gunpods on Phantoms

Navy Phantoms were capable of carrying a 20mm gunpod, but there is an
abundance of references stating this weapon was worse than useless for
air to air use, and thus not carried. However, I can't really find any
reference on the use of the gun in air to ground work. I know Air
Force Phantoms used gunpods for this, but did the Navy?

Thanks for any info

Rob

robvr- Navy Phantoms were capable of carrying a 20mm gunpod, but there is an
abundance of references stating this weapon was worse than useless for
air to air use, and thus not carried. BRBR

The biggest obstacle was the weight of the thing and how ya had to 'bring it
back'. If ya had 2 and 2 and the pod, max trap was in the 4.0 range. Plus wing
tanks got the crap beat outta them on the boat.


P. C. Chisholm
CDR, USN(ret.)
Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer

(Rob van Riel) wrote:

Navy Phantoms were capable of carrying a 20mm gunpod, but there is an
abundance of references stating this weapon was worse than useless for
air to air use, and thus not carried. However, I can't really find any
reference on the use of the gun in air to ground work. I know Air
Force Phantoms used gunpods for this, but did the Navy?

They may not exactly have been 'useless' for air-to-air, the
USAF's 366th TFW "Gunfighters" scored a number of times with the pod.

Interesting info from Pechs1 about trap weight, though. The
USN may have had additional issues due to the gun getting banged about
during traps.



----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

John,

The USN may have had additional issues due to the gun getting banged about
during traps.

Not just traps. Aircraft handling - particularly on a crowded hangar deck -
is not conducive to the health and longevity of protruding "attachments."
The EA-6B folks - with jamming pods that cost (circa 1972) $1 million a
pop - learned early on that "sailors and pods don't mix."

--
Mike Kanze

"When you're majoring in abnormal psychology, ALL television is
educational!"

- Frank & Ernest, 3/9/04


"John S. Shinal" wrote in message
...
(Rob van Riel) wrote:

Navy Phantoms were capable of carrying a 20mm gunpod, but there is an
abundance of references stating this weapon was worse than useless for
air to air use, and thus not carried. However, I can't really find any
reference on the use of the gun in air to ground work. I know Air
Force Phantoms used gunpods for this, but did the Navy?

They may not exactly have been 'useless' for air-to-air, the
USAF's 366th TFW "Gunfighters" scored a number of times with the pod.

Interesting info from Pechs1 about trap weight, though. The
USN may have had additional issues due to the gun getting banged about
during traps.



----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet
News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000
Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption
=---

(Pechs1) wrote in message ...
robvr- Navy Phantoms were capable of carrying a 20mm gunpod, but there is an
abundance of references stating this weapon was worse than useless for
air to air use, and thus not carried. BRBR
SNIP:
Pechs- did the Navy F4B have an air to air computing gunsight like the
USAF F4D?
Of course, you could have used the old TAC technique - stick the
muzzle up his ass and pull the trigger and ease back on the pole.
We flew the pod on our F4Ds at the A-A dart quite a bit and had good
luck with the SUU23 and its shotgun pattern of about 8 mils in el and
10 mils in az. The gun pod was also wicked in CAS TIC work. You could
get in real close. The 366 TFW at DaNang in 72 had one F4E that
carried a CL tank and two SUU23s on the wing pylons. Unfortunately the
06s hogged all the sorties. (guess the double-barreled shotgun effect
made up for any -unh- erraticity from the deskxperts.
Walt BJ

(Pechs1) wrote in message ...
robvr- Navy Phantoms were capable of carrying a 20mm gunpod, but there is an
abundance of references stating this weapon was worse than useless for
air to air use, and thus not carried. BRBR

The biggest obstacle was the weight of the thing and how ya had to 'bring it
back'.

Makes sense.


If ya had 2 and 2 and the pod, max trap was in the 4.0 range. Plus wing
tanks got the crap beat outta them on the boat.

Almost makes sense, mainly because I never flew anything myself, let
alone a Navy jet. Would 2 and 2 mean 2 Sparrow, 2 Sidewinder? What do
max trap values mean? I know enough to know this has something to do
with landing parameters, but I couldn't tell you what to save my life.


Rob

Not being the professional my self, but an avid desktop pilot, my
understanding is that trap values are a meassure of the maximum bringback
fuelweight that would allow the AC to trap the wire on the carrier. 4.0
would mean 4000 lbs JP4, which might be considered a bit on the skimpy side,
espc. in bad weather, at night or with a wounded bird, what with no easy
divert field close by.

I'm not certain of the numbers (and others will hopefully correct me) but I
think that 4.0 is near minimums to two attempts at the deck if there is
other traffic in the pattern, when flying the F4

and cheers for the info, I'm brushing up on my Vietnam knowledge in
anticipation of recieving my next boardgame: "Downtown", which looks at
strike warfare in routepack 5 and 6 (AFAIR)

cheers,
Morten

"Rob van Riel" wrote in message
om...
(Pechs1) wrote in message
...
robvr- Navy Phantoms were capable of carrying a 20mm gunpod, but there
is an
abundance of references stating this weapon was worse than useless for
air to air use, and thus not carried. BRBR

The biggest obstacle was the weight of the thing and how ya had to
'bring it
back'.

Makes sense.


If ya had 2 and 2 and the pod, max trap was in the 4.0 range. Plus wing
tanks got the crap beat outta them on the boat.

Almost makes sense, mainly because I never flew anything myself, let
alone a Navy jet. Would 2 and 2 mean 2 Sparrow, 2 Sidewinder? What do
max trap values mean? I know enough to know this has something to do
with landing parameters, but I couldn't tell you what to save my life.


Rob

(Rob van Riel) wrote:

Navy Phantoms were capable of carrying a 20mm gunpod, but there is an
abundance of references stating this weapon was worse than useless for
air to air use, and thus not carried. However, I can't really find any
reference on the use of the gun in air to ground work. I know Air
Force Phantoms used gunpods for this, but did the Navy?

Marine Corps F-4s certainly did. We've always liked cannons,
whether ground-based artillery or airborne .30 cals, .50 cals,
20mm, 30mm. [Or even the 105mm carried by Puff and its
descendants.]
--
OJ III
[Email sent to Yahoo addy is burned before reading.
Lower and crunch the sig and you'll net me at comcast]

Morten,

4000 lbs JP4

Microscopic nit: Carrier-borne aircraft used JP5 in my day. Higher
flashpoint, thus safer around the boat. Not sure, but ISTR the boat uses
another JP type these days?!

Ashore, they burn JP4, allowing XC stops at the nice golf courses positioned
at nearly all AFBs. g

--
Mike Kanze

"When you're majoring in abnormal psychology, ALL television is
educational!"

- Frank & Ernest, 3/9/04


"morten lund" wrote in message
. ..
Not being the professional my self, but an avid desktop pilot, my
understanding is that trap values are a meassure of the maximum bringback
fuelweight that would allow the AC to trap the wire on the carrier. 4.0
would mean 4000 lbs JP4, which might be considered a bit on the skimpy
side,
espc. in bad weather, at night or with a wounded bird, what with no easy
divert field close by.

I'm not certain of the numbers (and others will hopefully correct me) but
I
think that 4.0 is near minimums to two attempts at the deck if there is
other traffic in the pattern, when flying the F4

and cheers for the info, I'm brushing up on my Vietnam knowledge in
anticipation of recieving my next boardgame: "Downtown", which looks at
strike warfare in routepack 5 and 6 (AFAIR)

cheers,
Morten

"Rob van Riel" wrote in message
om...
(Pechs1) wrote in message
...
robvr- Navy Phantoms were capable of carrying a 20mm gunpod, but
there
is an
abundance of references stating this weapon was worse than useless for
air to air use, and thus not carried. BRBR

The biggest obstacle was the weight of the thing and how ya had to
'bring it
back'.

Makes sense.


If ya had 2 and 2 and the pod, max trap was in the 4.0 range. Plus
wing
tanks got the crap beat outta them on the boat.

Almost makes sense, mainly because I never flew anything myself, let
alone a Navy jet. Would 2 and 2 mean 2 Sparrow, 2 Sidewinder? What do
max trap values mean? I know enough to know this has something to do
with landing parameters, but I couldn't tell you what to save my life.


Rob

"Mike Kanze" wrote:
Morten,

4000 lbs JP4

Microscopic nit: Carrier-borne aircraft used JP5 in my day. Higher
flashpoint, thus safer around the boat. Not sure, but ISTR the boat uses
another JP type these days?!

Ashore, they burn JP4, allowing XC stops at the nice golf courses
positioned
at nearly all AFBs. g

USAF started the transition to JP8 in 1979.