NEW: Follow the Editorial Staff on
StrategyPage Twitter Link


GROUND COMBAT +

AIR COMBAT +

NAVAL OPERATIONS +

SPECIAL OPERATIONS +

HUMAN FACTORS +

SPECIAL WEAPONS +

WARFARE BY THE NUMBERS +

LOGISTICS +

TOOLS +


Visit StrategyPage's US Cavalry Store



Air Weapons Article Index : Current 1999 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics

Armed MV-22s In Afghanistan

May 11, 2009: The U.S. Marine Corps are sending at least one squadron of 10-12 MV-22 tilt rotor transports to Afghanistan this year. Some of the MV-22s will be equipped with a GAU-2B machine-gun fitted to the bottom of the aircraft. The GAU-2B is a remote control turret using a six-barrel 7.62mm machine-gun. This system has a rate of fire of 3,000 rounds per minute (50 per second), and max range of 1,500 meters. The system weighs a few hundred pounds and includes 4,000 rounds of ammo. A member of the crew uses a video game like interface to operate the gun.

This weapon is part of the Universal Turret System (UTS) for Helicopters. Plans for arming the V-22 have been discussed for nearly a decade. The original proposal was for a UTS equipped with a 12.7mm machine-gun. That has a longer range (about 2,000 meters, compared to 800), but the 7.62mm GAU-2B could lay down more bullets more quickly. Experience in Iraq and Afghanistan indicated this would be a more useful defensive measure. The UTS will be mounted on MV-22s (and SOCOM CV-22s) as needed. The machine-gun turret is mainly there for protection from local threats, not for turning the V-22 into an assault aircraft. The marines also plan to mount an M-2 12.7mm machine-gun on the rear ramp as well. Currently they sometimes use a 7.62mm machine-gun there, but the 12.7mm weapon has been successfully used on the rear ramp of large helicopters.

The marine MV-22s can carry 24 troops 700 kilometers (vertical take-off, level flight, landing, and return) at 400 kilometers an hour. The MV-22 is replacing the CH-46E helicopter, which can carry 12 troops 350 kilometers at a speed of 200 kilometers an hour. The MV-22 can carry a 10,000-pound external sling load 135 kilometers, while the CH-46E can carry 3,000 pounds only 90 kilometers.

submit to reddit
Send Link to a Friend
Next Article CHINA: Rebuilding The Good Old Days


Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Sort in Reverse Order Posted

Monkeysee099    Really?   5/12/2009 3:00:47 PM
So why are they putting a gun on this thing?  I guess I don't get it.  Can the V-22 actually go into a combat zone and survive?  What happens when the turret fails to retract?  Will they just crush the expensive turret and its associated electronics?  The turret is probably made of stronger stuff than the airframe, will it then damage the airframe as well?
 
Please someone make some sense on this one.
 
Quote    Reply

JFKY    Well   5/12/2009 3:26:29 PM
Since the MV-22 has ALREADY been deployed to a combat zone I guess your snark is misplaced.
 
Quote    Reply

Monkeysee099    JFKY   5/13/2009 2:51:18 PM
You're right JFKY, by combat zone I meant Hot LZ.  Now does that work for you?  Still looking for a little help on it making sense, don't worry JFKY, I don't expect any from you.
 
Quote    Reply

JFKY    Monkey   5/13/2009 3:00:53 PM
Will there be hot LZ's in Afghanistan, could there have been in Iraq?  There is as much likelihood of combat at the LZ in  Afghanistan as in Iraq, don't you think?  Your "complaint" makes no sense...you ASSUME the MV-22 is crap and work from there.  I just don't start from that assumption.  But you keep right on asserting, i.e. making claims with no evidence if it makes you feel better.
 
Quote    Reply

Phaid       5/13/2009 3:05:57 PM
 
Quote    Reply

Phaid       5/13/2009 3:11:57 PM
Also, here is a link to the official BAE Systems brochure.  Check out the gunner station and its controller.
 
Quote    Reply

Monkeysee099    JFKY   5/13/2009 5:20:20 PM
I never assumed the V-22 was crap, you simply assumed I did.  I wonder why you keep thinking my opinion counts anywhere as fact or why, substantiated by however much 'evidence' or 'references' you elect to produce, yours weighs any more.  They are opinions and nothing more. 
 
I never stated a difference between OEF and OIF operations or the likely hood of entering a hot LZ in one or the other.  I have no idea where you got that from, I was merely asking the question, does this thing really need a turret?
 
Having said that, here's my stance on the V-22.  Great tactical airlift aircraft if your cargo can fit in the tiny space.  I don't have tech data on high density altitude operations but I'm sure it'll still haul a fair amount of cargo out of a small place.  It does really neat things while having more range and speed as well.  Unfortunately it has some limitations that make it more vulnerable than a helicopter coming into a hot LZ. 
 
And no, I don't have time in my day to dig through them crazy internets and pull out references.  Negating someone's opinion because they don't provide sources is a poor argument for your case.  Concurrently, awesome sources is not always proof positive that your argument is right; it merely means you're smart enough to make a coherent argument for your position using sources.  Almost anyone can do that, hell, the press does it daily.
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

phrogdriver       5/16/2009 8:48:22 PM

I never assumed the V-22 was crap, you simply assumed I did.  I wonder why you keep thinking my opinion counts anywhere as fact or why, substantiated by however much 'evidence' or 'references' you elect to produce, yours weighs any more.  They are opinions and nothing more. 

 

I never stated a difference between OEF and OIF operations or the likely hood of entering a hot LZ in one or the other.  I have no idea where you got that from, I was merely asking the question, does this thing really need a turret?

 

Having said that, here's my stance on the V-22.  Great tactical airlift aircraft if your cargo can fit in the tiny space.  I don't have tech data on high density altitude operations but I'm sure it'll still haul a fair amount of cargo out of a small place.  It does really neat things while having more range and speed as well.  Unfortunately it has some limitations that make it more vulnerable than a helicopter coming into a hot LZ. 

 

And no, I don't have time in my day to dig through them crazy internets and pull out references.  Negating someone's opinion because they don't provide sources is a poor argument for your case.  Concurrently, awesome sources is not always proof positive that your argument is right; it merely means you're smart enough to make a coherent argument for your position using sources.  Almost anyone can do that, hell, the press does it daily.

 

 


What are those limitations that make it more vulnerable than a helicopter?  Ingressing and egressing at over 200 knots is a pretty big asset, for starters.
 
The "tiny" cargo space is the same size as that of the 46, which was in turn bigger than most assault helo's cargo space.
 
Not saying you're a kneejerk hater, but it sounds like the standard talking points.


 
 
Quote    Reply





New Strategy - Wargames at Discount Prices
1.Modern Air Power: War Over the Middle East
2.Commander: Napoleon at War
3.Close Combat: Watch am Rhein
4.Gallic Wars
5.Fast Action Battle: The Bulge

100+ Computer and Board games all with free shipping.
 
 
 

StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2009StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy