"Ron Monroe" wrote in message
thlink.net...
Ok, then dispute it with Jay Miller and every other article I have ever
read on the gun.
They said the gun was inefective. And remember, eeven with that fighter
closing in at 1000mph, the bullet is losing altitude. Probably the only
way the fighter would get hit is if it was in a dive. Another thing, which
they have proven with the SR-71, the closure rate isn't too good if the
chase aircraft isn't flying any faster than the aircraft he is pursuing.
Even if he was 100mph faster, by the time he caught up, the plane would
probably be over a friendly country. I don't think they had too many
aircraft that good intercept the B-58, when the B-58 was flying.

All bullets' flight paths are moved downward by gravity no matter what their
ground speed. You always have to aim some amount above the target to allow
for this fact. Since the B-58 was never used in actual combat any opinion
of the effectiveness of the tail cannon is strictly that; opinion. If the
B-58 tail cannon was ineffective at supersonic speeds it would probably also
be ineffective at subsonic speeds.

As a continuation discussion, however, of real problems associated with
rear-firing weapons we could consider rear-firing missiles which use
external control surface movement to guide the missile. If they were
carried externally they would be travelling backwards at the instant of
launch and probably tumble out of control. consideration was given to
carrying them in tubing long enough to gain forward airspeed before leaving
the tubing and being exposed to external air. This might work but has the
potential to destroy the launching aircraft if the missile became stuck in
the tube or some other malfunction occurred.

I believe there was some experimenting with using missiles fired forward but
using a plannned reversal of course to end up behind the launch aircraft
with forward speed in that direction before targeting guidance took over.

Everytrhing is relative, but you have to look at it in the proper
perspective. BLOOEY!
Ron

"Panic" wrote in message
...
"Ron Monroe" wrote in message
ink.net...
Didn't make any difference. The supersonic speed going forward versus
the bullet speed going backwards, meant that it was totally eneffectual.
Luckily, they never were in a position where it was needed. But, it was
radar controlled.
Ron

Not quite, Ron. Say the B-58 is traveling at 1,000 MPH and has a tail
cannon with a muzzle velocity of 1,000 MPH. In relation to a ground
observer, if the cannon was fired just as it flew overhead of the
observer, the cannon shell would stop and free fall towards the observer
while the delivery aircraft flew away from the shell at 1,000 MPH
departure rate. But.... if a fighter was pursuing the B-58 at 1,000 MPH
he would fly into the cannon shell at a closure rate of 1,000 MPH.
BLOOOOey!!!! goes the fighter. Everything is relative!!!