AirRyan
Topic Author
Posts: 2398
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 9:57 am

MV-22 Osprey Ditches Belly Gun...

Tue Jun 29, 2010 2:56 am

I said the same thing long before they ever got the gun out to the aircraft: it won't work well enough to outweigh it's negatives. It's too heavy, it's a pain in the ass, and it's just too difficult to "realistically" be a viable resource.

http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/2010/06/marine_belly_gun_062810w/
 
SeJoWa
Posts: 410
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 6:11 pm

RE: MV-22 Osprey Ditches Belly Gun...

Tue Jun 29, 2010 10:36 am

While it has to be a good idea to find ways to add some destructive punch to the Osprey, that gun is just not as simple as possible and necessary, it seems. It speaks volumes that it gets left behind a lot in the field. Decision making time: NEXT!

I guess the rectractable mechanism was deemed necessary for aerodynamic reasons. A little complicated for an "interim" weapon.

Also, why not slave the weapon to the guys up front? You'd think the Apache approach was probably the smart thing to do from the outset! See http://tri.army.mil/lc/CS/Csa/apihadss.htm

Alternative destructive punch is available in the new guided and versatile Hydra rockets and equivalents sprouting all over the war industry. I'd say adapt those asap and see what the troops do with them.

See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydra_70#Precision_guided_Hydra_70
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Posts: 9804
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

RE: MV-22 Osprey Ditches Belly Gun...

Tue Jun 29, 2010 5:22 pm

Marines refusing a minigun? Bizarre...
Forget dogs and cats - Spay and neuter your liberals.
 
dragon6172
Posts: 795
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:56 am

RE: MV-22 Osprey Ditches Belly Gun...

Tue Jun 29, 2010 6:32 pm

Quoting SeJoWa (Reply 1):
I guess the rectractable mechanism was deemed necessary for aerodynamic reasons. A little complicated for an "interim" weapon.

Actually the retraction is required for ground clearance during landing, which was always my argument against the thing. The time you need a defensive weapon most in a helicopter is when you are landing and taking off (and while on deck) in a landing zone, which makes this gun about worthless since it has to be retracted during these phases of flight.
Phrogs Phorever
 
SeJoWa
Posts: 410
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 6:11 pm

RE: MV-22 Osprey Ditches Belly Gun...

Tue Jun 29, 2010 6:37 pm

Quoting dragon6172 (Reply 3):
Quoting SeJoWa (Reply 1):
I guess the rectractable mechanism was deemed necessary for aerodynamic reasons. A little complicated for an "interim" weapon.

Actually the retraction is required for ground clearance during landing


Of course.   

Would a dedicated Osprey "gunship" make sense?
 
bennett123
Posts: 7426
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2004 12:49 am

RE: MV-22 Osprey Ditches Belly Gun...

Tue Jun 29, 2010 6:47 pm

Also what happens if it fails to retract?.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 6664
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: MV-22 Osprey Ditches Belly Gun...

Tue Jun 29, 2010 8:02 pm

Quoting Bennett123 (Reply 5):
Also what happens if it fails to retract?.

It will be retracted, forceable  

I said before the a/c was deployed that the grunts would find a way to arm the a/c since the designers never seemed to believe that the a/c would require self defense equipment, so far not so good.
Based on design the only thing that seems viable as a wepon which could be engaged during the landing phase are some sort for fixed forward firing equipment, guns or rockets. I do not like the gun on the ramp, especially if troops are to offloaded. They have enough to worry about from the hostiles on the ground to also now consider safe routes of egress from the props and teh field of fire.
Resolve that the Osprey in Marine use will be unarmed and work at getting more punch in the Cobra gunships.
 
AirRyan
Topic Author
Posts: 2398
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 9:57 am

RE: MV-22 Osprey Ditches Belly Gun...

Fri Jul 02, 2010 3:12 am

Quoting SeJoWa (Reply 1):
While it has to be a good idea to find ways to add some destructive punch to the Osprey, that gun is just not as simple as possible and necessary, it seems. It speaks volumes that it gets left behind a lot in the field. Decision making time: NEXT!

It was doomed from the beginning, a waste of time and money as far as I'm concerned because it never passed the smell test.

Quoting SeJoWa (Reply 1):
Also, why not slave the weapon to the guys up front? You'd think the Apache approach was probably the smart thing to do from the outset!

No room with the FLIR and aerial refueling probe.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 2):
Marines refusing a minigun? Bizarre...

Contrary perhaps to popular misconception, Marines are not stupid - if your gun impedes you from doing your mission, yes, even your gun can be expendable.

Quoting dragon6172 (Reply 3):
Actually the retraction is required for ground clearance during landing, which was always my argument against the thing. The time you need a defensive weapon most in a helicopter is when you are landing and taking off (and while on deck) in a landing zone, which makes this gun about worthless since it has to be retracted during these phases of flight.

And this has happened at least once in AFG from what I have read. As a former 6322 (Phrog avionics,) the mini-gun was never going to work because it was not functional enough, for all the reasons already mentioned. If it's not practical, it's not viable. KISS is more than just another acronym, it's what often keeps you alive in a high risk environment.

Quoting SeJoWa (Reply 4):
Would a dedicated Osprey "gunship" make sense?

Hell no, not at twice the price of what a new AH-1Z could be had for. A $75m half-assed tilt-rotored gunship is about as useful as a one legged man in an ass kicking contest.

Quoting par13del (Reply 6):
Resolve that the Osprey in Marine use will be unarmed and work at getting more punch in the Cobra gunships.

The solution is to cut the Osprey buy in half, use it in numbers more akin to the sh¡tters, and supplement the bulk of Marine Air with a traditional medium lift helicopter such as the H-71.
 
SeJoWa
Posts: 410
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 6:11 pm

RE: MV-22 Osprey Ditches Belly Gun...

Fri Jul 02, 2010 8:27 am

Quoting AirRyan (Reply 7):
the smell test.

We need to get back to grooming more people with the expertise, experience and authority ( EE2A    ) to force decisions based on their "smelling" ability - which is the well (and sometimes painfully) honed ability to prioritize and decide (with a measure of understanding), I think. Any thoughts on that?

Quoting AirRyan (Reply 7):

No room with the FLIR and aerial refueling probe.

My incompletely expressed thought was to slave targetting for smart Hydras (or somesuch) to the helmets, so no gun up front. It may be the most doable solution? Hence also the cheapest... the kind of 70% ACTION we need more of (because you get vital feedback).

In my experience (designing prototypes), when you hit a wall, drop everything and build something that provides feedback. ANY feedback, to be perfectly honest and bloody minded about it. Best way to make progress, and hence, get things done over time (because very often, results are unexpected, but now crudely verified).

Quoting AirRyan (Reply 7):
Quoting SeJoWa (Reply 4):
Would a dedicated Osprey "gunship" make sense?

Hell no, not at twice the price of what a new AH-1Z could be had for. A $75m half-assed tilt-rotored gunship is about as useful as a one legged man in an ass kicking contest.

But the AH-1Z would slow the entire mission down. Hmmm. How about a couple of Broncos with the underslung turret?

See: http://www.fas.org/irp/program/collect/ov-10-nog.jpg
Keesje's a fan of those too, I know.
 
dragon6172
Posts: 795
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:56 am

RE: MV-22 Osprey Ditches Belly Gun...

Fri Jul 02, 2010 10:30 am

Quoting SeJoWa (Reply 8):
But the AH-1Z would slow the entire mission down.

Simple matter of mission planning. In theory Ospreys do not need an escort in transit to the LZ since they fly high and fast (relative terms really). So it is just a matter of the Cobra/Huey gunships meeting the Ospreys at the LZ to provide cover for the actual insertion/extraction.
Phrogs Phorever
 
travelavnut
Posts: 1327
Joined: Wed May 12, 2010 1:35 pm

RE: MV-22 Osprey Ditches Belly Gun...

Fri Jul 02, 2010 2:50 pm

So if this was the "interim" defensive weapon, what will be the final weapon?
Live From Amsterdam!
 
Devilfish
Posts: 5181
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

RE: MV-22 Osprey Ditches Belly Gun...

Sat Jul 03, 2010 5:53 am

Quoting SeJoWa (Reply 8):
How about a couple of Broncos with the underslung turret?

They have the "KISS" solution but choose to ignore it.....

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...C-27J-Baby-Spooky-05001/#more-5001


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Bruce Leibowitz
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Vasile Alexandru Muresan - Romanian Spotters


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Max Bryansky - Russian AviaPhoto Team
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Ken Iwelumo - Global Aviation Images


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Dean West
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Md Faridz


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Augustas Didzgalvis
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Alex Beltyukov

Quoting TravelAVNut (Reply 10):
So if this was the "interim" defensive weapon, what will be the final weapon?

They were trying this.....



.....but could end up with RO/RO kits.....

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...0J-Aerial-Tankers-05409/#more-5409

.....just not on the Ospreys.
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests