Is Spooky safe to take downtown?

I think the opposite question should be asked. Is the crew of the
ac130 safe given the amount of SA gear floating around Iraq. Can the
AC130 maintain a safe distance from the weapons of the resistance?

Henry J Cobb wrote in message ...
http://globalsecurity.org/military/s...ft/ac-130u.htm
The newest addition to the command fleet, this heavily armed aircraft
incorporates side-firing weapons integrated with sophisticated sensor,
navigation and fire control systems to provide surgical firepower or
area saturation during extended loiter periods, at night and in
adverse weather.

Is Spooky safer for the surrounding civilians than laser guided bombs or
hellfire missiles for attacks on point targets in urban areas?

-HJC

"miso" wrote in message
om...
I think the opposite question should be asked. Is the crew of the
ac130 safe given the amount of SA gear floating around Iraq. Can the
AC130 maintain a safe distance from the weapons of the resistance?

Henry J Cobb wrote in message
...
http://globalsecurity.org/military/s...ft/ac-130u.htm
The newest addition to the command fleet, this heavily armed aircraft
incorporates side-firing weapons integrated with sophisticated
sensor,
navigation and fire control systems to provide surgical firepower or
area saturation during extended loiter periods, at night and in
adverse weather.

Is Spooky safer for the surrounding civilians than laser guided bombs or
hellfire missiles for attacks on point targets in urban areas?

-HJC


Spooky flies at night, which makes visual targeting more difficult. In
addition, the most visible thing Spooky does is put out a long line of
tracer fire, which appears to curve as you're watching it. That throws off
visual targeting too. Finally, if you shoot at Spooky, you'd better hit it
quick, because it shoots back and is accurate enough to ruin your whole day.

As far as MANPADS go, Spooky has a decent slant range and effective
countermeasures. MANPADS are not terribly effective under those
circumstances..


KB

No tracers these days. Only in training. With all the high tech sensors
you don't need the tracers to aim with (went out with the AC-47), and as you
say, "tracers work both ways."

--
Les
F-4C(WW),D,E,G(WW)/AC-130A/MC-130E EWO (ret)


"Kyle Boatright" wrote in message
...

"miso" wrote in message
om...
I think the opposite question should be asked. Is the crew of the
ac130 safe given the amount of SA gear floating around Iraq. Can the
AC130 maintain a safe distance from the weapons of the resistance?

Henry J Cobb wrote in message
...
http://globalsecurity.org/military/s...ft/ac-130u.htm
The newest addition to the command fleet, this heavily armed
aircraft
incorporates side-firing weapons integrated with sophisticated
sensor,
navigation and fire control systems to provide surgical firepower
or
area saturation during extended loiter periods, at night and in
adverse weather.

Is Spooky safer for the surrounding civilians than laser guided bombs
or
hellfire missiles for attacks on point targets in urban areas?

-HJC


Spooky flies at night, which makes visual targeting more difficult. In
addition, the most visible thing Spooky does is put out a long line of
tracer fire, which appears to curve as you're watching it. That throws
off
visual targeting too. Finally, if you shoot at Spooky, you'd better hit
it
quick, because it shoots back and is accurate enough to ruin your whole
day.

As far as MANPADS go, Spooky has a decent slant range and effective
countermeasures. MANPADS are not terribly effective under those
circumstances..


KB




---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.670 / Virus Database: 432 - Release Date: 4/27/2004

I watched the weapons school at Nellis shoot up range 61 at night.
They used tracers, which were just barely visible from 10 miles
(estimated) away with the naked eye. With binoculars, the tracer fire
was quite easy to see. Conclusion: I was damn glad they were on our
side. I also concluded the "no trespassing" signs on the bombing
ranges are a good idea.

If it is flying blacked out and no tracers, then it shouldn't be easy
to target. Depending on distance, you could probably see it block out
the stars and sky glow with NV gear. I've seen this with blacked out
pavehawk (or similar shape) helicopters, and something the size of a
herc would make it easier.

"Les Matheson" wrote in message news:KT5kc.3556$pJ1.650@lakeread02...
No tracers these days. Only in training. With all the high tech sensors
you don't need the tracers to aim with (went out with the AC-47), and as you
say, "tracers work both ways."

--
Les
F-4C(WW),D,E,G(WW)/AC-130A/MC-130E EWO (ret)


"Kyle Boatright" wrote in message
...

"miso" wrote in message
om...
I think the opposite question should be asked. Is the crew of the
ac130 safe given the amount of SA gear floating around Iraq. Can the
AC130 maintain a safe distance from the weapons of the resistance?

Henry J Cobb wrote in message
...
http://globalsecurity.org/military/s...ft/ac-130u.htm
The newest addition to the command fleet, this heavily armed
aircraft
incorporates side-firing weapons integrated with sophisticated
sensor,
navigation and fire control systems to provide surgical firepower
or
area saturation during extended loiter periods, at night and in
adverse weather.

Is Spooky safer for the surrounding civilians than laser guided bombs
or
hellfire missiles for attacks on point targets in urban areas?

-HJC


Spooky flies at night, which makes visual targeting more difficult. In
addition, the most visible thing Spooky does is put out a long line of
tracer fire, which appears to curve as you're watching it. That throws
off
visual targeting too. Finally, if you shoot at Spooky, you'd better hit
it
quick, because it shoots back and is accurate enough to ruin your whole
day.

As far as MANPADS go, Spooky has a decent slant range and effective
countermeasures. MANPADS are not terribly effective under those
circumstances..


KB




---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.670 / Virus Database: 432 - Release Date: 4/27/2004

"miso" wrote in message
om...
I think the opposite question should be asked. Is the crew of the
ac130 safe given the amount of SA gear floating around Iraq. Can the
AC130 maintain a safe distance from the weapons of the resistance?

Going to war is not safe.
That being said, given how they are used I'ld say they have a real
good chance of coming back from their missions.

Henry J Cobb wrote in message
...
http://globalsecurity.org/military/s...ft/ac-130u.htm
The newest addition to the command fleet, this heavily armed aircraft
incorporates side-firing weapons integrated with sophisticated
sensor,
navigation and fire control systems to provide surgical firepower or
area saturation during extended loiter periods, at night and in
adverse weather.

Is Spooky safer for the surrounding civilians than laser guided bombs or
hellfire missiles for attacks on point targets in urban areas?

-HJC

"John Keeney" wrote in message
...
Going to war is not safe.
That being said, given how they are used I'ld say they have a real
good chance of coming back from their missions.


For whoever originated the thread...sure these aircraft aren't AC-130
gunships, callsign 'Spectre' rather than the 'Spooky in the title? AC-47
'Spooky' aircraft might indeed have a little trouble downtown.

Tex Houston

On Thu, 29 Apr 2004 07:50:33 -0600, Tex Houston wrote:

For whoever originated the thread...sure these aircraft aren't AC-130
gunships, callsign 'Spectre' rather than the 'Spooky in the title?

http://www.theaviationzone.com/factsheets/ac130.asp

The AC-130U, commonly referred to as "U-Boat", is the most complex aircraft
weapons system in the world today. It has more than 609,000 lines of
software code in its mission computers and avionics systems. The newest
addition to the command fleet, it is the latest in a long line of
heavily-armed, side-firing gunships and is named "Spooky II" in honor of
the first gunship model, the AC-47D. All other AC-130s are referred to as
"Spectre".

-----

-Jeff B.
yeff at erols dot com

"Yeff" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 29 Apr 2004 07:50:33 -0600, Tex Houston wrote:

For whoever originated the thread...sure these aircraft aren't AC-130
gunships, callsign 'Spectre' rather than the 'Spooky in the title?

http://www.theaviationzone.com/factsheets/ac130.asp

The AC-130U, commonly referred to as "U-Boat", is the most complex
aircraft
weapons system in the world today. It has more than 609,000 lines of
software code in its mission computers and avionics systems. The newest
addition to the command fleet, it is the latest in a long line of
heavily-armed, side-firing gunships and is named "Spooky II" in honor of
the first gunship model, the AC-47D. All other AC-130s are referred to as
"Spectre".

-----

-Jeff B.


Interesting, wasn't aware of the rename. Probably use a tactical callsign
for missions anyway. We probably have too many 'II' aircraft what with
Lightning, Texan and others. Sure confuses the issue when the "II' or 'III'
is omitted.

Thanks,

Tex

"Tex Houston" wrote in message
...

"John Keeney" wrote in message
...
Going to war is not safe.
That being said, given how they are used I'ld say they have a real
good chance of coming back from their missions.


For whoever originated the thread...sure these aircraft aren't AC-130
gunships, callsign 'Spectre' rather than the 'Spooky in the title? AC-47
'Spooky' aircraft might indeed have a little trouble downtown.

"Spooky", Tex, seems to have become a synonym for
"fixed wing gun ship". The few times we trained with
an AC-130 supporting, the grunts all referred to it as
"Spooky".
Besides, it is as official as such things get that the
AC-130U is "Spooky" instead of "Specter".