B-1B Gunship

Uuuuh... does that means that it will not have the low range of the AC-130 guns and will be able to flight much higher safe from manpads and SPAAGs while still retaining a decent air cover?

Attached: 1466630494087.jpg (500x689, 113K)

How about you actually read the patent before spouting bullshit?

Its a patent for a system that deploys a weapon in this particular way, not anything specifically do to with the B-1.

Look at the pics in the article. This concept would employ much smaller guns than an AC-130.

The biggest gun looks to be a M-230 like on the Apache.

Attached: imagesvc.timeincapp.com.jpg (1440x810, 121K)

>not anything specifically do to with the B-1.
1. It's a patent by Boeing, the owners of the B-1.
2. It's clearly a B-1 being depicted.
3. The patent talks of equipping a bomber.

Okay so a solid "no I didn't read it"

Yeah, seems like that, is only a way to put guns in the belly of a plane and still be able to retract it(must be pretty fun to have a malfunction of the gun and having to repair it mid-flight), so the planes now do not have to do circles and don't have things sticking out(stealth, speed and fuel efficiency).

But as you point out, the plane that uses it will have to fly quite low and be vulnerable to any AA, unless we find a way to have guns that has:

>Automatic fire beyond 20km
>Low recoil so as not to destroy the airframe by using it
>Is light enought and the ammo is light too

Up until then, the AC-130 likes will be relegated to COIN operations under the constant threat of being easily taken out of the sky.

>patent specifically mentions equipping a bomber with it, by replacing a rotary bomb bay with it
>"hurr durr didn't read the patent"
Why are summerfags always so obnoxious and retarded?

Why would a patent specific states the B-1? A patent is generally written in the most generic way possible so it can be applied to as many as possible.

I don't think you get how patents work, man. They didn't submit a patent for "a gun deployed from a B-1 Lancer jet bomber." They just used one in the drawing.

Nothing would stop this from being mounted on other aircraft, either existing or yet to be designed. Honestly you could probably make it work on something like an F-22 if you had a reason to.

almost like..

...its a generic system

:hmmm:

that's the joke

>is this a good idea

Not in the slightest. There's a reason why Boeing is in dead last place in the us aerospace industry

>Automatic fire beyond 20km
>Low recoil so as not to destroy the airframe by using it
>Is light enought and the ammo is light too
You're potentially describing a laser weapon, though I don't know if this is the best way to mount one.

The problem with laser weapons is that once you shoot it, if it's really powerfull to hurt it's going to blind a lot of people around the area of impact and the people around the source of the laser too(the air is also impacted but less).

If we go down this route... maybe a railgun system that ejects the rails? Both systems require fuckhuge ammounts of power anyway.

You would need a complex system for cooling, any laser weapon would need to be integrated into the airframe.

Oh shit nigger is this some Dahir Insaat shit?

already been done before

Attached: 17325facdd6a65d28c084578d49a6061.jpg (1507x1166, 75K)

More dakka always good.

But how will we produce enough ammunition?

That's pretty different, but they already did do this exact concept on an OV-10 Bronco, which would seem to be a much better platform for the idea.

Attached: OV-10D.jpg (707x551, 92K)

My god, it's going to fire shite

haha it looks like a benis

>light ammo
Theres a reason they're wanting to put it in a bomber: the MASSIVE payload weight they carry. The B1-B has a max ordnance payload of 125,000 pounds.

>Why would a patent specific states the B-1?
Are you trolling?

Because that patent is by Boeing which owns the B-1, because a B-1 is being depicted, because the patent explicitely mentions a bomber and last but not least because the patent explicitely mentions it replacing a rotary bomb bay.

Guess which American, currently operational bomber employs a rotary bomb bay?

Attached: B-1B Bomb Bay.jpg (467x700, 68K)

>F-35 armed with an autocannon

FUND IT

>Theres a reason they're wanting to put it in a bomber: the MASSIVE payload weight they carry. The B1-B has a max ordnance payload of 125,000 pounds.
Agreed.

I just wonder what kind of autocannon would be appropriate, so as to take advantage of the payload capacity, altitude etc. Clearly, fighter jet calibers like 25mm 27mm or 30mm are too small here.

As someone who works on B1's, I seriously doubt this ever becoming a thing, just like how the B1 was supposed to become a missile truck with the B1R upgrades, cool idea, but not likely to ever get funding.

>be a/b-1b(b) bilot
>b-b-b-b-b
>cruising over int'l waters between theatre loiter points
>seal team requests cas
>they are innamountains
>landlocked country
>ok
>mach 2.8 @ 40k ft gets us there in about 40 minutes
>invert to dive into gunrun altitude
>slow to mach 2.2 while dropping to treetop altitude
>approach mountain from below summit level
>open up variable geometry wings and deploy ventral canon gimbles just after flaring back to mach 1.6
>weapons officer reports good firing solution
>crest ridgeline below mountain at supersonic speeds brushing the treetops
>a dozen different muzzles swing suddenly onto five targets
>three enemy technicals and nearby troops disappear in the explosions of 20mm canonfire
>a t72 launches its turret skyward on a pillar of smoke & fire
>the best dressed goatfucker in the enemy encampment gets decapitated by a space-age steel core penetrator on an explosive sabot launched from a space-age sniper rifle on steroids carried by this plane and able to penetrate concrete walls with killing power
>entire fire mission takes one second
>engagement range is eight miles
>mean altitude is 168+/-100ft above deck
>gunpods & wings retract as we roll away around the back of the mountain on the other side of the valley and burn away at mach 2.5
>gain altitude
>rto spots bandits
>flare wings & invert
>open belly
>burstfire everything at bogeys
>button back up as we barrel roll to level out and change geometry yet again for supersonic cruise

>a t72 launches its turret skyward
From what, exactly? A Bushmaster gun? Not likely. This seems like a lot of work for something you could do better with a bomb.

That might be true, but the problem is that the airframe is still made out of alluminium, the 105mm of the AC-130 was already a problem by itself, adding something even more powerfull is going to wreck it hard, unless they add a recoil compensation system or reinforce the structure or use lower loads(and lose range)

>Guess which American, currently operational bomber employs a rotary bomb bay?

Attached: B2.jpg (750x562, 61K)

>he's never seen a heat round penetrate & detonate the magazine of a soviet tank
Are you new here? Sure is Summer!

The ammo carrousel.

The soviet turret throwing contests have been a meme in Jow Forums since the times of Ivan Chesnokov.

>A-2

Attached: 0c4.png (600x606, 89K)

my dick holy shit

>60 ton carrying capacity
So, after dropping sixty tons of smartbombs & missiles to wipe out strategic targets like enemy air defenses & tanks, let's use them to drop paratroopers & tankettes behind enemy lines, then return with them loaded with guns for cas... wtf I love the B-1B et Al now!

>just like how the B1 was supposed to become a missile truck with the B1R upgrades
That was an unsolicited proposal shilled by the History Channel in one of their crap shows. USAF never had the slightest interest. Anyone who thinks it is real is a TV-watching mouthbreather

No it was designed, the thing is, that I'm pretty sure that many government agencies have thousands of designed projects of this sort that will never see the light because they way too ludicrous to be applied.

Lol the gay russians couldn’t even afford more than 12 of those gay bootlegs

The R upgrade itself is still a real thing, we've updated components for it, it's just not the split stab proposal

>rotary bomb bay

can they just all fall out willy nilly and lock on like in macross missle spam?

>no v-tail
C'mon, the boner gives me a boner

Attached: b1r.png (1280x687, 403K)

there's the catch, you would have to import the ammunition from india.
think inkjet cartridge-level of dependency.

Fun fact. The tu160 was never mass produced, each plane is pretty much individually made and has little variations.

bomb bays aren't meant to sustain gun recoil for long

now a laser? make it happen

Attached: Ac7_zoisite.png (1920x1090, 1.47M)

It works well for COIN.

We're pretty far off from that still.

Attached: Falken ADF-01.jpg (1280x720, 472K)

Honestly? Not really. They're attaching a laser to the AC-130 within 4 years.

This. It's a gay. Just load up bombs as usual.

Already been dun befo?

Attached: will-hayden-sons-of-guns-mug-shot-490x679.jpg (490x679, 54K)

>laser can only fire straight ahead
not the smartest of designs...

Medium altitude long range gunship. B1 happens to have some nice features for a c130 in today's threat climate.

The point is that we'd be at the point where we have a laser so large and powerful we CAN'T gimbal it.