piggybacking due to tinkerbell leaving out the real ng.
"Tank Fixer" wrote in message
k.net...
In article et,
lid says...
"Tank Fixer" wrote in message
k.net
In article ,
says...

It almost sounds like the 30mm Caseless Pods that can be mounted
under Fighters making even an A-4 into a tank killer. That died
when the A-7 did. Too bad. The A-7E was a superior AC to the A-10
when armed with the 30mm caseless chain gun. To upgrade the A-7 to
an AC with the F/A-18 perfomance would have cost appr. 3.5 million
per copy. versus how much for an A-10 that requires constant
TopCap? Another Congressional Boondoggle.



Anyone know what he is talking about ?
I've not heard of any system like this before.

I'm guessing he's takling about a couple two things.

First is the GPU-5 (aka Pave Claw) gun pod, which holds a four-barrel
version of the GAU-8 called GAU-13. (Definitely neither caseless nor a
chain gun, though). It was supposed to give conventional fighters almost
the
same gun power as the A-10. But it really didn't work very well. The
New
York Air Natioanl Guard had one F-16 unit that went to the Gulf with the
GPU-5 in 1991 (the "Boys from Syracuse"/174th Fighter Wing). They took
the
pods off the planes early in the proceedings and never flew them again.

This was a new gun that never went into production. It was supposed to be
for the A-7D for the Air Force. But the acceptance of the A-10 stopped all
research into it. It was caseless. Good idea that never reached
production.



http://www.f-16.net/reference/versions/f16_fa.html

Second, for a time, there was discussion of using a modified A-7 with
afterbrning engnie as a CAS bird instead of the A-10. But that was Air
Force, not Navy. And as much a I like the A-7, I have to admit that
this
was probably a dead end idea. Even with extensive mods, the A-7 was
never
going to be a turning fighter or radar missile shooter like the Hornet.

http://www.vought.com/heritage/products/html/ya-7f.html

The Air Force didn't want to give up the A-7 anymore than the Navy did. The
A-10 was helpless unless you had air superiority. The A-10 was a sitting
duck for even the Soviet SU7 Attack. This made the AF look at alternatives.
But the F-16A was the answer to that question when it was affordable.

And of course, the coming of the FA-18 filled the need for the Navy. At the
time, the FA-18 was still on the drawing board. But at 3.4 mil, the Super
Corsair was tempting. Things just happened before the need for the Super
A-7 was finished. Nothing lost in the end.






Looks like those in RAM know a bit more about the subject than you do
daryl....

Hey Tinkerbell, keep trolling.