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
|
|||
|
|||
"Osprey may get turret-mounted machine gun"
In message om, David
E. Powell writes There could weight to play with in the tail, or a way to counterbalance by moving some equipment inside. They modified the B-17 OK, but they had a lot more relative weight to play with. There's the problem: the more weight you hang on the airframe, the less payload you have (which is the point of a transport helicopter). Also, a turreted MG doesnt have to weaigh 1000 lbs. (Even including ammo.) When you put it in a remotely-operated weapon station, the weight goes right up. "The basic Mini-Gun is 0.80 m long and weighs 18.8 kg. A typical pintle installation with one gun and 5,000 rounds of ammunition weighs about 500 kg", to quote Jane's Air-Launched Weapons on the GAU-2A/M134 7.62 mm Mini-Gun and Armament System - that's for a manually pointed mount. Wonder what they will hang on there? A .50 or twin .50 could work. 7.62 minigun? 7.62 is okay for suppressive fire against infantry, but if the V-22 is supposed to be doing any sort of self-escort then it really needs more range and hitting power (it may have enemy helicopters to cope with, and certainly wants to engage light vehicles). Something like a M3M .50" would be a decent compromise between terminal effect and weight. Don't forget the sighting system, too - if the V-22s are going in at night then you need to match the sight to the weapon and its range (so you can identify targets in time to effectively engage them). As with most engineering problems, it's not that the problem is insoluble... just that it ends up more expensive in time, money and capability than it first looks. -- The nation that makes a great distinction between its scholars and its warriors, will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting done by fools. -Thucydides pauldotjdotadam[at]googlemail{dot}.com |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
"Osprey may get turret-mounted machine gun"
On Oct 21, 7:47 am, "Paul J. Adam" wrote:
7.62 is okay for suppressive fire against infantry, but if the V-22 is supposed to be doing any sort of self-escort then it really needs more range and hitting power (it may have enemy helicopters to cope with, and certainly wants to engage light vehicles). Something like a M3M .50" would be a decent compromise between terminal effect and weight. The once suggested system was the GDAS GAU-19 3 barrel .50 cal gattling gun. Weighing 456 lbs. http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2002gun/depasqual.pdf BB I guess everybody has some mountain to climb. It's just fate whether you live in Kansas or Tibet... |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
"Osprey may get turret-mounted machine gun"
BlackBeard wrote:
On Oct 21, 7:47 am, "Paul J. Adam" wrote: 7.62 is okay for suppressive fire against infantry, but if the V-22 is supposed to be doing any sort of self-escort then it really needs more range and hitting power (it may have enemy helicopters to cope with, and certainly wants to engage light vehicles). Something like a M3M .50" would be a decent compromise between terminal effect and weight. The once suggested system was the GDAS GAU-19 3 barrel .50 cal gattling gun. Weighing 456 lbs. http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2002gun/depasqual.pdf no ammo no sights and no allowance for strengthening frame or System Weight – System (empty weight) 460 – Portable Magazine 37 lbs Vince |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
"Osprey may get turret-mounted machine gun"
Vince wrote:
David E. Powell wrote: On Oct 16, 7:35 pm, Vince wrote: David Lesher wrote: Mike writes: Osprey may get turret-mounted machine gun http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/ Posted : Thursday Oct 11, 2007 15:11:37 EDT Air Force and Marine Corps V-22 Ospreys may get a turret-mounted machine gun, fulfilling a long-sought requirement for a forward-firing defensive weapon and making it unique among today's U.S. transport aircraft. Strange no one is discussing how much such weighs; in an airframe already short of payload... and balance its a side to side prop-rotor configuration hang a thousand pounds on the chin and see what happens There could weight to play with in the tail, or a way to counterbalance by moving some equipment inside. They modified the B-17 OK, but they had a lot more relative weight to play with. Also, a turreted MG doesnt have to weaigh 1000 lbs. (Even including ammo.) IIRC that was the weight of the 30 mm turret + ammo + structural reinforcement and all control equipment Vince Just have the Marines go retro to WW1 and fire their pistols out the cockpits... :-\ |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
"Osprey may get turret-mounted machine gun"
On 2007-10-21 07:47:55 -0700, "Paul J. Adam" said:
Don't forget the sighting system, too - if the V-22s are going in at night then you need to match the sight to the weapon and its range (so you can identify targets in time to effectively engage them). Actually, it seems to me that the V-22 could have a real advantage in this respect. Contemporary remotely-targeted gun systems can slew, aim and burst-fire far, far faster than a single gunner can provide it with targets. And the heavy part of the system is the gun, ammo and physical aiming hardware, not the targeting vision systems and associated avionics. So why not take a COTS gun, add another 6 vision/targeting channels and let the troopies in the back pick out bogies for the gun to shred? A full-360 ventral TV/IR vision system wouldn't add much weight, and the individual soldier aiming apparatus need not be more than a headset LCD sight and a joystick plugged into the targetting data bus. Assign one of the senior NCO's to monitor all the troopie targeting pippers with an override switch in order to prevent friendly-fire mistakes or ammo wastage. Expense might be a prohibitive factor, but probably not weight. Do wonders for the morale of the ground pounders making the assault, though. ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
"Osprey may get turret-mounted machine gun"
Bill Baker wrote:
On 2007-10-21 07:47:55 -0700, "Paul J. Adam" said: Don't forget the sighting system, too - if the V-22s are going in at night then you need to match the sight to the weapon and its range (so you can identify targets in time to effectively engage them). Actually, it seems to me that the V-22 could have a real advantage in this respect. Contemporary remotely-targeted gun systems can slew, aim and burst-fire far, far faster than a single gunner can provide it with targets. And the heavy part of the system is the gun, ammo and physical aiming hardware, not the targeting vision systems and associated avionics. So why not take a COTS gun, add another 6 vision/targeting channels and let the troopies in the back pick out bogies for the gun to shred? A full-360 ventral TV/IR vision system wouldn't add much weight, and the individual soldier aiming apparatus need not be more than a headset LCD sight and a joystick plugged into the targetting data bus. Assign one of the senior NCO's to monitor all the troopie targeting pippers with an override switch in order to prevent friendly-fire mistakes or ammo wastage. Expense might be a prohibitive factor, but probably not weight. Do wonders for the morale of the ground pounders making the assault, though. of course you make the V-22 light up like fireworks for any AAA. Vince |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
"Osprey may get turret-mounted machine gun"
Bill Baker wrote in :
On 2007-10-21 07:47:55 -0700, "Paul J. Adam" said: Don't forget the sighting system, too - if the V-22s are going in at night then you need to match the sight to the weapon and its range (so you can identify targets in time to effectively engage them). Actually, it seems to me that the V-22 could have a real advantage in this respect. Contemporary remotely-targeted gun systems can slew, aim and burst-fire far, far faster than a single gunner can provide it with targets. And the heavy part of the system is the gun, ammo and physical aiming hardware, not the targeting vision systems and associated avionics. So why not take a COTS gun, add another 6 vision/targeting channels and let the troopies in the back pick out bogies for the gun to shred? A full-360 ventral TV/IR vision system wouldn't add much weight, and the individual soldier aiming apparatus need not be more than a headset LCD sight and a joystick plugged into the targetting data bus. Assign one of the senior NCO's to monitor all the troopie targeting pippers with an override switch in order to prevent friendly-fire mistakes or ammo wastage. Expense might be a prohibitive factor, but probably not weight. Do wonders for the morale of the ground pounders making the assault, though. Au contraire, mon ami. Check out the Huey NTIS system some time. The targeting hardware is quite a bit heavier than the gun. Changing out the gun requires a couple of strong Marines. Changing the targeting hardware, in toto, requires a hoist. No "four guys on a hernia bar" stuff allowed. Dave in San Diego |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
"Osprey may get turret-mounted machine gun"
On 2007-10-27 22:19:22 -0700, Dave said:
Au contraire, mon ami. Check out the Huey NTIS system some time. The targeting hardware is quite a bit heavier than the gun. Changing out the gun requires a couple of strong Marines. Changing the targeting hardware, in toto, requires a hoist. No "four guys on a hernia bar" stuff allowed. Huh. I'm surprised, but I'll take your word for it since NTIS seems to be a current-technology system. I wouldn't have thought it'd take a hoist to lift any subsystem out of a Huey other than the engine pack or transmission. Besides, if I'm reading the Bell website right it seems that that targeting system is way, way more complex than what I'm suggesting. I'm just talking about fixed, passive, relatively non-enhanced (i.e., no sensor cooling, no heavy optics) VL/IR sensors...not-so-stupid CCD minicams, essentially. ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Desktop Wallpaper - "Osprey Out for a spin". | T. & D. Gregor, Sr. | Simulators | 0 | August 31st 07 02:48 PM |
"Seeking Foreign Buyers For Osprey" | Mike[_7_] | Naval Aviation | 72 | July 4th 07 05:26 AM |
Desktop Wallpaper - "A covey of Osprey". | T. & D. Gregor, Sr. | Simulators | 0 | June 1st 07 08:41 PM |
"Marine Corps Grounds V-22 Osprey Aircraft" | Mike[_1_] | Naval Aviation | 0 | February 18th 07 03:40 PM |
V-22 Osprey "ground effect" question | Robert | Naval Aviation | 6 | January 2nd 07 03:44 PM |