|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sun Sep 21, 2008 4:53 pm
Which machine gun do you think is the best type of weapon for an aircraft? Subjects include rate of Fire, Weight, Size, Power, and Range.
I think that the .303 Browning has shown itself as a very good weapon for the slower aircraft of its time, where engagements barely ever ranged past 100m. The gun itself is relatively light, and the ammunition is smaller and thus more can be carried.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Sep 21, 2008 4:59 pm
Well, I may get flamed but, the MG-151 20mm version. It doesn't matter if the ammunition carried is more or less. If you have less wouldn't you be pressed to not waste as much?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Sep 21, 2008 5:20 pm
I think a 7.62 minigun might be a nice weapon on a plane. Light, small ammo, and a rate of fire capable of shredding most aircraft. Hell, the Air Force had a light recon plane once with a 5.56 microgun in it. I think it was called the Mosquito? It was a rather fearsome plane, for a modified Cessna.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Sep 21, 2008 5:40 pm
Fresnel I think a 7.62 minigun might be a nice weapon on a plane. Light, small ammo, and a rate of fire capable of shredding most aircraft. Hell, the Air Force had a light recon plane once with a 5.56 microgun in it. I think it was called the Mosquito? It was a rather fearsome plane, for a modified Cessna. If what I have said offended you...
The mosquito was a high speed bomber made of wood.
... then it was probably intentional.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Sep 21, 2008 5:45 pm
Rommel_Desert_Fox Fresnel I think a 7.62 minigun might be a nice weapon on a plane. Light, small ammo, and a rate of fire capable of shredding most aircraft. Hell, the Air Force had a light recon plane once with a 5.56 microgun in it. I think it was called the Mosquito? It was a rather fearsome plane, for a modified Cessna. If what I have said offended you...
The mosquito was a high speed bomber made of wood.
... then it was probably intentional. ... was it British in origin?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Sep 21, 2008 5:57 pm
If what I have said offended you...
I think it was.
... then it was probably intentional.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Sep 21, 2008 6:00 pm
OberFeldwebel Rommel_Desert_Fox Fresnel I think a 7.62 minigun might be a nice weapon on a plane. Light, small ammo, and a rate of fire capable of shredding most aircraft. Hell, the Air Force had a light recon plane once with a 5.56 microgun in it. I think it was called the Mosquito? It was a rather fearsome plane, for a modified Cessna. If what I have said offended you...
The mosquito was a high speed bomber made of wood.
... then it was probably intentional. ... was it British in origin? I think so. Almost killed Niels Bohr. Now I have to look it up... Cessna A-37 Dragonfly, or A-37 Super Tweet. Turns out that was really your standard 7.62 Minigun. My mistake.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Sep 21, 2008 6:50 pm
XM214 Microgun, a 5.56 minigun.
Is that what you're talking about, Fresnel?
Heck, some are even in civilian hands...
Anyways, there's a reason machine guns aren't really the primary arms of planes anymore, it's all about the missiles.
The GAU-8 Avengers PWN, though...
The one thing I don't like about the Western-style miniguns, is that they're electric.
I like the gas ones (*cough* Soviet *cough*) better because they "spin up" faster.
The M39 cannon seems decent. A high-ish rate of fire, without costing too much weight wise.
I wouldn't really like the Bren though because you seem limited to 20 rounds, and then you're done.
I don't really like smaller aircraft guns though. The engagement distance gets thrown off.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Sep 21, 2008 6:55 pm
OberFeldwebel Well, I may get flamed but, the MG-151 20mm version. It doesn't matter if the ammunition carried is more or less. If you have less wouldn't you be pressed to not waste as much? MG-151 would be grouped into the "Conventional 20mm cannon" Option.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Sep 21, 2008 6:57 pm
Maelthra Reloaded OberFeldwebel Well, I may get flamed but, the MG-151 20mm version. It doesn't matter if the ammunition carried is more or less. If you have less wouldn't you be pressed to not waste as much? MG-151 would be grouped into the "Conventional 20mm cannon" Option. Ah, noted and voted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Sep 21, 2008 7:01 pm
The fact was, there are very probably thousands of different weapons that were mounted on aircraft, but through my knowledge there were a few "General" sizes of guns and I wanted to keep the poll fairly short.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Sep 21, 2008 7:12 pm
.303 browning. XDDDD
Well, depends on the type of fighting now. for ground support, the .50 or the bigger would be good. But now, air to air dog fights are next to unheard of, though the Warthog made four confirmed air to air kills in desert storm. XD
Yes, the Mosquito was British, made mostly out of wood.
Maelthra stole my idea with a Hurricane. XD
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Sep 21, 2008 7:33 pm
I'm gonna start murdering people. Supermarine Spitfire. Why is it nobody can recognize the fuselage and semi-bubble canopy? :O
For close support, Bigger is better, but also heavier. And SAM's and Triple-A are still a threat, so maneuverability can't be sacrificed. 30mm Works well in a dedicated platform (The A-10 was designed around the Avenger system), not many aircraft could carry what amounts to a Pickup truck under it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Sep 21, 2008 7:38 pm
Well of course gatling guns are the best (for obvious reasons) and I like the 7.62mm caliber in them, but the bigger the better.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Sep 21, 2008 7:49 pm
ArmasTermin Well of course gatling guns are the best (for obvious reasons) and I like the 7.62mm caliber in them, but the bigger the better. If what I have said offended you...
If it revolves, it's a revolver. biggrin
... then it was probably intentional.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
