Posted on 02/24/2012 6:07:03 AM PST by Yo-Yo
Thanks. Now I’m “sure” and duly impressed.
How much time have you logged maintaining/flying Harriers?
None. I'm just a civilian fan of military aviation always interested in learning from those who know more. The thanks I sent you was sincere with no sarcasm intended.
In other news scientists discovered oranges are totally different than apples. Film at 11.
But those aircraft don’t operate from amphibious assault ships. The requirement for the gun pod has always been there on the F-35B. The aircraft will provide close air support as well as being available for first day of the war stealth scenarios with internal payload only. I fail to understand why people can’t get their heads around such a concept?
Hmmm.... The shoot-down of an Iraqi helicopter by an A-10 with its GAU-8 during GWI?
(IIRC, the Hog pilot said, "It just came apart..." ) <GRIN...>
Rumours of gun kills during the Eritrea-Ethiopia war in the late 1990s. During the Falklands there were gun kills. Sea Harrier against C-130 and Pucara against Westland Scout helicopter. On March 26th 1999 the lead F-15C pilot switched to guns after thinking that his AIM-120 AMRAAMs had missed the Serbian MiG-29s. The AMRAAMs had hit the two MiG-29.
Honest answer: probably during the VN war.
When was the last time grunts on the ground were saved by a gunfighter in the air? Probably not long ago.
The F-4 at first only could handle missiles or bombs. Then the NVAF piloted by Russians started shooting them down and we had too hurriedly come up with gun pods for the F-4.
Fighters need internal wing and nose guns.
Then maybe they should quit saying the apple is going to replace the orange.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.