If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Kills with Guns
Just finished the book Ed. A good read. The most depressing part is that
once again, it's clear that the military works like too many other human endeavours. Who you know matters more than what you know in terms of how the organization runs. And in a very real way, like other organizations, skill actually works AGAINST promotion. Good pilots are more likely to take risks and pay the price, good politicians serve their constituents instead of their re-election interests, good professors their research instead of their careers, etc. As for the book, one more question: What happened to Sopin? If it's in there, I must have missed how the relationship ended. Oh, and one more question (I sound like Columbo!): it just struck me that in almost every fighter book I've read, heavy drinking features prominently. Was alcoholism (vs. binge drinking) ever a real problem? TV |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Kills with Guns
"TV" wrote in message ... Certainly was covered here. Remember though the memorial service was held on the 30th he died on the 14th. Huh, I don't have any such thread from the 14th onwards showing up. Darn newsgroup provider! TV Certainly possible I'm wrong. I received about twenty notices the first couple of days. By the way, it was a great send off. Tex Houston |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Kills with Guns
wrote in message oups.com... On Jun 30, 8:44 pm, vincent norris wrote: An interesting note. Most Vietnam gun kills were scored by the F-105, perhaps the least maneuverable aircraft in wide service there. John, there ought to be some interesting stories about those kills. Americans should be ashamed to talk about what they did to Vietnam. Certainly the Truman doctrine one step too far. Is there a nation on the face of the planet that hasn't a skeleton or two in its closet? Falcon 109 John |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Kills with Guns
wrote in message oups.com... The article at: http://www.afa.org/magazine/July2007/0707strafing.asp includes the following: "We're using the gun quite a bit in the Iraq and Afghanistan operations. The fighters are using lots of 20 mm off F-15Es and F-16s and 30 mm off A-10s to hit ground targets. Why is that? For individuals, the gun is probably one of the most accurate weapons, with the least collateral damage. That 20 mm will end the bad guy's life, but stray rounds will just drive into the ground, and that's it. In Iraq, the adversary uses both road networks and riverine networks. There have been a number of occasions where boats have been identified carrying insurgents on the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers, and we've used 20 mm and 30 mm guns to destroy those boats. A moving target is hard to hit with a bomb. With a gun, it's no big deal. In one instance, the enemy was getting ready to move people somewhere to do something later that night, but we removed them from the fight. The same thing happened in Balad, where we found people going to get roadside bomb supplies. We have been using the gun against single persons who have been planting improvised exposive devices. You'll have an individual with a truck, and a couple of other individuals; you'll see them get out and move around, trying to dig a hole, and you'll bring in an F-16 or an F-15E, or maybe an A-10, and you'll use 20 or 30 mm and go kill them. If you have troops in contact, or you have individuals in buildings, you do the same thing." Discussions about aircraft guns usually center on air-to-air usage, but nowadays, that's a secondary mission. With the primary usage of aircraft guns being strafing. For how long has this been true? Strafe can be a worthwhile employment of the gun, evidently done with much success in the ongoing pair of conflicts. Can be somewhat hazardous in the daytime if the bad guys have the capability to shoot back (a risk/reward thing). Pretty functional at night with goggles, etc. R / John |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Kills with Guns
On Thu, 5 Jul 2007 00:01:57 -0400, "TV" wrote:
Just finished the book Ed. A good read. The most depressing part is that once again, it's clear that the military works like too many other human endeavours. Who you know matters more than what you know in terms of how the organization runs. And in a very real way, like other organizations, skill actually works AGAINST promotion. Good pilots are more likely to take risks and pay the price, good politicians serve their constituents instead of their re-election interests, good professors their research instead of their careers, etc. Strangely enough, in the USAF, the aviator career specialty is the only profession in which comment in performance reports on your primary duty was expressly prohibited. While a personnel weenie could get a glowing write-up about his/her skill at manageing the paperwork, a fighter pilot got his comments on how he performed his additional duties. (See comments regarding CTF Officer or Roscoe Control Officer in Palace Cobra.) As for the book, one more question: What happened to Sopin? If it's in there, I must have missed how the relationship ended. Left in Thailand. It's often a harsh world. Divorced the wife when I returned to US and proceeded to several years of assignments in Europe. Oh, and one more question (I sound like Columbo!): it just struck me that in almost every fighter book I've read, heavy drinking features prominently. Was alcoholism (vs. binge drinking) ever a real problem? Folks deal with their fears in many ways. Some used alcohol to cope. Fighter pilots tend to live life very strenuously and inevitably some pay a price. TV Ed Rasimus Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret) "When Thunder Rolled" www.thunderchief.org www.thundertales.blogspot.com |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Kills with Guns
This has been an issue for some time (at least two years) now and has
not made it to the front burner - but now with the USAF SOF looking at COIN aircraft and people admitting to the vulnerability of the helicopters and the fact that even the A-10's 30mm has become too big a weapon for the ROE there is an attitude change. You would think at first this all should not be interrelated but it has come down to the fact that the ground forces fighting an insurgency can not get a jump on the enemy without some help from the third dimension and everything tried now has been too big weapon wise, too late in getting to where it is needed, or too clumsy for small unit operations in urban environments. So now it is realized that when the fighters are up their 20mm guns and their accurate gunsights can make a difference especially if the ammo is basic ball. Visualize a 20/23/25 mm gun with a constantly chambered round (side-by-side twin for instance) that can get off quicker and a "spit-burst" of 6 to 10 rounds every trigger pull and combine that with a laser-sight. If the platform was survivable then you can see from the grunts poiunt of view it would become a very popular machine. It is not yet possible as a UAV although it should be put into the go-do locker for sure, yet a manned platform gives the grunt-air relationship a chance to exploit the combat situation as it always has and yet has been denied from this war for too long. In Vietnam as you talk to the Thud pilots, which still represents an enormously proud and daring group of can-do people ("there is a way" right!) and what you see time and time again is their courage and airmanship being thrown up against incompetence in command and the whole targeting cycle and perceived purpose of air power in the war. If they would have been let loose, with people like Olds at the helm, they would have ripped North Vietnam a new asshole in a few months. If we honor their courage and dismiss the incompetence that sent them on their missions that only added to their risk, then we have failed both them and ourselves. This "gun" strafe issue in Iraq and again in Afghanistan is the same script being played in a different theater. Incompetence at the top, apathy at the midsection, and dead heroes at the bottom. Could or would we ever face off with the retired generals who we praise so much over and over, like Meyers - nice guy, hard worker but totally irrelevant to any path in this war to victory. When you read those words about how important a fighter strafing was to a ground unit, can you understand for a minute how just about everything else we have been doing has not added up to a hill of beans. We as a nation have accomplished this in five years of war - 100 dead a month / 1500 wounded / $30 billion spent - that's it, it does not get better then that and the thousands of troops that go out in small units, patrols, convoys, etc., all rarely get the chance to have real air assist and protection. In Afghanistan now the UK is concerned because their casualties are taking four hours to get to hospital, there are no spare helicopters, and those there are too vulnerable. We are looking at sling configured ultra-lights now. All of you in this group have enormous distinction in combat and in the aviation disciplines - you must not let this incompetence go on and on when you can see in a micro-seconds solutions that have yet to be even put on the table in the Pentagon and the commands. Politics aside - we are doing this to ourselves and we (you and I) are not doing enough to honor the Thud spirit for one, to get ride of the incompetence and bring back the warriors placing the network managers aside for a while until business with the al Qaeda can be finished. "John Carrier" wrote in message . .. wrote in message oups.com... The article at: http://www.afa.org/magazine/July2007/0707strafing.asp includes the following: "We're using the gun quite a bit in the Iraq and Afghanistan operations. The fighters are using lots of 20 mm off F-15Es and F-16s and 30 mm off A-10s to hit ground targets. Why is that? For individuals, the gun is probably one of the most accurate weapons, with the least collateral damage. That 20 mm will end the bad guy's life, but stray rounds will just drive into the ground, and that's it. In Iraq, the adversary uses both road networks and riverine networks. There have been a number of occasions where boats have been identified carrying insurgents on the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers, and we've used 20 mm and 30 mm guns to destroy those boats. A moving target is hard to hit with a bomb. With a gun, it's no big deal. In one instance, the enemy was getting ready to move people somewhere to do something later that night, but we removed them from the fight. The same thing happened in Balad, where we found people going to get roadside bomb supplies. We have been using the gun against single persons who have been planting improvised exposive devices. You'll have an individual with a truck, and a couple of other individuals; you'll see them get out and move around, trying to dig a hole, and you'll bring in an F-16 or an F-15E, or maybe an A-10, and you'll use 20 or 30 mm and go kill them. If you have troops in contact, or you have individuals in buildings, you do the same thing." Discussions about aircraft guns usually center on air-to-air usage, but nowadays, that's a secondary mission. With the primary usage of aircraft guns being strafing. For how long has this been true? Strafe can be a worthwhile employment of the gun, evidently done with much success in the ongoing pair of conflicts. Can be somewhat hazardous in the daytime if the bad guys have the capability to shoot back (a risk/reward thing). Pretty functional at night with goggles, etc. R / John |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Kills with Guns
"Flashnews" wrote in message . .. Joining this late because I have been gone but if it helps here is a collection of data I put out years ago ---- An Air Combat Summary for Western Fighters: Since 1979, American made fighters have been engaged in air combat at least 214 times and have downed around 214 aircraft. Air Battles that have occurred were from the Bekaa Valley and Persian Gulf to around the world during the coup attempt in Venezuela. Engagements and Kills were recorded throughout more than 3400 air-to-air and air-to-ground combat sorties. Western aircraft included the F-4E Phantom, F-14 Tomcat, F-15 Eagle, F-16 Falcon, F-5E Tiger II, Mirage F-1, and F-18 Hornet fighter-bombers. These engagements resulted in (with this data base) 214 confirmed Kills with only the two air-to-air combat losses. No direct correlation is made with those kills offically sanctioned by the respective air forces; for instance, Israel and Pakistan will make a determination of "personal kill" versus "squadron kill" based on the exact way the pilot performed rulling out louck and chance in the scoring. There we What about the Harrier FRS1 in the Falklands 1982 - They had 24 kills with most being AIM-9L but IIRC there were several cannon kills - their targets were all "western" aircraft. David |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Kills with Guns
The article at:
http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/hta.../20070707.aspx has more on the strafing "renaissance". |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Rivet Guns | tdfsks | Home Built | 3 | July 21st 05 01:43 AM |
P-51C crash kills pilot | Paul Hirose | Military Aviation | 0 | June 30th 04 05:37 AM |
Flying Guns: the Modern Era | Tony Williams | Military Aviation | 2 | March 26th 04 03:52 PM |
COWS WITH GUNS | Beefy Burger | Home Built | 14 | January 21st 04 07:07 AM |
Guns on fighters? | SKSvilich | Naval Aviation | 54 | December 8th 03 02:27 PM |