[Admin]

First there was this gun...



It was developed by General Electric, the "We bring good things to life" people. It's one of the modern-day Gatling guns. It shoots very big bullets. It shoots them very quickly.

Someone said, "Let's put it in an airplane."

Someone else said, "Better still, let's build an airplane around it."



So they did. And "they" were the Fairchild-Republic airplane people.

And they had done such a good job with an airplane they developed back in WWII...





...called the P-47 Thunderbolt, they decided to call it the A10 Thunderbolt.





They made it so it was very good at flying low and slow and shooting things with that fabulous gun.


But since it did fly low and slow, they made it bulletproof, or almost so. A lot of bad guys have found you can shoot an A10 with anything from a pistol to a 23mm Soviet cannon and it just keeps on flying and shooting.



When they got through, it looked like this...





It's not sleek and sexy like an F18 or the stealthy Raptors and such, but I think it's such a great airplane because it does what it does better than any other plane in the world.


It kills tanks.


Not only tanks, as Sadam Hussein's boys found out to their horror, but armored personnel carriers, radar stations, locomotives, bunkers, fuel depots...just about anything the bad guys thought was bulletproof turned out to be easy pickings for this beast.





See those engines. One of them alone will fly this puppy. The pilot sits in a very thick titanium alloy "bathtub."


That's typical of the design.


They were smart enough to make every part the same whether mounted on the left side or right side of the plane, like landing gear, for instance.



Because the engines are mounted so high (away from ground debris) and the landing gear uses such low pressure tires, it can operate from a damaged airport, interstate highway, plowed field, or dirt road.

Everything is redundant. They have two of almost everything. Sometimes they have three of something. Like flight controls. There's triple redundancy of those, and even if there is a total failure of the double hydraulic system, there is a set of manual flying controls.






Capt. Kim Campbell sustained this damage over Bagdad and flew for another hour before returning to base.


But about that gun...


It's so hard to grasp just how powerful it is.





This is the closest I could find to showing you just what this cartridge is all about. What the guy is holding is NOT the 30mm round, but a "little" .50 Browning machine gun round and the 20mm cannon round which has been around for a long time.


The 30mm is MUCH bigger.






Down at the bottom are the .50 BMG and 20x102 Vulcan the fellow was holding. At the bottom right is the bad boy we're discussing.


Let's get some perspective here: The .223 Rem (M16 rifle round) is fast. It shoots a 55 or so grain bullet at about 3300 feet/sec, give or take. It's the fastest of all those rounds shown (except one). When you move up to the .30 caliber rounds, the bullets jump up in weight to 160-200 grains. Speeds run from about 2600 to 3000 fps or so.


The .338 Lapua is the king of the sniper rifles these days and shoots a 350 grain bullet at 2800 fps or so. They kill bad guys at over a mile with that one.


The .50 BMG is really big. Mike Beasley has one on his desk. Everyone who picks it up thinks it's some sort of fake, unless they know big ammo. It's really huge with a bullet that weighs 750 grains and goes as fast the Lapua.


I don't have data on the Vulcan, but hang on to your hat.


The bullet for the 30x173 Avenger has an aluminum jacket around a spent uranium core and weighs 6560 grains (yes, over 100 times as heavy as the M16 bullet, and flies through the air at 3500 fps (which is faster than the M16 as well).


The gun shoots at a rate of 4200 rounds per minute. Yes, four thousand. Pilots typically shoot either one- or two-second burst which set loose 70 to 150 rounds. The system is optimized for shooting at 4,000 feet.


OK, the best for last.


You've got a pretty good idea of how big that cartridge is, but I'll bet you're like me and you don't fully appreciate how big the GA GAU-8 Avenger really is.



Take a look...





Each of those seven barrels is 112" long. That's almost ten feet. The entire gun is 19-1/2 feet long.


Think how impressive it would look set up in your living room.


Oh, by the way, it doesn't eject the empty shells but runs them back into the storage drum. There's just so dang many flying out, they felt it might damage the aircraft.


Like I said, this is a beautiful design.






I'm glad it's ours.

[Citizen Smith]

depleted uranium ?

This post has been edited by Citizen Smith: 30 July 2010 - 08:30 AM

[Mailman]

Being near DMAFB (Home of the Warthog) in Tucson, you see these beasts flying around all the time.

Always dug them. The gun has a very unique sound and, evidently, is how it got the 'warthog' name.

[win]

nu, does this count?




"there are old pilots and bold pilots but there are few old, bold pilots"

[Headshot]

Citizen Smith, on 30 July 2010 - 08:28 AM, said:

depleted uranium ?

I googled it for you...

http://en.wikipedia....epleted_uranium

Because it has more mass than lead, depleted uranium will go through materials that lead can't penetrate. I worked on the Utah Test and Training Range and the "Warthogs" (A-10's), as they were affectionately called by their drivers, would come in to practice strafing. Whereas other jets, such as F-16's would hit their strafing target about 5% of the time, A-10's would not only hit the targets every time, but would consistantly leave a pile of rubble in their wake. If the Air Force ever gets rid of this weapon platform, it will be a huge mistake. No other aircraft on Earth can do what the A-10 does as well as it does it. Rather than phasing them out, we should be building more. This is a design that is as good today as it was when it was created. Go Warthogs!!

This post has been edited by Headshot: 30 July 2010 - 09:15 AM

[locktite]

Citizen Smith, on 30 July 2010 - 09:28 AM, said:

depleted uranium ?

Pretty sure. 7000gr is one pound if memory serves, so it's almost a pound of DU in each shot.

[Citizen Smith]

Headshot, on 30 July 2010 - 09:14 AM, said:

Citizen Smith, on 30 July 2010 - 08:28 AM, said:

depleted uranium ?

I googled it for you...

http://en.wikipedia....epleted_uranium

Because it has more mass than lead, depleted uranium will go through materials that lead can't penetrate. I worked on the Utah Test and Training Range and the "Warthogs" (A-10's), as they were affectionately called by their drivers, would come in to practice strafing. Whereas other jets, such as F-16's would hit their strafing target about 5% of the time, A-10's would not only hit the targets every time, but would consistantly leave a pile of rubble in their wake. If the Air Force ever gets rid of this weapon platform, it will be a huge mistake. No other aircraft on Earth can do what the A-10 does as well as it does it. Rather than phasing them out, we should be building more. This is a design that is as good today as it was when it was created. Go Warthogs!!

Guess half a million deformed babies in Iraq, and their parents, might disagree with you on that one.

[Headshot]

Mailman, on 30 July 2010 - 08:31 AM, said:

Being near DMAFB (Home of the Warthog) in Tucson, you see these beasts flying around all the time.

Always dug them. The gun has a very unique sound and, evidently, is how it got the 'warthog' name.

You are right about the weird sound, but the "warthog got its name because everybody considers it an "ugly" aircraft and because of the big bumps (engines) it sports on either side of the fuselage.

[broden]

Like they say Paul


Solving Problems 4200 times a minute

[Headshot]

Citizen Smith, on 30 July 2010 - 09:19 AM, said:

Guess half a million deformed babies in Iraq, and their parents, might disagree with you on that one.

Horse hockey!!! Depleted uranium bullets have to get into your body to harm you. Of course, if they do, you are dead very quickly and you won't be having babies. Blaming deformed babies (in a country where good sense and medical care...of any kind...are extremely rare commodoties) on depleted uranium is pretty far-fetched. There have been no abnormalities noted among the families of Air Force personnel that work around this ammo all the time. Why would I believe that it has affected the Iraqis differently? When we put our guys up in the air and send them off to fight our enemies, I want them to have the very best, most effective weapons and ammunition available. This weapon and ammunition is exactly that. It is designed to kill the enemy, and it does a VERY good job of it. Anyone who would send our people to combat with less than the best is doing a great disservice to our warriors, and in my mind, is NOT worthy of listening to. I want OUR guys to come home after combat. I would just as soon the ENEMY doesn't go home afterwards.

This post has been edited by Headshot: 30 July 2010 - 09:39 AM

[locktite]

Citizen Smith, on 30 July 2010 - 10:19 AM, said:

Guess half a million deformed babies in Iraq, and their parents, might disagree with you on that one.

What mechanism do you imagine DU would have that might cause that? I guess decades of bio and chem warfare probably has nothing to do with it ....

Would it be better to stick to good old safe lead?

[locktite]

Headshot, on 30 July 2010 - 10:36 AM, said:

Depleted uranium bullets have to get into your body to harm you. .... Anyone who would send our people to combat with less than the best ...

The biggest issue *I* have with it is that the DU can be made into fuel VERY easily. We're essentially shooting our future energy supply out all over some sand dunes in a squabble over oil. Idiocy.

[Headshot]

locktite, on 30 July 2010 - 09:49 AM, said:

Headshot, on 30 July 2010 - 10:36 AM, said:

Depleted uranium bullets have to get into your body to harm you. .... Anyone who would send our people to combat with less than the best ...

The biggest issue *I* have with it is that the DU can be made into fuel VERY easily. We're essentially shooting our future energy supply out all over some sand dunes in a squabble over oil. Idiocy.

Actually, the DU is the WASTE product from making fuel rods. U-234 and U-235 are used for fuel. DU is U-238. It is way too stable to use as fuel. For fuel, you want a material that really wants to be something else (like U-234 and U-235). Besides, the future of energy on this planet is in the sun, not in fossil or fissile fuels.

[BigRob]

I've flown an A10 many many times. Old reliable.

[JamesMusslewhite]

If and When the US and Europe gets attacked next, I really hope the "Whinny Liberal Socialist Pacifist" that get hit first. I personally hate hearing their bantering snippy little comments from cowardice individuals proudly voicing their negative bias feelings; having been given this right, through the sacrifices of heroes.


Sorry the military does not just shoot foam bullets and bean bags and just throw down their guns and surrender and the slightest altercation. Idiots. Sometimes I wish the computers had a button called "Bitch Slap" which allows you to reach out and touch someone.

[samatm]

Paul,

where did u get this info. Its really good! I had no idea that things cannon was as bigger than a VW bug. No wonder it could fit Big Rob.

yeah.. Paul can u add a B. Slap button as musslewhite suggested and also a simple "thats funny" button would be great too.

This post has been edited by samatm: 30 July 2010 - 11:08 AM

[Headshot]

BigRob, on 30 July 2010 - 10:20 AM, said:

I've flown an A10 many many times. Old reliable.

I didn't realize you were a hog driver, Rob. Good on ya...

I hope the Air Force reconsiders its plan to replace them with the F-35. It just won't work. The A-10 is built for close-in work, can get hit and still survive to fly another day. It takes a lick'n and keeps on tick'n. The F-35 (with only one engine and NO armour) just can't do that.

[A_Simple_Man]

JamesMusslewhite, on 30 July 2010 - 10:48 AM, said:

If and When the US and Europe gets attacked next, I really hope the "Whinny Liberal Socialist Pacifist" that get hit first. I personally hate hearing their bantering snippy little comments from cowardice individuals proudly voicing their negative bias feelings; having been given this right, through the sacrifices of heroes.

Did you know that some of those "Whinny Liberal Socialist Pacifist" bastards had fathers, grandfathers, uncles and cousins who served, sometimes died, so that their relatives and friends had the freedom to think and say whatever they liked within the laws of their country? Or did you think you did it all by your lonesome?

Its ok now. We have both had our say, which you and others have fought to give us the right to do. Thanks for that and . . . Be well.

[Headshot]

A_Simple_Man, on 30 July 2010 - 11:31 AM, said:

JamesMusslewhite, on 30 July 2010 - 10:48 AM, said:

If and When the US and Europe gets attacked next, I really hope the "Whiny Liberal Socialist Pacifists" get hit first. I personally hate hearing their bantering snippy little comments from cowardly individuals proudly voicing their negative biased feelings; having been given this right, through the sacrifices of heroes.

Did you know that some of those "Whiny Liberal Socialist Pacifist" bastards had fathers, grandfathers, uncles and cousins who served, sometimes died, so that their relatives and friends had the freedom to think and say whatever they liked within the laws of their country? Or did you think you did it all by your lonesome?

Its ok now. We have both had our say, which you and others have fought to give us the right to do. Thanks for that and . . . Be well.

Freedom isn't something that one generation fights for and the rest get a free ride. If those who benefit from freedom aren't willing to fight for it, they don't deserve to keep it. And sooner or later...if enough people forget that freedom is worth fighting for...someone will come along to take it away.

This post has been edited by Headshot: 30 July 2010 - 11:43 AM

[JamesMusslewhite]

[quote name='locktite' date='30 July 2010 - 09:37 AM' timestamp='1280453861' post='202354']

Citizen Smith, on 30 July 2010 - 10:19 AM, said:

Guess half a million deformed babies in Iraq, and their parents, might disagree with you on that one.

There are less than 1,000,000 births a year in the whole of Iraq over 9 years less than 9,000,000 birth. 500,000 deformed babies means more than 5% of all births in Iraq would be deformed over a 9 year period. And you think it is only because of DU rounds? I even say a video that claimed 18 out of every 100 babies claim, but I can not find any supporting evidence showing such high figures. Could you please enlighten us with you sources to such a claim?

Of course Saddam Hussein decade long war with Iran where he repeatedly used Gas; the Gassing of the Kurdish tribes in the North; the Burnning of all his oil wells leading up to the war; His Biological/ Chemical War program could not possibly have anything to do with these figures.


Potential medical and genetic consequences - Kurdish attacks 1988
In surveys by local doctors, a higher percentage of medical disorders, miscarriages (14X higher), and colon cancer (10X higher) was found in Halabja compared to Chamchamal. Additionally, "Other cancers, respiratory ailments, skin and eye problems, fertility and reproductive disorders are measurably higher in Halabja and other areas caught in chemical attacks, Fouad Baban and other doctors say." Some of those who survived the attack or were apparently injured only lightly at the time, later developed medical problems doctors believe stemmed from the chemicals, and there are concerns that the attack may be having a lasting genetic impact on the Kurdish population, as preliminary surveys show increased rates of birth defects.

The Iran–Iraq War September 1980 to August 1988, the tactics used closely mirrored those of World War 1, including large scale trench warfare, manned machine-gun posts, bayonet charges, use of barbed wire across trenches, human wave attacks across no-mans land, and extensive use of chemical weapons such as mustard gas against Iranian troops and civilians as well as Iraqi Kurds. At the time, the UN Security Council issued statements that "chemical weapons had been used in the war." However, in these UN statements Iraq was not mentioned by name, so it has been said that "the international community remained silent as Iraq used weapons of mass destruction against Iranian as well as Iraqi Kurds."

The know-how and material for developing chemical weapons were obtained by Saddam's regime from foreign firms. The largest suppliers of precursors for chemical weapons production were in Singapore (4,515 tons), the Netherlands (4,261 tons), Egypt (2,400 tons), India (2,343 tons), and West Germany (1,027 tons). One Indian company, Exomet Plastics (now part of EPC Industrie Ltd.) sent 2,292 tons of precursor chemicals to Iraq. The Kim Al-Khaleej firm, located in Singapore and affiliated to United Arab Emirates, supplied more than 4,500 tons of VX, sarin, and mustard gas precursors and production equipment to Iraq. Leaked portions of Iraq's "Full, Final and Complete" disclosure of the sources for its weapons programs shows that thiodiglycol, a substance needed to manufacture mustard gas, was among the chemical precursors provided to Iraq from US companies such as Alcolac International and Phillips.

So there is a lot of blame to spread around. The world sold it to him and he was more than glad to use it, often, and in great quantities. How many Iraqis were exposed in the transportation, mixing, storing, and implementing these chemicals in a country the size of California.

Yes I am sure it is only caused by DU bullets. If I kept brain in my shirt pocket.

This post has been edited by JamesMusslewhite: 30 July 2010 - 05:15 PM

[Headshot]

JamesMusslewhite, on 30 July 2010 - 12:41 PM, said:

There are less than 1,000,000 births a year in the whole of Iraq...over 9 years less than 9,000,000 births. 500,000 deformed babies means more than 18% of all births in Iraq would be deformed over a 9 year period. And you think it is only because of DU rounds? 18 out of every 100 babies you claim, but I can not find any supporting evidence showing such high figures. Could you please enlighten us with you sources to such a claim?

Your point is valid, no matter what the percentage is, but a half million is only 5.5% of nine million. It is still many, many times higher than any birth abnormality rates ever reported any place in the world...including Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which by the way, were found (1945-1948) to have no significant differences in birth abnormality occurrence from any other city in the world at the time. I hate fabricated statistics like the one Citizen Smith threw out. People throw them around to prove their point and expect that nobody will question their validity. Sorry...it ain't so.

This post has been edited by Headshot: 30 July 2010 - 01:10 PM

[JamesMusslewhite]

Headshot, on 30 July 2010 - 01:03 PM, said:

JamesMusslewhite, on 30 July 2010 - 12:41 PM, said:

There are less than 1,000,000 births a year in the whole of Iraq...over 9 years less than 9,000,000 births. 500,000 deformed babies means more than 18% of all births in Iraq would be deformed over a 9 year period. And you think it is only because of DU rounds? 18 out of every 100 babies you claim, but I can not find any supporting evidence showing such high figures. Could you please enlighten us with you sources to such a claim?

Your point is valid, no matter what the percentage is, but a half million is only 5.5% of nine million. It is still many, many times higher than any birth abnormality rates ever reported any place in the world...including Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which by the way, were found (1945-1948) to have no significant differences in birth abnormality occurrence from any other city in the world at the time. I hate fabricated statistics like the one Citizen Smith threw out. People throw them around to prove their point and expect that nobody will question their validity. Sorry...it ain't so.

Thank you for the correction, I did not proof read and catch that and another mistake I had not properly finished. This happens we I rush a post before having to leave and go to town. I have made the appropriate corrections to my previous posts. Thanks again.

[BigRob]

Oh...you guys meant the real one.

I thought you were talking about the remote control kind? DOh!
I have a mini-ducted fan A10 I fly around. Does that still count?

This post has been edited by BigRob: 30 July 2010 - 11:36 PM

[Citizen Smith]

Headshot, on 30 July 2010 - 09:36 AM, said:

Citizen Smith, on 30 July 2010 - 09:19 AM, said:

Guess half a million deformed babies in Iraq, and their parents, might disagree with you on that one.

Horse hockey!!! Depleted uranium bullets have to get into your body to harm you. Of course, if they do, you are dead very quickly and you won't be having babies. Blaming deformed babies (in a country where good sense and medical care...of any kind...are extremely rare commodoties) on depleted uranium is pretty far-fetched. There have been no abnormalities noted among the families of Air Force personnel that work around this ammo all the time. Why would I believe that it has affected the Iraqis differently? When we put our guys up in the air and send them off to fight our enemies, I want them to have the very best, most effective weapons and ammunition available. This weapon and ammunition is exactly that. It is designed to kill the enemy, and it does a VERY good job of it. Anyone who would send our people to combat with less than the best is doing a great disservice to our warriors, and in my mind, is NOT worthy of listening to. I want OUR guys to come home after combat. I would just as soon the ENEMY doesn't go home afterwards.

PLEASE O.P.E.N. Y.O.U.R. M.I.N.D........................ put off your TV and start reading

Do you wonder why americans have the rep you do ? Its your media, it lies to you.

Please wake up............... the idea that I need to give you a reference or a link to half a million deformed kids is ridic.

You INQUISITIVENESS should take you there.

Real men, dont worship big toys. Real men, believe in moral principles. The rest is up to you. So, you going to inquire or not ?

[broden]

BigRob, on 30 July 2010 - 10:34 AM, said:

Oh...you guys meant the real one.

I thought you were talking about the remote control kind? DOh!
I have a mini-ducted fan A10 I fly around. Does that still count?

only if you tape a gun to it