"[AFSOC] is looking at a number of different options [in terms of weaponry and configurations] for a gunship. The marines are always interested in every new capability [for the V-22]," he said.Well, the MV-22 was suppose to have defensive weaponry added to it...robust defensive weapons as part of its package before it was to be allowed to enter service. Conway was pretty adamant about that...the current Commandant doesn't care as much.
While the concept is still in its early stages, Col Ropella hinted that the CV-22 may be fitted with forward-firing missiles, but beyond that he did not reveal any further details. However, when asked about the possibility of high-energy weapons, such as lasers, being fitted, he said: "All things are on the table. Some engineers at NAVAIR [Naval Air Systems Command] probably have dreams about [lasers] on the V-22."
Given the V-22's tiltrotor configuration and nearly 12 m diameter rotorblades, forward-firing munitions could not be carried on underwing hardpoints. Instead, the aircraft would either have to employ ramp-mounted or cargo bay-stored canister munitions, similar to those carried by the USMC's KC-130J Harvest HAWK Hercules gunship, or sponson-mounted stub-wings.
A side-firing cannon/machine gun could be fitted, but this would involve some structural re-modelling as the V-22 does not have a paratrooper door on the left-side aircraft fuselage, and the door on the right side is located forward of the rotors, which would present safety issues for the aircraft.
But how do you make a proper gunship out of an airplane that has huge props blocking the way in forward flight and very limited wing space?
The only way I can see it working is to take a blast from the past and copy the F-86D solution to killing heavy bombers.
The F-86D was the product of the USAF trying to develop an interceptor that was capable of knocking down a Soviet Bomber that was attempting to attack the US.
WW2 and Korean War experience showed that machinegun fire performed poorly against bombers and that a much bigger punch was needed. The answer was to haul 2.75in folding rockets into the air and ripple fire them at the bombers.
Fast forward to today and you have the same option with the V-22. Its already shown that it can carry belly weaponry but the beauty of this system is that the tech has improved and if this "concept" is fully realized then you could possible have two racks.
One rack with 48 2.75in rockets that could be raised and lowered and then further back a rack with say five 5in rockets.
Since all these rockets would be of the laser guided variety you're talking about quite a punch.
The next question is will this be a forward firing option or would they be mounted sideways so you can do NASCAR around the enemy position.
Personally I'm thinking forward so you don't have to even blink about engine damage from exhaust plumes.
Other than that maybe strengthen the ramp and toss some griffins on it or perhaps a trainable 20mm cannon if you're feeling frisky.
The crazy thing is this though. A blast from the past might be the answer to a AFSOC and USMC issue.
What about a beefed up BAE Guardian System? May no longer be retractable if you move to the 25 or 30mm cannon. But it will clear the rotors.
ReplyDeleteIt ha more clearance then I expected.
Deletehttp://3.bp.blogspot.com/_VMdraHwAbeg/TCixdCzYFXI/AAAAAAAADrs/obLIiMuOW00/s1600/V22_bellygun.JPG
Scrap the idea of making an aircraft that can not support offensive weapon systems due to its aeronautical designs and go forward with a the now Boeing OV-10X. Just put more powerful engines, reinforce the the wings to handle the increased pay and fuel load, add two FLIR turrets for both pilot and R.I.O., add a data link to control drones, and add a turret containing a twin Bofors 40mm cannon.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.google.com/search?q=ov-10+turret&espv=210&es_sm=93&tbm=isch&imgil=podRjzoogjJOEM%253A%253Bhttps%253A%252F%252Fencrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com%252Fimages%253Fq%253Dtbn%253AANd9GcSGXKyWF7Assgf3T8IeterV1bGRneQRQKGU1r1dYWOnaUVHjUd-Tg%253B707%253B472%253Bq5MLWpNzwzDxiM%253Bhttp%25253A%25252F%25252Fwww.fas.org%25252Firp%25252Fprogram%25252Fcollect%25252Fov-10.htm&source=iu&usg=__AcWKHX9NtgLyhwhRhslRGA4YfFU%3D&sa=X&ei=VFEAU7uMKNaEoQSKpYDwDg&ved=0CCwQ9QEwAA&biw=1920&bih=1099#facrc=_&imgrc=podRjzoogjJOEM%253A%3Bq5MLWpNzwzDxiM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.fas.org%252Firp%252Fprogram%252Fcollect%252Fov-10-nog.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.fas.org%252Firp%252Fprogram%252Fcollect%252Fov-10.htm%3B707%3B472
in the past many aircraft fired 7.62 to 30mm rounds trought rotor blades, by a system discovered in 1915. Did the US forget how to do that ? go to your closer aircraft museum and reverse engineering the p40...
ReplyDeleteYes, BUT! When the tilt rotor goes up the guns aim up also.
DeleteI see five ways to arm Osprey.
Delete1, Fit them with wing hardpoints. Synchronized M230's could fire through props, bombs could be used with no problem and rockets and missiles would be used when props point up.
2, Fit them with cobra like wings to carry weapons on sides of main landing gear pods.
3, Fit them with weapons under belly semi-recessed. Arming would be pretty awkward due to ground clearance. That could also severely limit types of weapons.
4, Fit them with hardpoints on TOP of fuselage. Jaguar and Lightening did this on their wings. It would make freefall weapons not an option but would enable aircraft to use even Maverics, Harpoons etc. with no issues aside from increased topweight and somewhat awkward arming.
5, Fit them with big and long autocannon such as Bofors L70 same way Mi-24's carried 30mm guns.
In my opinion first fourth and fifth options combined as needed. Some Ospreys should also get nose job to get similiar layout to cobra.
With the current weapons pod on the V-22 (see below link) and maybe the addition of a 25mm or even 30mm cannon on the ramp, an armed MV-22 would be just the ticket for a "gunship" that could cirlce a battle field ala AC-130. What about a 40mm bofors cannon vice the 25/30mm?
ReplyDeleteSeems to me that is of the shelf technology that could be easily adapted to the airframe and be cost effective. Maybe even made as a "package" that could be installed situational dependent.
Whoops. I messed up and mentioned "off the shelf" and "cost effective" in the same sentence. Its not flashy, its not high tech so it has no chance.
I am guessing that Cpl Tony Stein, MOH awardee Iwo Jima, and his "Stinger" (a salvaged M-1919 30 cal machine gun from a Navy Fighter) would stand no chance in this day and age.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Stein
What has become of my beloved Marine Corps?
apparently one of the issues with the 40mm bofors and part of the reason that future AC-130 designs won't have the bofors is that US stockpiles of 40mm bofors ammo are running seriously low and their is no viable manufacturing and research for future supplies.
DeleteWhy bother such convert-a-gunships are maybe ok for fighting guys with flipflops and no AAA or manpads .
ReplyDeleteSeems to me that is what we have been fighting most of these days....
DeleteAfghanistan is quite unique as its in 40+ year state of war and the last manpad vas supplied by US in the 80s ,but on the other hand failed states that are falling apart like Libiya or Syria are full of still usable manpads ,just look at the Syrian af loses
Delete+ large number of ex soviet manpad's, Iranian manpad's, Chinese manpad's and everything you can by for a narco businesses cash.
DeleteA Modern MANPAD does not have a long shelf life in the field and must be maintained in depot or it goes tits up and will become combat ineffective.
DeleteIn the hands of members of failed states, militia's, terrorist cells or guerilla armies these would be hard pressed to function reliably.
Recall that 1980 was 34 long years ago and any redeye or stinger as well as any soviet type will be nothing but a turn in for a gun buy back in California.
The problem is that if you configure this into a gun ship you lose the troop compliment. So they you have an extremely big, expensive, and fragile attack VTOL.
ReplyDeleteThe Osprey just straight up does not have any spare weight to mount weapons. This is straight out of the scene in Pentagon Wars, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AHSjpFUKQR4.
OMG I have never seen that clip before. That was brilliant!
DeleteYeah i think that clip should be mandatory viewing for all officers and anyone in acquisition.
DeleteCome on guys,
ReplyDeletefolks bolted 30mm cannons to 3000lbs LOH (MD-500) belly and got away with it for a few.
This mechanism under the belly, but with the removable ('mission-module') ammo-drum inside at best CG-location, and no ingestion of gases into the turbines...4000lbs all up.
Once inside, perhaps room for double/triple the ammo-capacity in extra drums/barrels ?? And when empty, strap the empty barrels out of the way, cover-plate over the ammo-feed, and fly Marines and their stuff.
Altogether different meaning of bringing a keg to the party.
Might not even need new code in the controls-logic.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GAU-8_Avenger
"Really !?"
Mount a belly launcher module for HELLFIRE missiles.
ReplyDeleteAny fire and forget missile could be used a TOW such as is mounted on Choppers.
A remote turret in the nose.
A bathtub gun mount much as the Messerschmitt ME 110 or the B-17 C mount what ever caliber you wish but it will need to be a low capacity ammo drum.
The locations are limited to the belly and the nose a ball turret in the nose or even MG's mounted to the sides as in the B-25 strafing bombers.
Old Style Vietnam H-34 helo's would have Marines firing through the square plexi-glass portholes after the plexi was removed using their personal weapons.
Hang some Marines on a SPIE rig and let them carry their weapons ready to shoot!
Try this: http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/apkws-ii-hellfire-jr-hydra-rockets-enter-sdd-phase-02193/
ReplyDeleteThis was suppose to work: http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/incoming-hostile-the-usns-jatas-aircraft-warning-system-07007/
ReplyDeleteI can see it turning into somthing like a ACH-47A "Guns A-Go-Go from vietnam. http://aviationtrivia.blogspot.com/2011/02/one-powerful-helicopter-gunship-ach-47a.html
ReplyDeletethe potential as a CAS weapon would be interesting.
i considered that but the big problem is the narrow fuselage. the thing is sized internally like an old CH-46 so you're operating in VERY limited space. i just don't see large caliber cannons being carried. even multiple mini guns would be a problem.
Delete