Skull Leader

I would imagine a pair of GAU-8 tank-busters would probably have seriously adverse effects on the flight performance of a side-firing gunship. Just a guess though. If it were a forward firing weapons system it might be different... but the primary benefit of having a side-firing weapons platform, is that they ALWAYS have the enemy in their gunsight.

Well, obviously it's far more accurate now (with upgrades in computer technology) than it was in Vietnam. That said, sighting-in the guns was the initial priority after takeoff. Once and if the guns were properly sighted in, they could generally put a 105 shell within about a 10-15 foot area, pretty much wasting anything within that radius. Adding the 105 was a resounding success. It's my understanding that the 40mms that went on the gunships in vietnam weren't as easy to sight in, and differed from gun to gun on how well they did (the rule was, if your gunship got a good pair of 40mms, you did everything you could to keep those guns in top shape. And if you only had one good 40mm, that gun got top priority. The autocannons were never as precise... they still got the job done well though. Nowadays they could target a quarter laying in the middle of a field and proably put the 105 shell directly on it. Computer target-aquisition-gear/fire control systems have become so advanced...

Gunships already have an "intermediate" weapon. the 40mm Bofors cannon. In fact, the U boats are the only Spectres operating with 3 weapons systems right now: 1 25mm "Equalizer" 5-barrel cannon 1 40mm Bofors light cannon 1 105mm Howitzer artillery cannon The H models USED to have this: 2 20mm Vulcan cannons 1 40mm Bofors light cannon 1 105mm Howitzer artiller cannon Since about the mid/late 1990s, the Hotels did away with the 20mm vulcan cannons though, it was decided that with the advancements in AAA and MANPAD technology, the gunships had to get dangerously close for the 20mms to be of any real effect (within around 9,000-10,000 feet, the gun's MAXMIMUM range is around 12,000 ft). The Equalizer autocannon on the U-boats has a longer effective range (around 15,000 ft), hence the reason it still has them. For a little more AC-130 gunship weapons history: When the first AC-130As went to Southeast Asia in the late '60s, they were mounted with 4 20mm Vulcan Cannons and 4 7.62 miniguns. "Project Surprise Package" and the "Pave Pronto" program removed a pair of the miniguns and a pair of the vulcans in favor of a pair of the 40mm Bofors cannons. This was the heaviest any service AC-130A would be armed (around 1980, the miniguns were removed, for the same reasons the 20mms would LATER be removed). When the AC-130E models came to Asia, they were armed the same as the "Pave Pronto" AC-130As. When the "Pave Aegis" program came along, they removed one of the 40s and bolted a 105mm howitzer to the deck. ..... instant tank killer. It could also work over a hardened building pretty good. The 105s and 40mm were later put on trainable mounts, giving them added flexibility. When the AC-130Es rotated through the upgrade program to AC-130H standards, they all received the 105mm gun. AC-130H models of arounf 1971 or 1972 were probably the most heavily armed gunships ever (a pair of 20mm Vulcans, a pair of 7.62 miniguns, a 40mm, and a 105mm), although the gunships of today are FAR more accurate, needing much less ammo to get the job done. They're also currently packing a serious amount of highly-classified ECM gear that renders them pretty invisible after the sun goes down.(although it's seriously "uglied up" the gunship's appearance...)

Just my point. C-130Js have quieter, cooler running engines with a higher top speed and more loiter time. The Gunship conversion program could easily work one over into a wicked killing machine. Add on the Heat-sink/IR Baffles that ACs use on their engines, and I'm betting an AC-130J would be pretty hard to track.

Wow... Macross done "Le Mis" style. Coming from a classically trained musician who has been in a pit orchestra for Le Mes, I can honestly say I'm impressed with the work put into this

Further to that, more Zentraedi/Meltrandi fleets had to have been encountered in the years after space war I. By the time of the Mac7 episode "fleet of the strongest women", they aren't really surprised once they realize they're fighting another Meltrandi fleet and seem to have a set plan ready to go (IE the "Minmay attack". They just take the attitude of "oh, it's another fleet.."

I guess I really should look at this from the standpoint of a MOSPEADA fan, they've not had it quite as good as Macross fans have (whereas most diehard macross fans look to disown Harmony Gold as having ever had anything even remotely close to do with anything Macross-related, MOSPEADA fans kind a see it as a back door to maybe spark things back up in Japan)... kinda ironic, eh?

Bad character artwork, production delay after production delay, still nothing ORIGINAL (they're still using Mospeada stuff), poor animation (examples have already been seen), pick your poison. You're basing your comments on what you've seen in this thread without realizing that there is more out there (and it eats as much ass as what we've seen here).

The concept is nowhere NEAR being retired... the AC-130H and U gunships are still in heavy use in the gulf right now. I'll wager the next variant is simply based off a C-130J (a -30 stretch variant would be cool). The Osprey has next to no interior by comparison which in turn, means less ammo, fewer weapon systems, and less loiter time. The diversity of the weapon systems on an AC-130U allow it to assault a wide variety of targets very efficiently. What's more, they can hang around the target area pretty much all night long (only leaving to refuel a couple of times) Just about the only limiting factor on fixed-wing gunship ops is night-time. Unless they have to (and it's happened often enough), the SOS wing MUCH prefers to operate at night, and they do so with deadly efficiency.

Yeah, like most other "rumors" in life, the answer is probably somewhere in the middle. Of course God doesn't fly at the side of Infidels by their beliefs. Well, both sides have pretty much begun staring one another down. One side saw Cooper as "consorting with the enemy", while the other side saw him as "spying for the enemy"... pretty much wound up as a mexican standoff for him, hence no backup. Most of it probably is, in terms of the Tomcats themselves, battles they took part in, etc... it's really only the number of kills I question. Another thing that has been a constant source of debate in regards to Ali-Cats is whether or not they still have any phoenix missiles. Pretty much the entire world believes they don't, while Tom swears up and down on his dead grandmother's grave that they do. I'm not so sure what to believe. I think it's entirely possible that they have some still, but probably not in any great numbers... unless they've found a way to reverse-engineer them. It's made all the sadder by the simple fact that we'll NEVER know a true, accurate total of it's air to air record. It's difficult to discuss this with most true aviation enthusiasts because they laugh at Cooper and Bishop's book. I won't except their book as divine-wrote, but it's better than nothing and currently all we have to go on. I figure between that book and my contact within the intelligence community of the air force, I can draw my own conclusions and be happy with that And for those who just might want to know.... as of THIS writing, it is exactly 5 months, 11 days, 21 hours, 55 minutes, and 10 seconds until the Tomcats are officially retired from USN service. (chew on that for a bit....)

The Tomcat hasn't been retired yet. VF-31 "Tomcatters" still have a stateside readiness deployment this summer. They won't be retired until september. Yeah, the Iranian "Ali-Cats" are F-14As. You can do what I did and volunteer to be a "plane captain" at a museum that has a Tomcat... if they have an open cockpit you can sit inside it whenever you want (I captain for the Tomcat at the Tulsa Air and Space Museum, I sit in it every time I'm there). Sure the plane will probably never fly again (ours could if it needed to, we still have both engines and a pair of spares, the plane is completely intact also), but how many people can say they take care of their own 1/1 scale Tomcat? kalvasflam, Most of the original Iranian F-14 pilots were instructed in flight use and ACM by Americans based off of American tactics since at least half of their fighter technology is of American origin. Unless I'm mistaken they have their own (if out of date) E-3 Sentry aircraft. Those that have gone on to train today's generation of Iranian Tomcat pilots have that experience as well as a wealth of combat experience from their war with Iraq. They whittled down far more of the Iraqi airforce than we did (Iraq couldn't financially AFFORD to fly most of their airforce by the first gulf war). Their training definately isn't on par with what we have, but they have forward air control units of their own, and the AWG-9 radar system used by those Tomcats is still quite effective. I would say of the nations the US considers "enemies", they offer a considerable airborne threat. Certainly not one to be underestimated.

I'm a member there as well (as well as a paying member of the Tomcat and Tailhook associations). Since I plan to be there in September for the ceremony I've tried to stay on top of things there. While Tom Cooper offers up information that no one else has, be careful with it. He's going by what the government of Iran has TOLD him (and what few pilots he was able to interview have heard). He has next to no official paper evidence to back up any of his claims. Some of it may be true, other parts of it may not. There is an infamous "3-way" Phoenix missile kill he speaks of where an Iranian Tomcat managed to splash 3 MiGs with one AIM-54. The circumstances and possibilities are a near mathmatical impossibility (I'd give it about a 2% chance). He claims that almost their entire run of tomcats (minus those that Iraq managed to shoot down and a few accidents) are still completely functional. I take issue with this because just after the new year, I was made privy to the unclassified parts of an intelligence threat-assesment briefing held at McConnell AFB where basically the US reviews pretty much anything and everything it has to fear around the world. In that briefing, it was said that the US has eyes watching approximately 20 functioning Tomcats left in Iran. The rest are either mothballed or have been parted out. At any rate, they don't have the means to fly more than 20 or so without some parts-swapping between airframes. His book on Iranian Tomcats is awesome, it's just about the only resource available for Ali-Cats, but beware his facts and figures, because he's the only one spouting them and they don't match up at all with what pretty much every other government sees.

... then quit watching it.

They ran the trailer for it during "Ice Age 2". It's animated.

Best buy here does good to keep a single copy of each disc on the shelf, everything else flies off.

My name is Skull Leader and I approve of this video.

Dude... the show's been on the air for 15+ years and it only NOW gets a movie??

And the new export models have even more powerful engines yet (GE F-110s) That makes, to my knowledge, 4 different planes that engine has been used in: B-1 Lancers (4 each) F-16 Variants (some of them) F-14 Super Tomcats (both B and D models) F-15SG Strike Eagles

Unless I'm mistaken, the paintjob on the two is identical, right down to the wing number.

Too bad the video is neither Robotech (clearly a DYRL valkyrie), or live action (it's CG, and of 1990s vintage at that)..

It sucks I don't understand more japanese, because the footage was awesome...

Our best buy finally has it in stock, although I've made no move to buy it yet

In reality, all this dogfight BS is just pure fantasy against the USAF/USN right now. But especially the USAF. The aerial coverage is probably too good, and a majority of the kills will occur in BVR engagements, individually, the other side might have a chance, but as you say, the odds of that happening is close to zero. There were similar comments in WWII, ace Jap pilots such as Sakai were really good, and the general comments from those pilots were, the average American pilot wasn't really that good, but the problem was, the Americans excelled at teamwork, and that just killed the IJN air arm. It's the same comment about fighting wars, that's a team sport, and in that arena, currently the U.S. tend to be a bit better than most. Yeah, there might be one in fifty chance that a Flanker could smoke a -22 or even a few -15s in an actual war, but the kill ratio aren't gonna favor the guys flying the Flankers. By the way, loved the interesting comments about Sparrow and Phoenix, didn't know that was the case. What's the drop distance before ignition? 387645[/snapback] I couldn't give you specifics (I don't know them myself) but with videos of the aircraft at speed and altitude, those missiles can appear to drop as much as 30 feet or more before they ignite. I believe the Sidewinder and the AMRAAM are the only rail-launched air to air missiles in the US inventory(IE, they don't drop and then fire, but fire directly off the rail) I believe this has to do with fin-placement when mounted on the pylon. The Phoenix missile was designed to approach it's target from above, so as soon as the motor fires, the missile pitches itself up.

As often as not, when a Phantom would go to fire a Sparrow missile, it would just fall off the rack and not fire. There was also a definate hard deck below which the phantom could not fire the sparrow because they'd be practiaclly dropping it into the treeline before the missile would ignite! Things didn't change with the Tomcat and the Phoenix missile. The AIM-54 has an external arming lever that a red-shirt has to switch while the Tomcat is on the catapult. It is, evidently, not a very easy lever to turn and in many cases presented the appearance of being armed when it actually wasn't. New jet and new missile, same results. "Fox three..." and one million dollars goes straight into the drink with no firing.

In a BVR conflict, the russian probably might as well eject and save himself the stress of worrying which direction the attack will come from, because the F-22A is damn near IMPOSSIBLE to see on Radar. A week or so ago I was talking to a Super Hornet pilot from VFA-103. Just before he and his WSO came to the airshow, the squadron had been duking it out with the raptors from Tyndall in a number of different kinds of engagements. In all but two of the BVR encounters, the Super Hornet guys couldn't even FIND the raptor by the time the "Bang, you're dead" call went out. In a knife fight, however, things change. Don't be mistaken, the Raptor is still very much sierra hotel, but the playing ground is a lot more even. Stealth is no longer a factor. The 103 pilot says just about everyone in the squadron has some excellent guncamera footage of them pulling lead and then making the "kill" on a Raptor (he's supposed to send me some images when he gets free time). So, in summary, for BVR conflicts, as soon as the "fight's on" call goes out, the Raptor won nearly every time. However, when the conflict started within visual range, the results were almost an even 50/50 (actually closer to 60/40 favoring the Super Hornets, they are excellent maneuverers at low speeds). Knowing that, the F-22A's ace card is DEFINATELY in the BVR kill. The 22 pilot needs to hope he's not alone and out of AMRAAMS if he's spotted, or else it's all up to his skill vs. the other guy. (having said that, what are the chances of an encounter like that happening? Unless we enter into some major air war, almost nil)