Nellis Recieves first F/A -22

01/04/02 | Livefrom Vegas

[dighton]

According to this, it has a 20mm Gatling.

[csvset]

From LM site linked previously.

The F/A-22 has an internal M61A2 20mm cannon, an advanced version of the proven M61 Gatling-type gun.

[Poohbah]

The gun's probably high up on the fuselage to avoid stuffing gun gas down the intakes.

[LibKill]

Thanks. I feel better now.

I'm no pilot, but I remember that the F-4 (a great bird) had to be retrofitted with guns when the pilots found out that the brain-boys had made a mistake.

A 20mm Gatling will do just fine.

Our guys deserve the best equipment.

[Poohbah]

IIRC, at some negative alpha figures, gas from the F-4E's Vulcan could be ingested into the intakes. To quote Egon from Ghostbusters, "it would be bad."

[LibKill]

"it would be bad.

Yep, even I can see that.

[Beowulf]

I am curious as to why it was not selected. Do you have any thoughts?

[Poohbah]

Northrop had just pumped up the price tag of the B-2 FAR beyond any reasonable amount, so their "lower costs" were considered to be the real deal.

[Slipjack]

The other Aircraft Companies was scaling down and would have had to lay off thousands of their employees.

[Slipjack]

Still looks like a F15 that was hit by a BARN Door A*S becuase it was to slow in getting out!

[hchutch]

Too bad we can't build more B-2s...

An ideal force structure for our heavy bomber force would be 60 B-2s, 150 B-1s, and 80 B-52Hs, plus whatever EB-52Gs standoff jamming and SEAD aircraft (I'd prefer about 50) and RB-2 recon planes (say, 24) we could build.

[Poohbah]

Frankly, the B-2 is too slow for tomorrow's wars.

Give me an expensive hypersonic bomber development program out at Groom Lake.

[LibKill]

Give me an expensive hypersonic bomber development program out at Groom Lake.

Be careful, it may already be 'out there'. :)

[hchutch]

I'll assume work on that is being done, but at the same time, the B-2s are still a good option and can get a lot of things done...

And the only warning some tinpot gets is when important buildings explode. :)

[ArrogantBustard]

LockMart doesn't say, but FAS indicates the gun above and behind the starboard intake. Seems reasonable, at least.

[bonesmccoy]

Um, doesn't that mean you're bombing any nation back to the stone age?

[Sparticus]

It came down to the way the two looked. The 22 looks better on a poster. Friends who worked on the 23 project said they knew that their project was going to loose when they saw the performance comparisons as well as the photos of the 22. The two planes were actually very close in performance characteristics, but stylistically, the 22 had better eye appeal (at least to generals).

[Sparticus]

loose = lose

[zygoat]

I believe you are onto something with your eye-appeal theory. One of my favorites,the A-10, recieved a lot of guff because it didn't have a pointy nose. I know it's not a fighter, but it's cheap and nothing does it's job better.

[#1CTYankee]

"Still only half the Plane the ATF-23 was",

I spoke with the chief test pilot while the flight testing was going on.(A long time ago.)
He stated the 23 was faster but not by much. The 22 was easier to fly, more agile and had better throttle response.
(Pratt engines coupled with the Hamilton Standard engine controls.)