I think you mean the GAU-17. I still here proficiency can be a problem. The HCS guys get around it because the Reserves have substantially more ammo in the NCEA than a typical REGNAV Type Wing gets (or advertises, anyway).
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
APKWS Hits the Fleet
- Thread starter SynixMan
- Start date
I think you mean the GAU-17. I still here proficiency can be a problem. The HCS guys get around it because the Reserves have substantially more ammo in the NCEA than a typical REGNAV Type Wing gets (or advertises, anyway).
My bad... to much time flying with the GAU-16, .50 cal. I meant the -17, 7.62 minigun. Thanks for that correction.
But NCEA is a training/funding issue is a strawman.
There is no way that paying for more 7.62 mm could possibly be more expensive then purchasing a new weapon system, doing the T&E on it, modifying and installing it on fleet airframes, then paying for the NCEA of 20 mm or some kind of rocket/missile.
I've heard plenty of proposals in my day about what weapon systems we should put on the helos. Mk-19 granade launchers; fixed, forward firing .50 cal or 20 mm; Follow-on Hellfire; a 7.62 gun that can be locked into the forward position and fired from the cockpit (IGMS it used to be called) and other systems.
The GAU-17 is tempermental but once you learn to 'care and feed it' it's a good system (as told to me by multiple HCS folks who have deployed with the weapon). It's already in the system, it's flight rated and it uses ammo already in the inventory (and in the amory).
All we have to do is buy more 7.62mm and probably buy some more of the guns themselves since there are a bit more 60S in the inventory than there was/is 60H.
It makes too much sense for the Navy to actually do it, so I realize I'm tilting at a windmill right now....
But NCEA is a training/funding issue is a strawman.
There is no way that paying for more 7.62 mm could possibly be more expensive then purchasing a new weapon system, doing the T&E on it, modifying and installing it on fleet airframes, then paying for the NCEA of 20 mm or some kind of rocket/missile.
I've heard plenty of proposals in my day about what weapon systems we should put on the helos. Mk-19 granade launchers; fixed, forward firing .50 cal or 20 mm; Follow-on Hellfire; a 7.62 gun that can be locked into the forward position and fired from the cockpit (IGMS it used to be called) and other systems.
The GAU-17 is tempermental but once you learn to 'care and feed it' it's a good system (as told to me by multiple HCS folks who have deployed with the weapon). It's already in the system, it's flight rated and it uses ammo already in the inventory (and in the amory).
All we have to do is buy more 7.62mm and probably buy some more of the guns themselves since there are a bit more 60S in the inventory than there was/is 60H.
It makes too much sense for the Navy to actually do it, so I realize I'm tilting at a windmill right now....
Harrier Dude
Living the dream
I refuse to grant credibility to any of your opinions/thoughts on this matter until Otto has weighed in.
Because with the way aquisitions seem to work, we'd probably have to pay for a "new" weapon system, pay for the T&E, and modify existing airframes to make the -17 work, and THEN have to pay for ammo.
Why do all that when we've made it this far with our standard 200 rounds a quarter "war fighter" budget?
I'm with you and agree. Just poking the bear.
phrogpilot73
Well-Known Member
Is that seriously your NCEA? If so, that's beyond pathetic. Ours is closer to 800-1000 rounds/quarter.
The Navy also couldn't afford the DAP gun. Just the gun was expensive; all the other work to include certifying and then FINDING shipboard storage space, establishing maintenance upkeep, and the log train would have jacked up the price even higher.
I assume that number is rounds per crewman? If you want your guys to be good with a mini, you'll shoot a lot more than that on a single sortie.
Mount should not be an issue - the -60S has same layout as the -60G/K/L which have the mount. The -60S is really just a -60L that Navy modified and painted grey.
phrogpilot73
Well-Known Member
We don't have the GAU-17 on the 46. We have the XM-218 (GAU-16) and the M240D on the ramp. Very few qualified tailgunners in our squadron, so our 800-1000 rounds/quarter is just our .50cals...
We do 1-2 shoots per quarter, 300-400 rounds per aircraft in a section...
Whoa, careful with your use of "your." From the community of whence I was born, that was how the squadron level NCEA was created. That's not to say that you didn't get more than that at times or that you couldn't ask for more. In the bad old days of OIF (2003-2004), it was normal for everyone squadron in the Wing to get about 1000 rounds of .50 in their NCEA. Ammo availability was blamed on the fact that everything was going to the Iraq and such. Of course, being on a Marine base, we had no problem getting the ammo, and after working with the Wing Gunner, I slowly squeezed him for more because he knew that none of the squadrons could actually maintain readiness with that little ammo.
Nowadays, I have no idea what "their" NCEA is. I do know on that on the Reserve side, ammo availability was "not a problem," and the RSL couldn't hold enough ammo at any given time to keep up with what we could shoot if we didn't get bored.
phrogpilot73
Well-Known Member
It appears that it's about the same on the green side... Our quarterly NCEA is 800-1000 of .50 cal, probably 500 of 7.62, but if we wanted to shoot more, it was never a problem. Our big problem is if we want to train with expendables. Only place our ordies can load them on the plane is Oceana, and we can't store them in Norfolk. We almost always plan to do Ground Threat Reaction during AT (because we usually aren't home for that), and blow our entire NCEA for the FY... Otherwise - it's a giant PITA.
I'm not too comfortable posting NCEA, but I'm not talking just "shoot what you want, the bean counters will sort it out." I'm talking "really, we have to expend ANOTHER 1000 rounds of <fill in the blank> today?" Fun when you have a range like the one in Central Florida where you can shoot up old Hueys and T-45s. Not so fun when you just want an O/I to get good Mexican.
Makes sense I guess (who doesn't like to shoot?) if your gunners are really only for defending your own aircraft. But the guys talking about using side fire to no shit shoot swarming boats, that's not even close to enough. If it were me building the training plan for that role, each crew (assuming hard crews) shoots a minimum of twice a week, full load of 1200 rounds (talking .50, more like 5000 for 7.62) per aircraft.