In article , Mitchell Holman
says...

Miloch wrote in
:

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/f-3...udes-a-gun-tha
t-cant-shoot-straight/ar-BBZtkV2?li=BBnbfcL

(Bloomberg) -- Add a gun that can’t shoot straight to the problems
that dog Lockheed Martin Corp.’s $428 billion F-35 program, including
more than 800 software flaws.

The 25mm gun on Air Force models of the Joint Strike Fighter has
“unacceptable” accuracy in hitting ground targets and is mounted in
housing that’s cracking, the Pentagon’s test office said in its latest
assessment of the costliest U.S. weapons system.
The Air Force and Navy versions are also continuing to have cracks in
structural components, according to the report, saying, “The effect on
F-35 service life and the need for additional inspection requirements
are still being determined.”

Gun Woes

The three F-35 models are all equipped with 25mm guns.


When is the last time a fighter used guns in combat?

With its outrageous pricetag, the services are hard pressed to justify buying
them...so they boast all the things the F-35 can do...including ground
attack...and there-in lies the rub...unreliable guns for the USAF version that
has the guns stowed internally...those with the guns mounted externally have no
problems.

....yet another reason to keep the A-10!!!...which the USAF wants to retire to
save money to pay for F-35s that "Can't shoot straight".


What Couldn’t the F-4 Phantom Do?

https://www.airspacemag.com/military...-do-180953944/

...."Flying into combat without a shooting iron was another matter. “That was the
biggest mistake on the F-4,” says Chesire. “Bullets are cheap and tend to go
where you aim them. I needed a gun, and I really wished I had one.”

“Everyone in RF-4s wished they had a gun on the aircraft,” says Jack Dailey, a
retired U.S. Marine Corps general and director of the National Air and Space
Museum in Washington, D.C.

McDonnell’s earliest concept included interchangeable nose sections to readily
convert a standard F-4 into the RF-4B, a camera-equipped reconnaissance
aircraft. The aircraft’s most photo-friendly asset, however, was speed. RF-4Bs
flew alone and unarmed deep into unfriendly airspace. “Speed is life,” Phantom
pilots liked to say.

In the front seat of a Marine Corps photo-recon Phantom on more than 250
missions, Dailey was tasked to support Marines on the ground with film and
infrared imagery. “We were trying to track movement of the Viet Cong coming down
the Ho Chi Minh Trail,” he says. “They moved their trucks a lot at night. We
could fly along a road and pop flash cartridges and catch them out in the open.”

The recce pilots in RF-4s had good reason to wish for a gun: The focal length of
the RF-4’s camera lens and the required photo coverage imposed a flight regime
that didn’t include evasive action. “For photographic purposes, they wanted you
flying straight and level at about 5,000 feet,” says Dailey. The predictable
flight path and the absence of defensive weapons drew enemy calibers from
anti-aircraft artillery down to small arms. “We got hosed down every day,” says
Dailey. Often, ground forces simply used barrage fire—large groups firing rifles
and other sidearms into the sky simultaneously. Dailey’s Phantom was nailed on
nine occasions. A rifle round once penetrated the cockpit, narrowly missing him.
Another time he landed with so much engine damage “you could see light shining
through.”

Naval aviators were rudely initiated into an F-4 idiosyncrasy: As airplane and
deck parted company, the Phantom’s nose initially rose slowly. And with a bit
of speed, the nose could over-rotate to a near-stall attitude if not controlled.
“It got pretty wild,” says Chesire. “It was always lots of fun to watch new guys
take off.”



*