The AC-5

[stormlion1]

Funny part about the Old Dog was that plane was a test bed for B-1 upgrades that was eventually used to upgrade the entire B-52 fleet. At least from what I remember from the book series I read a decade ago.
What I want to know is what effect all those guns firing in tandem would have on a C-5's airframe.

[mpipes]

There is now way that the US would ever do this. C-5s are considered strategic assets and are vitally important as strategic airlift. They carry one of the highest priorities for repair in the event of a break down, and they are the only aircraft capable of carrying many cargo loads. There have never been enough airframes as far as many logistic expert believe.

[stormlion1]

There are currently 126 C-5A/B aircraft in service, but they are retiring a number of the C-5A's aircraft, so they can't be that in demand. Probably replacing them with C-17's. Maybe a retired C-5 can be modified into a AC-5?

[Sanjuro]

AFAIK the C5As are being retired because the airframes are approaching the end of their fatigue life- giving them a new role which had a higher level of airframe abuse would be problematic.
As one of the calmer posts on spacebattles said, the advantage of a bigger airframe for gunship use would be in longer loiter time, carrying more ammunition and more fuel. Weapons on both sides would mean that 50% of the weapons would be completely wasted in each engagement, not to mention the extra crew training time required.

[copeab]

Originally Posted by Sanjuro

As one of the calmer posts on spacebattles said, the advantage of a bigger airframe for gunship use would be in longer loiter time, carrying more ammunition and more fuel. Weapons on both sides would mean that 50% of the weapons would be completely wasted in each engagement, not to mention the extra crew training time required.

What about flying a figure eight pattern centered on the target? You'd fire from the the port on one loop and starboard on the other.

(ineffecient, yes)