Gun Trucks

[Targan]

Originally Posted by Webstral

Don't get me started on the F-35. The allies have been suckered and pressured into supporting a bad product. I'm very concerned that this one is going to bite us at a time we'd very much prefer not to be bitten.

Oh sh*t. Is that the general consensus I wonder? 'Cause here in Australia we're kind of banking on the F-35. Our old-style FA/18s are getting a bit long in the tooth, we've retired all our F-111s and we've bought a few Super Hornets as a stopgap measure while we wait for the F-35. If that project falls in a heap we're going to have a pretty horrible capability gap.

Of course one could argue that with such an iddy biddy defence force, Australia is always going to suffer capability gaps. We may be a wealthy nation on a per capita basis but we just don't have the population base to support a truly capable armed forces.

[95th Rifleman]

Originally Posted by Targan

Oh sh*t. Is that the general consensus I wonder? 'Cause here in Australia we're kind of banking on the F-35. Our old-style FA/18s are getting a bit long in the tooth, we've retired all our F-111s and we've bought a few Super Hornets as a stopgap measure while we wait for the F-35. If that project falls in a heap we're going to have a pretty horrible capability gap.

Of course one could argue that with such an iddy biddy defence force, Australia is always going to suffer capability gaps. We may be a wealthy nation on a per capita basis but we just don't have the population base to support a truly capable armed forces.

UK is in the same pickle, we are banking on the F-35 to provide us with a carrier aircraft when we eventualy get our new Elisabeth.

[copeab]

Originally Posted by Targan

Of course one could argue that with such an iddy biddy defence force, Australia is always going to suffer capability gaps. We may be a wealthy nation on a per capita basis but we just don't have the population base to support a truly capable armed forces.

Hire the Swiss. They'll stand at your shores, pikes in hand

[Targan]

Originally Posted by copeab

Hire the Swiss. They'll stand at your shores, pikes in hand

Don't get me wrong, I'd be all for having our own funky, down under version of the Papal Guard but... we have a LOT of shores. I don't think there are enough Swiss people for that.

[Legbreaker]

Originally Posted by Targan

... we have a LOT of shores. I don't think there are enough Swiss people for that.

Our borders would be just like Swiss cheese.

[Sanjuro]

And for the really desperate, there are concrete armored cars.

How about an aircraft carrier made of Pykrete? It won't be fast, but you can make it big enough to carry conventional aircraft rather than dedicated carrier-based models...
http://www.knowledgerush.com/kr/encyclopedia/Icecrete/

[bobcat]

[Graebarde]

Found what I was looking for in the WW2 aircraft with LCG in the nose.. Bell P-39 had a 37mm firing through the rotor hub. Don't ask me how.. just what it says... knew that I saw something on one somewhere... Not may built, and I know there were some in service in PAO.. met an old timer at church years back that flew them, then transfered to P-38 Lightning. He was on the Yamamoto raid flying top cover for them. Funny old guy too... said he was shot down three times... but got five of them.. "Oh your an ace." says I. "That's not how my wife pronounces it." says he.

FB



http://www.militaryfactory.com/aircr...ircraft_id=140

[copeab]

Originally Posted by Graebarde

Found what I was looking for in the WW2 aircraft with LCG in the nose.. Bell P-39 had a 37mm firing through the rotor hub. Don't ask me how..

The engine was behind the pilot, placing a shaft under the pilot's legs up to the prop. Worth adding that some PT boats began fitting the 37mm cannon from wrecked P-39's (including the built-in 30 round magazine) as a deck gun.

The Me 109, with a front engine, had a short 20mm cannon that fired through the propeller hub.

just what it says... knew that I saw something on one somewhere... Not may built, and I know there were some in service in PAO.. met an old timer at church years back that flew them, then transfered to P-38 Lightning.

Either the P-38 prototype or first model had a 37mm rather than 20mm nose gun.

[dragoon500ly]

Originally Posted by Graebarde

Found what I was looking for in the WW2 aircraft with LCG in the nose.. Bell P-39 had a 37mm firing through the rotor hub. Don't ask me how.. just what it says... knew that I saw something on one somewhere... Not may built, and I know there were some in service in PAO.. met an old timer at church years back that flew them, then transfered to P-38 Lightning. He was on the Yamamoto raid flying top cover for them. Funny old guy too... said he was shot down three times... but got five of them.. "Oh your an ace." says I. "That's not how my wife pronounces it." says he.

FB



http://www.militaryfactory.com/aircr...ircraft_id=140

The engine on a P-39 is mounted behind the pilot and the propeller shaft is offset below the hub of the prop (runs the prop through a gear housing) the barrel of the cannon runs right through the center of the housing. Needless to say, it is a maintenance nightmare!

The early models of the P-38 were designed with a 37mm cannon, that was replaced with a 20mm somewhere around the D/E model. There was also a
B-17 variant that mounted one in the nose for anti-fighter duty, never official, but there are a couple of pics and a old war story of it being used in Europe.

My high school shop teacher was a Confederate Air Force Colonel and we got extra credit for "assisting" the regular mechanics on the old warbirds.

[Graebarde]

Originally Posted by Sanjuro

How about an aircraft carrier made of Pykrete? It won't be fast, but you can make it big enough to carry conventional aircraft rather than dedicated carrier-based models...
http://www.knowledgerush.com/kr/encyclopedia/Icecrete/

Yeah that was an interesting program on History Channel about that some time ago. Wood pulp and ice... guess they were for northern service only.. but the concept was actually sound from tests done, as to construction, floating, and durability, other than the fact it melted!!

[boogiedowndonovan]

Hey Grae,

when you were in Vietnam, did you come across any gun trucks?

just curious
bdd

[Panther Al]

Originally Posted by Targan

Oh sh*t. Is that the general consensus I wonder? 'Cause here in Australia we're kind of banking on the F-35. Our old-style FA/18s are getting a bit long in the tooth, we've retired all our F-111s and we've bought a few Super Hornets as a stopgap measure while we wait for the F-35. If that project falls in a heap we're going to have a pretty horrible capability gap.

Of course one could argue that with such an iddy biddy defence force, Australia is always going to suffer capability gaps. We may be a wealthy nation on a per capita basis but we just don't have the population base to support a truly capable armed forces.

In all honestly, my admittedly scant, research and knowledge of the F35 program tells me its more boondoggle than not. Yes, it has the potential of being a very good multirole Aircraft. But its going to be probably one of the most expensive fighters ever. And the maintance costs are projected to be equally massive.

Ignoring the steathy bits of the F35 program, I honestly believe the various Airforces that are buying into it would be much better served with the latest flavours of current strike fighters: F/A18 E/F, Block 50/60 F16s, Gripens, and 15E's. Be massivly cheaper to boot.

[Ronin]

Originally Posted by Panther Al

In all honestly, my admittedly scant, research and knowledge of the F35 program tells me its more boondoggle than not. Yes, it has the potential of being a very good multirole Aircraft. But its going to be probably one of the most expensive fighters ever. And the maintance costs are projected to be equally massive.

Ignoring the steathy bits of the F35 program, I honestly believe the various Airforces that are buying into it would be much better served with the latest flavours of current strike fighters: F/A18 E/F, Block 50/60 F16s, Gripens, and 15E's. Be massivly cheaper to boot.

It would seem to me that the Sukhoi PAK FA would be a better choice than the F-35 at the moment. If for no other reason its superior to the Super hornet (etc). While the F35 is potentially a better aircraft. Its a long, long way away. The Sukhoi is a year or two tops, away. NATO countries need to shake the stigma, that the Russians are the bad guys. We cant buy their stuff. Let face it, its a brave new world. Its kinda every country for itself. I mean we buy all kinds of stuff (Clothing, other assorted items) from China for our military here in the US. I think they portray a far greater threat in our future than the Russians. My ten cents anyway

[Webstral]

Originally Posted by Ronin

I think they portray a far greater threat in our future than the Russians. My ten cents anyway

Each of these nations will be as big a threat as their leadership feels they can afford to be.

The US should be buying all the latest Russian gear, if only to see what is going on with the competition. Pilots who thoroughly understand the enemy's strengths and weaknesses, as well as their own strengths and weaknesses, are the most likely to bring victory.

Concrete armored cars. I never would have thought of that. The threat of invasion really brings out the creativity in some folks.

Getting back the gun trucks, I want to put a question out to the community at large: when does a fire support vehicle become a light assault gun?

[Ronin]

Originally Posted by Webstral

Getting back the gun trucks, I want to put a question out to the community at large: when does a fire support vehicle become a light assault gun?

I would say when the vehicle in question is equipped with heavy frontal armor, and a gun of at least 50mm.

[Ronin]

Couple pics I came across

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by Ronin

It would seem to me that the Sukhoi PAK FA would be a better choice than the F-35 at the moment. If for no other reason its superior to the Super hornet (etc). While the F35 is potentially a better aircraft. Its a long, long way away. The Sukhoi is a year or two tops, away. NATO countries need to shake the stigma, that the Russians are the bad guys. We cant buy their stuff. Let face it, its a brave new world. Its kinda every country for itself. I mean we buy all kinds of stuff (Clothing, other assorted items) from China for our military here in the US. I think they portray a far greater threat in our future than the Russians. My ten cents anyway

And the Russians will sell the PAK FA a lot cheaper than we're selling the F-35 for, because they're strapped for cash. And the Russians aren't so worried about getting everything perfect or making every congressional district happy -- they just want to get on the market with something that, while it may not be what the F-35 may eventually come, is on the market now and is better than what is now available. A lot of countries will see the PAK FA as an opportunity to get stealth at a bargain, even if its systems are not as deluxe as those that the F-35 will eventually have or its stealth profile isn't as small as the F-35 will eventually have.

[Legbreaker]

And electronics and other systems can be upgraded over time....

[Vespers War]

Originally Posted by Ronin

It would seem to me that the Sukhoi PAK FA would be a better choice than the F-35 at the moment. If for no other reason its superior to the Super hornet (etc). While the F35 is potentially a better aircraft. Its a long, long way away. The Sukhoi is a year or two tops, away. NATO countries need to shake the stigma, that the Russians are the bad guys. We cant buy their stuff. Let face it, its a brave new world. Its kinda every country for itself. I mean we buy all kinds of stuff (Clothing, other assorted items) from China for our military here in the US. I think they portray a far greater threat in our future than the Russians. My ten cents anyway

I was reading back through the entire thread and this ended up particularly amusing me since the first Su-57 (the PAK FA's eventual designation) entered service in 2020, nine years after this comment was made, and as of the end of 2022 there were a total of 11 in service. Forecasting the future is always difficult, but this particular prediction aged peculiarly poorly.

Hewing closer to the original topic of the thread, I need to dig through my photo files at some point, because I took pictures of a surviving 1970s gun truck a few years back and I know I still have them but my archives from that far back are a mess.

[Raellus]

I'm not sure if this is real. I have some doubts. I imagine the recoil would be substantial. How would the truck chassis handle it? I doubt it uses radar guidance in this configuration. How is it aimed? Also, ammunition consumption...

IF this hybrid system is real, perhaps this is something that could appear in the T2kU.