The sky-high aircraft and aviation thread

Achae: Lol. Ok fair enough. I know the hog isn't perfect but it does what it does fairly well. We can certainly make it better and probably should.

I'm curious how much a Vulcan or Avenger cannon and their ammo weigh. It might make for a substantial increase in fuel and other types of weapons. A glance at Wiki suggests that the Vulcan and its feed system are around 500 pounds before you load any ammo into it. This page says the ammo weighs in at about .56 pounds a pop, and that 511 rounds are loaded in an F-16 (installations and ammo loads vary from one airframe to the next).

Overall the cannon, feed system, and ammo weigh in at around 750-800 pounds. A Sidewinder missile in comparison is around 200 pounds, and of course the balance could just be used to carry more fuel rather than more weapons, providing more loiter time.

EDIT: Per Wiki, the GAU-8 Avenger, locked and loaded and ready to kick ass, clocks in at around two short tons.

edited 31st Mar '15 8:15:01 PM by AFP

Yep. It is a heavy gun. Big long barrels, big motor, big ammo drum, big round velocity, and big hitting power. Keep in mind the F-16 is a rather small airplane. Our larger craft have more room for well more stuff.

So I got to talk for a few minutes with ex-USMC General James Mattis today, turns out he thinks the F-35B is still going to get things done.

@ Tom: Does the aircraft the F-35B is designed to replace — the Harrier — have an inbuilt cannon?

I don't think the F-35 B is going to come even close to the hype. The absolute most troubling and troubled of the F-35 family of craft is the Marine one. It has the most problems, most cost over run, and requires additional overhaul of the ships the harriers used to lift off of. The USAF one isn't too bad I could actually live with that one if they would not keep on to trying to insist in harebrained fashion it is some wunder waffen.

The answer to the Harrier question is they always mounted them in gun pods which presents problems of it's own rather then building them into the plane from the get go. The worst has to be the very limited ammo capacity on an auto-cannon in both the Harriers and the F-35's. The problem with the F-35 B and C hanging something like a flat side pylon mounting on the crafts undercarriage doesn't do nice things for radar cross sections. The craft is designed to be as streamlined as possible to avoid too much cross section. I would bet donuts to dollars that gun pod twinkles nicely from the side in radar. Of course adding the pylons for external payload so it can actually carry an appreciable weapon load isn't doing the radar cross section any favours either.

edited 1st Apr '15 3:27:07 AM by TuefelHundenIV

^ At least the Harrier's gunpod was built in such a way to not compromise any element of its parent aircraft's performance.

Are we sure that the guys responsible for giving the go ahead for the F-35 aren't the most successful deep-penetration agents this agency:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Intelligence_Directorate_%28Russia%29 ,

known to those whose data that they keep on file as the GRU, have ever had? Because they couldn't be fucking up the Western world's air defenses for the foreseeable future much more if they HAD been taking money from the boys based at Khodynka Airport.

edited 1st Apr '15 6:13:09 AM by TamH70

I don't think that's the case owing to a little thing I call the Law of Conspiracies.

In short, the larger a conspiracy is the harder it is to keep hidden. One agent is more or less invisible but a dozen are noticeable to intelligence sources. The ideal conspiracy group is no stronger than 4 members. Any larger and you risk someone on the other side noticing.

There's too many people involved in the F-35 cockup to consider infiltration a viable reason for its fuckups.

Jet fuel can't wipe audiotapes.

Cassette tape...err...tape does dissolve in petroleum based fuels. Especially high distillates like gasoline.

Then holograms or something.

I don't even know what conspiracies are hip anymore.

I think Garcon was attempting a "Jetfuel cant melt steel beams" joke.

I was but work and drink make my jokes not smart.

Why does everything have to be a conspiracy anyway?

Because humans like to have smart reasons why things happen, rather than the depressing "random chance and screwups are why".

Because lizard people living in the moon's core is more believable than America fucking up.

I would certainly like some of whatever the hell David Icke was sniffing when he came up with the idea that the planet is secretly run by alien shapeshifter lizards.

[DOUBLE POST]

edited 1st Apr '15 6:13:02 PM by Deadbeatloser22

We come up with conspiracy theories because simple reasons for major events often feel unsatisfactory, so we weave complex conspiracy theories to make the significant event have a more significant cause.

Never choose malice when greed and incompetency fill the same role.

Likewise never send an F-35 on a mission when an A-10 can do it just fine.

So the theorist can feel superior because they have realized a terrible truth that all the sheep are too blind and indoctrinated to see.

Would you send an A-10 on an air superiority mission, or use it as a tanker? Maybe the C-17 should be replaced by the A-10?

FA: Confessions Of A US Navy EA-18G Growler Electronic Warfare Officer — Remember that the US Navy is currently the only service in the West that conducts Electronic Attack.

Yes, and a little quote:

edited 2nd Apr '15 2:25:16 AM by Greenmantle