Reaper Question

Hi Guys and girls,

A quick question about Reaper et al, Why no gun?

In my mind at least having a gun that can be tied to the target system makes some sense.

And not to put a fine point on it a few dozen 25mm round to kill a truck is cheaper than a couple of Hellfires at $160K a pop.

Just find it interesting that it never happened.

Best regards

RAB

a reply to: RAB

They operate too high an altitude to effectively utilize a gun. They remain at higher altitudes so people on the ground can;'t hear their engines. A single impact with a large warhead at supersonic speed is far more effective than some spray of smaller calibre rounds. When talking about "Drones" its about stealthily dispatching the "enemy".

a reply to: RAB

Guns are pretty hard on an airframe when they fire. A fairly large airframe like an F-15 or F-16 has enough weight and airframe strength behind it that they can absorb the vibration. A UAV is light weight and fairly fragile.

It also has to deal with making a strafing run. It would be exceedingly easy for a UAV operator to fly into the ground. They aren't able to get the external cues the way a manned aircraft pilot can.

Also firing rounds of ammo causes the body of the craft to shake possibly making the rounds hit other unwanted targets.

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: RAB

They operate too high an altitude to effectively utilize a gun. They remain at higher altitudes so people on the ground can;'t hear their engines. A single impact with a large warhead at supersonic speed is far more effective than some spray of smaller calibre rounds. When talking about "Drones" its about stealthily dispatching the "enemy".

bingo.

a reply to: MAVERICKANDGOOSE

Welcome to ATS…

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: MAVERICKANDGOOSE

Welcome to ATS…

Thanks dude. I've spent a little bit of time around the A, B and C models and you're absolutely right in your assessment.