Comments on: Terror War's Workhorse Falling Apart

Exclusive: Crucial AC-130 Gunship May Be Most Overworked Part Of The American Arsenal

[gatrfan]

------

"...I guess we need to fast track a J model version of the AC130... taking positive action in response to this story."

-----

The problem isn''t necessarily with the actual age of the aircraft; The newer U-model gunships were built in the 1990s. The problem is that there are very few AC-130 gunships and each is constantly being used beyond their intended usage. If we are to continue fighting terrorists in Afghanistan, Iraq, and elsewhere, there must a initiative to put more gunships on the flight line. Currently, a prototype C-27B is in the works as a "gunship lite" concept, which would have only 30mm cannons. (All gunships are having their 25mm and 40mm guns replaced by 2 modern 30mm canons.) The technology aboard the gunships are the most advanced used in any aircraft. The age is not the problem. Their overuse per airframe is.

More gunships must be more bought, and they must be bought before they start falling out of the sky and endangering our guys on the ground. These weapon systems are an essential asset in the fight against terrorists, without it, America will be become severely handicapped in terms of our ability to neutralize the enemy quickly and precisely without endangering the good guys.

[artatl]

I''m puzzled by the story... the C130 is still in production... I think the J model is the current model and it is a greatly improved version. Normally the modifications for AC130''s happen after the production line. I guess we need to fast track a J model version of the AC130... taking positive action in response to this story.

SIDENOTE... I read how the gunship came into being... Would you believe the inspiration came from remote mail delivery? Seems someone figured out that if you had an airplane at the right altitude... and a rope with a bucket on the end... you could put the airplane in a tight turn... put mail in the bucket... lower the rope... and the buket could be held at a spot in the air where a person on the ground could walk up... take out the mail... put in outgoing mail... and then hoist the bucket back into the plane. Some bright person thought... imagine replacing the rope with the firing path of bullets... concentrating fire at the "point" on the ground where the bucket would have been. I think the original airframe was the military version of the DC-3... the C47... or AC-47 for the gunship version... I think they were know as Puff the Magic Dragon.

[artatl]

I''m puzzled by the story... the C130 is still in production... I think the J model is the current model and it is a greatly improved version. Normally the modifications for AC130''s happen after the production line. I guess we need to fast track a J model version of the AC130... taking positive action in response to this story.

SIDENOTE... I read how the gunship came into being... Would you believe the inspiration came from remote mail delivery? Seems someone figured out that if you had an airplane at the right altitude... and a rope with a bucket on the end... you could put the airplane in a tight turn... put mail in the bucket... lower the rope... and the buket could be held at a spot in the air where a person on the ground could walk up... take out the mail... put in outgoing mail... and then hoist the bucket back into the plane. Some bright person thought... imagine replacing the rope with the firing path of bullets... concentrating fire at the "point" on the ground where the bucket would have been. I think the original airframe was the military version of the DC-3... the C47... or AC-47 for the gunship version... I think they were know as Puff the Magic Dragon.

[artatl]

I''m puzzled by the story... the C130 is still in production... I think the J model is the current model and it is a greatly improved version. Normally the modifications for AC130''s happen after the production line. I guess we need to fast track a J model version of the AC130... taking positive action in response to this story.

SIDENOTE... I read how the gunship came into being... Would you believe the inspiration came from remote mail delivery? Seems someone figured out that if you had an airplane at the right altitude... and a rope with a bucket on the end... you could put the airplane in a tight turn... put mail in the bucket... lower the rope... and the buket could be held at a spot in the air where a person on the ground could walk up... take out the mail... put in outgoing mail... and then hoist the bucket back into the plane. Some bright person thought... imagine replacing the rope with the firing path of bullets... concentrating fire at the "point" on the ground where the bucket would have been. I think the original airframe was the military version of the DC-3... the C47... or AC-47 for the gunship version... I think they were know as Puff the Magic Dragon.

[rushlimbaug4]

I''''ve been saying for many years that there a few pieces of equipment that don''''t really need improvement .. just dust off the plans and tweak in some modern materials keep on trucking with what works .. to hades with these multi-billion dollar *development* contracts.


Posted by cyberus at 09:47 PM : Mar 12, 2008

First, Greetings to all my loyal listeners.

Second, Cyberus, enough of all the commie talk. Do these planes have lasers or will they look cool when they hit the ground in a fireball of jet fuel and high-tech explosives? Only a socialist LIB would suggest reusing a design that is cost effective and efficient!!!

We need new, shiny, titanium alloy planes with all the high-tech gadgetry and flashing lights with switches that do nothing that Boeing engineers can think up. Because it is American to spend money on shiny things that do nothing!! That is how we prove to the world that we are successful!! Just like a billionaire who purchases a 200,000 dollar watch that does not tell time!! It is how you show the LIB Terrorists that YOU are more successful and intelligent than them!!

How better a way to win a war against a people that Hate our Freedom to buy garbage and not have to worry about where our next meal is going to come from!!!!!!

God bless America!

[blackwater66-2009]

Flew on this one many times in the Nam and it is still around doing good stuff. What a plane !! It''s about like the Huey ! I still see them out flying around..
They were well made in the USA !!

[blackwater66-2009]

Flew on this one many times in the Nam and it is still around doing good stuff. What a plane !! It''s about like the Huey ! I still see them out flying around..
They were well made in the USA !!

[cyberus-2009]

----
The C130-- as an aircraft-- is a beautiful, reliable piece of work. This thing still carries cargo around the world, under various governments, and miserable, difficult airfield conditions. It is a standard of efficiency unto itself.

And when our DOD keeps C130s flying, it is a tribute to that reliability. If in the future we need more short-field transports like the C130, DOD needs simply to restart production of an improved model. Some designs never reach the end of their useful life.
(snipped)
Posted by alphaa10 at 09:09 PM : Mar 12, 2008
-----

AMEN!

I''ve been saying for many years that there a few pieces of equipment that don''t really need improvement .. just dust off the plans and tweak in some modern materials keep on trucking with what works .. to hades with these multi-billion dollar *development* contracts.

I mean think about it ... the C-130 is just a start ... think about what an old thunderbrick like the F-4 could do with modern metal airframes and modern engines? the freaking thing could carry monster payloads at fighter speeds, take ugly damage and still crawl home what it might be able to do as a fast attack light bomber buggers the mind.

[slpdisk]

If special operations forces ever get a chance to capture or kill Osama bin Laden, an AC-130 gunship will almost certainly be part of the operation. That is, if it''s still flying by then.
You would have to dig him up first cause last I heard he was dead!

[alphaa10-2009]

AC130guy said, "This story... illustrates how out of whack our priorities are. The Air Force is more focused on getting F-22 Raptors into service than taking care of our most essential weapons like the AC-130..."
---
Eisenhower warned about the military-industrial complex, but lobbies in Washington thrive like pigs on bloated DOD budgets and weapons systems that are horrendously expensive, but largely irrelevant. To the lobbies, especially, the terms military and intelligence are oxymorons, and very profitable ones.

In contrast to "high-tech" budgets, pilots flying A10s value their aircraft on close support because the thing was designed for its mission-- it features a titanium tub surrounding the pilot, and nothing but a headshot can harm him. It carries a tremendous weapons load, and great hangtime over target. In contrast, B1s and B2s must acquire, drdp and scoot before they run out of fuel.

[alphaa10-2009]

The C130-- as an aircraft-- is a beautiful, reliable piece of work. This thing still carries cargo around the world, under various governments, and miserable, difficult airfield conditions. It is a standard of efficiency unto itself.

And when our DOD keeps C130s flying, it is a tribute to that reliability. If in the future we need more short-field transports like the C130, DOD needs simply to restart production of an improved model. Some designs never reach the end of their useful life.

The AC130 fought in Vietnam, back when firebases faced human-wave attacks at night, and needed whatever they could call in.

Yes, the AC130 is a terrible weapon, but a lot of guys are around today because of that plane. And while many of them may disagree with Bush about Iraq, they have only gratitude for the AC130.

[gatrfan]

This story, as well as recent stories about the issue of a lack of AC-130 gunships and other essential Air Force aircraft just illustrates how out of whack our priorities are. The Air Force is more focused on getting F-22 Raptors into service than taking care of our most essential weapons like the AC-130. Their usefulness is seen everyday in the fight against extremists, which perplexes me even more why very little is being done to get more of them on the flight line and repair their center-wing boxes faster. Our priorities are screwed up, and it frustrates me that if we just put money where it needs to be and take money away from the useless programs, we could be killing more of the bad people and saving more of the good. Please, keep more articles like this coming so the problem will never go away for the one''s who call the shots. If they see this issue being pushed consistently, something will eventually be done. The stakes are to high to do nothing, especially now.

[alphaa10-2009]

Feel Free said, "Osama is most likely long-dead..."
---
If Bush couldn''t nail him after several tries (some Bush aborted), OBL is probably still out there.

Consider the level of intelligence, such that it is-- Bush claimed Iran had an ongoing "nucular" weapons program as late as last year.

Bush seemed unaware Iran scrapped its nuclear weapons effort back in 2003.

So, take your pick-- the Bush statement on Iran is a load of strategic ignorance, or it is a big lie, to excuse an invasion of Iran?

In any case, how much could Bush know? (Never mind...)

[feelfree1]

David Martin sounds like he is jacking off here:

"Even firing manually the AC-130 is a fearsome weapon."

"The one gun that does work flawlessly, the 23-millimeter gatling gun, fires at the rate of 1,800 rounds per minute."

And he doesn''t miss an opportunity to prop-up a boogie-man.

"If special operations forces ever get a chance to capture or kill Osama bin Laden, an AC-130 gunship will almost certainly be part of the operation. That is, if it''s still flying by then."

Osama is most likely long-dead, but without him the Western corporate media scare-mongering really makes no sense at all, so they need to keep him alive, at least in the minds of their U.S. victims.

[forthepeopl1]

AP) Top current advisers to Sen. John McCain''s presidential campaign last year lobbied for a European plane maker that beat Boeing to a $35 billion Air Force tanker contract, taking sides in a bidding fight that McCain has tried to referee for more than five years.

Two of the advisers gave up their lobbying work when they joined McCain''s campaign. A third, former Texas Rep. Tom Loeffler, lobbied for the European Aeronautic Defence and Space Co. while serving as McCain''s national finance chairman.

EADS is the parent company of Airbus, which teamed up with U.S.-based Northrop Grumman Corp. to win the lucrative aerial refueling contract on Feb. 29. Boeing Co. Chairman and CEO Jim McNerney said in a statement Monday that the Chicago-based aerospace company %u201Cfound serious flaws in the process that we believe warrant appeal.%u201D

McCain, the Republican presidential nominee in waiting, has been a key figure in the Pentagon''s yearslong attempt to complete a deal on the tanker. McCain helped block an earlier tanker contract with Boeing and prodded the Pentagon in 2006 to develop bidding procedures that did not exclude Airbus.

DONT WORRIE MCCAIN WILL COME TO HE RESCUE,AND HAVE CHINA BUILD US NEW ONES