Scooters Forever (A-4 Skyhawk Tribute Thread)

[zipmartin]

How often did you use the 20mm Mk 12 cannons and how effective were they?

BzB is the guy for this question as he flew the A-4 in combat. My time came in the training command as a student and instructor and in the adversary world. The few times we did fire the gun in the training command resulted in jams about 50% of the time....but then again, we didn't have Brownshoe working for us either.

 

[BusyBee604]

BzB,

After 16 years of flying the A-4, you must have some interesting comments on the reliability/effectiveness of the Mk 12 20mm cannons. Hope to hear from you.

Ron

Ron, first search AW using 20MM A-4. Y0u will find several posts on the MK-12 A-4 cannons from last year. A couple of my posts are there concerning our employment in combat.

Overall, the two 20mm cannons were not a big factor in our offensive capability.
1. Only 100 rds.
2. Strafing requires low angle (<30 deg.), low alt. (<2000') to be accurate. Much too low in a high threat environment, i.e. NV'nam.
*The only A-4 MIG kill in VN was by a 5" Zuni rocket, not 20mm!

We did employ them for the low threat CAS missions on Yankee Station (SV'nam) but still limited by only 100 rds. Effective...yes, for just a few secs. (100 rds.=4.3 sec. firing dual). Reliable...yes, I suffered very few jams during my career. The biggest cause of gun failure was improper servicing of, or leakage in the gun-charging HP air cylinders.

The most valuable use of our twin 20mms in combat, was having them AVAILABLE fully loaded in the event of a sudden SAR/RESCAP incident. If your wingie goes down, or you're assigned a RESCAP mission after you've dropped your 'load', at least you'll have some offense available.

Now the Hughes MK-4 20mm Gun Pod was another story. It was a new addition to the A-4 arsenal in '66, when I got to use it there were only a couple of pods aboard RANGER. I had about 3-4 missions assigned to hunt down gun running & logistics Sampans all along coastal waters. That pod was awesome. At 4500 rounds p/m, It could cut a big sampan or barge in two w/ a short burst! Sounded like a buzz-saw, & cut like one as well.

It was limited to 3-sec. bursts with >2 min. cooling between bursts. With 4500 rpm pouring out of [only] 2 barrels, overheating is a problem as exceeding the 3 sec. limit melts the barrel liners. As it is, both barrels require new liners after each firing flight.

The MK-4 can carry up to 1000 rds (13+ sec. total). A low rate of fire is selectable for max endurance RESCAP cover fire (1000 rds p/m = 60 sec. total). The End....
BzB

 

[Alpha_Echo_606]

AE606 photos

 

[Catmando]

Thanks BZB for some great and interesting stuff that I was curious about too.

However your experience and mine with the MK-4 Gun Pod (unless we had a different versions) was totally different. I think I only carried that Pod a total of 3 or 4 times, but only got about 3 rounds out total! It had a nasty habit of jamming the 1st round. That was for training in the RAG. Of course different maintenance may have been a big factor.

Even though it was a huge mistake not putting a gun on the F-4, we still never carried the gun pod in the fleet, not only because of its unreliability but also the extra drag.

I can't count the number of times I really needed a gun, and just didn't have one. AF FACs couldn't believe it. And it just pissed me off.

 

[Flugelman]

I can't count the number of times I really needed a gun, and just didn't have one. AF FACs couldn't believe it. And it just pissed me off.

Couldn't you just choke the Gomers with the smoke???

 

[Ronl]

Thanks BzB. Great information. I will do some searching on the forums.

Ron

Ron, first search AW using 20MM A-4. Y0u will find several posts on the MK-12 A-4 cannons from last year. A couple of my posts are there concerning our employment in combat.

Overall, the two 20mm cannons were not a big factor in our offensive capability.
1. Only 100 rds.
2. Strafing requires low angle (<30 deg.), low alt. (<2000') to be accurate. Much too low in a high threat environment, i.e. NV'nam.
*The only A-4 MIG kill in VN was by a 5" Zuni rocket, not 20mm!

We did employ them for the low threat CAS missions on Yankee Station (SV'nam) but still limited by only 100 rds. Effective...yes, for just a few secs. (100 rds.=4.3 sec. firing dual). Reliable...yes, I suffered very few jams during my career. The biggest cause of gun failure was improper servicing of, or leakage in the gun-charging HP air cylinders.

The most valuable use of our twin 20mms in combat, was having them AVAILABLE fully loaded in the event of a sudden SAR/RESCAP incident. If your wingie goes down, or you're assigned a RESCAP mission after you've dropped your 'load', at least you'll have some offense available.
View attachment 10781
Now the Hughes MK-4 20mm Gun Pod was another story. It was a new addition to the A-4 arsenal in '66, when I got to use it there were only a couple of pods aboard RANGER. I had about 3-4 missions assigned to hunt down gun running & logistics Sampans all along coastal waters. That pod was awesome. At 4500 rounds p/m, It could cut a big sampan or barge in two w/ a short burst! Sounded like a buzz-saw, & cut like one as well.

It was limited to 3-sec. bursts with >2 min. cooling between bursts. With 4500 rpm pouring out of [only] 2 barrels, overheating is a problem as exceeding the 3 sec. limit melts the barrel liners. As it is, both barrels require new liners after each firing flight.

The MK-4 can carry up to 1000 rds (13+ sec. total). A low rate of fire is selectable for max endurance RESCAP cover fire (1000 rds p/m = 60 sec. total). The End....
BzB

 

[zipmartin]

AE606 photos

A woefully under-serviced nose strut! And what's with the 122 side number on a VT-22 aircraft? Used to be the 100 series numbers were on VT-21 a/c and the 200 series on VT-22 a/c.

 

[Alpha_Echo_606]

Tires a little low too!

 

[Mumbles]

Figures as much for a jet with an HM King HS Brahma on the side.....

 

[Catmando]

Couldn't you just choke the Gomers with the smoke???

Whooop, Whoop..... Cheap shot alert...... cheap shot!

Actually we not only painted our F-4 tails outrageous bright colors just like the Red Baron, but we also stayed in Mil-power, smoking big time rather than going into AB to quit that smoke, just so we could let the Gomers know we were coming and whom they were dealing with.

 

[BusyBee604]

Actually we not only painted our F-4 tails outrageous bright colors just like the Red Baron, but we also stayed in Mil-power, smoking big time rather than going into AB to quit that smoke, just so we could let the Gomers know we were coming and whom they were dealing with.

To show your displeasure at being a gunless gunfighter...it would have been cool to paint the flying tiger jaws on the nose of your jets, sans teeth!
Uh, oh never mind, 'they' probably wouldn't have appreciated the humor in that.

BTW, re. smoking, in mid-cruise '66, our CAG/CARDIV originated a classified msg to OPNAV citing in statistical detail, concern over the high combat loss rates of our "smokers" (F-4/J-79 & A-4E/J-52); vs the "non-smoker" (A-4C/J-52). I believe a result, a smoke-abatement system was designed for the A-4E. Don't know about the F-4..Catmando?
The message was cleverly titled - Subj: Smoking can be hazardous to your health!
BzB

 

[pilot_man]

Never flown an A-4, but in both ejection seat aircraft I've flown (T-45, F/A-18), not stepping on the seat is standard practice. I always assumed it was to not soil or wear out the seat cushion, but there could be a better reason for it that I am unaware of

I always used to step on the seat getting in the Hornet, until I had an AME yell at me. The reason is so we don't damage the "stuff" inside the seat pan. It took me a bit, but now I never step on the seat. Just be careful grabbing the canopy bow if they haven't used Mr. Hands on your windscreen yet.

 

[Catmando]

....
BTW, re. smoking, in mid-cruise '66, our CAG/CARDIV originated a classified msg to OPNAV citing in statistical detail, concern over the high combat loss rates of our "smokers" (F-4/J-79 & A-4E/J-52); vs the "non-smoker" (A-4C/J-52). I believe a result, a smoke-abatement system was designed for the A-4E. Don't know about the F-4..Catmando?
The message was cleverly titled - Subj: Smoking can be hazardous to your health!
BzB

There was later mod to the J-79s that reduced their smoke significantly. But that was after I flew them.

 

[zipmartin]

.......I notice that some single seat Scooters had a restraining strap that was connected to the canopy on the starboard side of the cockpit.....

I now remember that awhile back, I posted a video which showed A-4F's taxiing with the strap plainly in view. Ronl, check out the first couple of minutes in this video for some footage. By the way, is there any particular reason you have such an interest in the canopy strap? Are you a model builder, a third-world dictator who has acquired some A-4's via the black market, or just an A-4 enthusiast?

 

[blackbart22]

One of the smoke abatement system was to add some chemical to the fuel, hydrazine or some such thing. Don't know how well it worked to reduce smoke, but it sure made some of my topside crew sick. They told us to try not to breath too much of the exhaust fumes on deck.