Tailgunner SV

[wyrdness]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R6ky50D3Rhg

I wonder if you could fit these to a Speed Triple.

[Razor]

Very, very tacky...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uLpiG_PqVxk

[muffles]

I guess that vid confirms those tailgunner exhausts have no packing in :lol: it sounds like my SV when it had no can on!

[wyrdness]

Very, very tacky...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uLpiG_PqVxk

I don't think that they suit a Harley, but maybe they'd look OK on a streetfighter.

[tinpants]

Try this one

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AElib2BPf-g

This is what the real ones do!!!:rambo: :cool: :smt067

4000 rounds per minute, 1 in 3 tracer. That is, for every tracer round you see there are three normal (ball or armour piercing)that you can't!!

I was lucky enough to have a play with one of these when I was in the States about 10 years ago. Awesome. Simply awesome.

[gettin2dizzy]

thats nothing! ;) check this out, (its over 60 000 rounds a minute ;) )
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8hlj4EbdsE

[rictus01]

taste dictates you could never fit thoughs to a Speed triple :smt011

[tinpants]

thats nothing! ;) check this out, (its over 60 000 rounds a minute ;) )
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8hlj4EbdsE

Impressive, but not a Gatling gun and, I'm sure, only an experimental prototype not an operational system.

Just imagine the logistics of keeping it fed with ammo:smt119 :D

[gettin2dizzy]

yeah, the bullets are stored in the barrels and are activated electronically. They've designed pistols with fire rates faster than current machine guns too!

[beniryu]

Try this one

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AElib2BPf-g

This is what the real ones do!!!:rambo: :cool: :smt067

4000 rounds per minute, 1 in 3 tracer. That is, for every tracer round you see there are three normal (ball or armour piercing)that you can't!!

I was lucky enough to have a play with one of these when I was in the States about 10 years ago. Awesome. Simply awesome.

I want one of those fitted to my bike.....to deal with sunday drivers........ :smt067 :crutches:

[wyrdness]

taste dictates you could never fit thoughs to a Speed triple :smt011
The ones pictured in this months Bike magazine look a lot better than the pics on the web site. However, I wouldn't actually fit them to my Triple, I'd just be interested to see what it would look like if someone did.

[Flamin_Squirrel]

Impressive, but not a Gatling gun and, I'm sure, only an experimental prototype not an operational system.

Just imagine the logistics of keeping it fed with ammo:smt119 :D

Apparently, the idea behind those crazy guns is for them to be used together with high precision fire control radar. The idea being you can use the radar to aim the gun, which with its crazy rate of fire makes it possible to shoot down tank shells :o

[Blue_SV650S]

Apparently, the idea behind those crazy guns is for them to be used together with high precision fire control radar. The idea being you can use the radar to aim the gun, which with its crazy rate of fire makes it possible to shoot down tank shells :o

I think the actual idea is to shoot the tanks ;) But you can shoot incoming missiles with a Phalanx (Gatling gun on warships as opposed to one mounted in the nose of an A10 tank-buster) ... fact is that if the missile is close enough for you to use close-in weapon systems then you are already in a world of ****!!! :D

Oh and a 'Tailgunner' is a euphemism for a batty-boy ... an up-hill-gardener ... a fudge-nudger ... ... seems this item is aptly named!!!! :D

[Flamin_Squirrel]

I think the actual idea is to shoot the tanks ;) But you can shoot incoming missiles with a Phalanx (Gatling gun on warships as opposed to one mounted in the nose of an A10 tank-buster) ... fact is that if the missile is close enough for you to use close-in weapon systems then you are already in a world of ****!!! :D

Oh and a 'Tailgunner' is a euphemism for a batty-boy ... an up-hill-gardener ... a fudge-nudger ... ... seems this item is aptly named!!!! :D

No I ment what I said, tank shells. The massive rate of fire combined with a decent radar gives a realistic chance of mounting a last ditch defence against enemy tank fire.

[Blue_SV650S]

No I ment what I said, tank shells. The massive rate of fire combined with a decent radar gives a realistic chance of mounting a last ditch defence against enemy tank fire.

lol, I meant that the idea is that the A10s take out the Tanks before they are a problem ... if shells are flying its prolly a little late already!! :lol: Same with the Phalanx ... things have already got pretty messy if you are using it in the first place ;)

Oh and have you ever seen an A10 firing a Gatling gun (or a phalanx for that matter) in real life??? ... they sound like wet f4rt, most disappointing!! :( ... well that is until you see the target ripped to shreds!!!! 8) :D

[tinpants]

No I ment what I said, tank shells. The massive rate of fire combined with a decent radar gives a realistic chance of mounting a last ditch defence against enemy tank fire.

Well, given that most tank ammo these days is supersonic and fired at ranges of generally less than 3000 metres, I would have thought it unlikely any close defence system would be quick enough to shoot the shell out of the air. Certainly these types of machine gun MAY be theoretically effective against comparatively slower moving rounds such as H.E.S.H. or H.E.A.T but not against A.P.F.S.D.S. The sabot in these is either tungsten or depleted uranium and only approximately 63mm in diameter. Couple this with the supersonic speed and you have, basically, Buckley's chance of knocking it out of the air.

Just as a matter of interest, I know how big and heavy the sabots are 'cos I've got one as a doorstop!! I "acquired" it in Canada when I was over there doing a Med Man Exercise in '93. They really are quite rare bits of kit as they usually get obliterated on contact with the target.

I heard the GAU 8 Avenger (A10 gun) when I was in the States. They put on a firepower demo for us. It does sound just like a wet fart but I'm just glad my wet ones aren't as destructive!!8-[ :-dd

[Blue_SV650S]

..

You are indeed unlikely to ‘catch up’ a shell that easily, but if you are firing at an oncoming shell (you are flying over ‘your’ tank) or even at 90deg to, it is feasible ;) Again refer to Phalanx, that shoots incoming missiles down … obviously the missiles are coming towards, not going away from the ship at the time!! :lol:

[Bluesteel]

How do you guys know so much about guns? Should we be keeping an eye out for alarming newspaper headlines involving SV riders?...

[gettin2dizzy]

its already been proven successful shooting down shells, some american navy ships have replaced the phalanx with one already! being able to fire 2000 shells in what sounds like one shot obliterates anything within a few square feet. awesome

[Scoobs]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2iLK-QXF5Q

Best EVER use of a minigun :wink:

[muffles]

4000 rounds per minute, 1 in 3 tracer. That is, for every tracer round you see there are three normal (ball or armour piercing)that you can't!!

<pedant mode>
Surely 1 in 3 means that for every tracer round you can see, there are 2 normal rounds you can't? Wouldn't it be "1 for every 3" if you wanted 1 tracer round for every 3 normal rounds?
</pedant mode>

[tinpants]

er, no. Remember, this is the Army way of thinking! 1 in 3 means 1 tracer to 3 "other".

In answer to Blue_SV650S, I wasn't refering to trying to "catch up with" an incoming projectile, rather the time taken to acquire said projectile and lock onto it then shoot it down. In the case of an APFSDS round which, as I have already said, is only about 63mm in diameter, fired at a normally max range of 3000m and travelling at a supersonic speed, the time from it leaving the muzzle of the tank gun to it striking its target would be around 1 second. I don't believe there is ANY weapon system on the market today that could acquire, target, track and shoot down something that small travelling that fast. It just can't be done. End of. The cross sectional diameter of an Exocet or A.N.Other anti-ship missile is a lot larger than that of a tank round and are fired from a far greater distance, so are a lot easier to track.

To answer Bluesteel's question, I know a lot about weapons, their uses and limitations 'cos I've used a lot of 'em in the past.

[gettin2dizzy]

system have been around for ages that do this. it's the last line of defence but a wall of bullets would only need to clip a projectile to get it to break up.

[tinpants]

This is all well and good when tackling sea based missiles but against depleted uranium sabots travelling at mach 1 well, I'm sorry, but I just don't believe it. These things are made from unbelievably dense material and I just have trouble getting my head round some small calibre (.30 cal) breaking up or even disrupting the flight path of something that heavy and fast. And as I said before, it would be very difficult nay impossible to acquire, target, track and destroy a projectile flying that fast fired from as close in as 3km.


If it can be done (and I'm talking land-based weaponry here) then ok, but I've not heard of it and, I've got to say, it sounds a bit fanciful to me.

[muffles]

er, no. Remember, this is the Army way of thinking! 1 in 3 means 1 tracer to 3 "other".

Fair enough :smt023 from a wording point of view it doesn't make sense but at the end of the day that's what you meant and that's what it is ;)

[DanAbnormal]

Oh dear, only in America could this mod be considered 'cool'.

[tinpants]

Fair enough :smt023 from a wording point of view it doesn't make sense but at the end of the day that's what you meant and that's what it is ;)

Yeah I know!! Thats the Army for you!! :D :D