Advertisements

Tag Archive: General Dynamics


Terrorist Killer US Military GAU 19B 50 Cal Gatling Gun

 

 

 

Published on Oct 27, 2014

” Another great weapon for the US military and us army. Could prove useful in combating terrorists in Iraq and Syria. The GECAL 50, officially designated by the United States military as the GAU-19/A, is an electrically driven Gatling gun that fires the .50 BMG (12.7×99mm) cartridge.

Technical specifications

  The GAU-19/A is designed for a linkless feed, but can be fed from a standard M9 linked belt if a delinker feeder is used. The rate of fire is selectable to be either 1,000 or 2,000 rounds per minute. The Humvee armament kit version fires at 1,300 rounds per minute. The average recoil force when firing is 500 pounds-force (2.2 kN). In January 2012, General Dynamics announced they would be delivering a new version designated the GAU-19/B. It provides the same firepower in a lighter platform, weighing 106 lbs.[1]
History

  The GECAL 50 was first manufactured by General Electric, then by Lockheed Martin, and now by General Dynamics. Design work began in 1982. Early prototypes had six barrels, but a three-barreled configuration is now standard. The GAU-19/A was originally designed as a larger, more potent version of the M134 Minigun. Due to the loss of nine helicopters in Grenada GE started building prototypes of the weapon in both a three-barreled and a six-barreled configuration. The six-barreled version was designed to fire 4,000 rpm, and could be adapted to fire up to 8,000 rpm. The GAU-19 takes 0.4 seconds to reach maximum firing rate.[2] Soon it was recommended as a potential armament for the V-22 Osprey.[3] The magazine would be located underneath the cabin floor and could be reloaded in-flight. However, plans to mount the gun were later dropped.[4] In 2005, the GAU-19/A was approved to be mounted on the OH-58D Kiowa helicopter. It also could have been used on the Army’s now cancelled ARH-70.[5] In January 2012, the U.S. Army ordered 24 GAU-19/B versions for use on helicopters. All were delivered by the next month.[1]

  In 1999, the United States sent 28 GAU-19s to Colombia.[6] Oman is known to use the GAU-19/A mounted on their HMMWVs. The navy of Mexico uses MDH MD-902 series helicopters with the GAU-19/A system mounted for anti-narcotics operations.[7]
Users

Colombia: Used by Drug Enforcement troops, and the Colombian national police
Japan: Used by Japan Coast Guard, on PC Kagayuki class
Mexico: Used by the Mexican Air Force and the Mexican Navy in Humvees, UH-60 Black Hawks and the MD Explorer
Oman: Used on Army HMMWV.
United States
Gatling Gun History

  The Gatling gun is one of the best-known early rapid-fire weapons and a forerunner of the modern machine gun. Invented by Richard Gatling, it is known for its use by the Union forces during the American Civil War in the 1860s, which was the first time it was employed in combat. Later it was used in the Boshin War, the Anglo-Zulu War and still later in the assault on San Juan Hill during the Spanish-American War.[1]

  The Gatling gun’s operation centered on a cyclic multi-barrel design which facilitated cooling and synchronized the firing/reloading sequence. Each barrel fired a single shot when it reached a certain point in the cycle, after which it ejected the spent cartridge, loaded a new round, and in the process, allowed the barrel to cool somewhat. This configuration allowed higher rates of fire to be achieved without the barrel overheating.
History

Patent drawing for R.J. Gatling’s Battery Gun, 9 May 1865.

  The Gatling gun was designed by the American inventor Dr. Richard J. Gatling in 1861 and patented on November 4, 1862.[2][3] Gatling wrote that he created it to reduce the size of armies and so reduce the number of deaths by combat and disease, and to show how futile war is.[4]
Although the first Gatling gun was capable of firing continuously, it required a person to crank it; therefore it was not a true automatic weapon. The Maxim gun, invented in 1884, was the first true fully automatic weapon, making use of the fired projectile’s recoil force to reload the weapon. Nonetheless, the Gatling gun represented a huge leap in firearm technology.

  Prior to the Gatling gun, the only weapons available to militaries capable of firing many projectiles in a short space of time were mass-firing volley weapons like the French Reffye mitrailleuse in 1870–1871, or field cannons firing canister, much like a very large shotgun. The latter were widely used during and after the Napoleonic Wars. Although the maximum rate of fire was increased by firing multiple projectiles simultaneously, these weapons still needed to be reloaded after each discharge, which for multi-barrel systems like the mitrailleuse was cumbersome and time-consuming. This negated much of the advantage of their high rate of fire per discharge, making them much less powerful on the battlefield. In comparison, the Gatling gun offered a rapid and continuous rate of fire without having to manually reload by opening the breech.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Advertisements

The Navy’s Newest Destroyer Is A Drone

 

 

 

 

 

 

” When the U.S. Navy christens the first of its newest class of destroyers this month, it will launch the first ship with a brain of its own.

  Among the high-tech features included on the USS Zumwalt—cannons that fire rocket-propelled, GPS-guided rounds and stealth design that gives the 610-foot ship the radar signature of a small fishing vessel—there’s also a computer intelligence capable of preparing the ship for battle and engaging enemy targets on its own. Think of it as a gigantic floating drone: “Most UAVs [unmanned aerial vehicles] are a few million dollars,” says Wade Knudson, who heads the Zumwalt project for Raytheon (RTN), which made most of the ship’s computer systems. “This is a $5 billion UAV.”

  Unlike aerial drones, however, the Zumwalt will still have a human crew and it will know how to anticipate their needs. If the ship’s smoke alarms and cameras detect a fire, the ship will turn on the sprinklers and seal off the area. When the fire is out, the ship knows to drain the water so the crew can investigate. All of this automation means the ship will carry a crew of just over 150—half of what would normally be required on a ship of this size. In a pinch, it can be manned by a crew of 40.”

 

Read more at Bloomberg

 

 

 

 

 

 

Lawmakers Who Oversee Government Surveillance Programs Receive Millions From Intelligence Companies

 

 

Chart via Maplight.org.

 

 

” Amid the NSA scandal, the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence — the committees in charge of oversight — denied stricter reform attempts to the NSA programs and instead propelled legislation aimed at restoring their trust. The committees are intended to keep waste, fraud, and abuse in check given most of these programs are hidden from the general public.

  Every single member on the committees received campaign contributions from the largest intelligence companies in the U.S. performing services for the the government.

  A report from Maplight, a nonpartisan research organization that reveals money in politics, highlights the donations from political action committees (PACs) and individuals from the intelligence services companies to these members. The report shows donations amount to over $3.7 million from 2005-2013.”

 

 

As usual money talks while the people suffer the resulting corruption.

 

 

” Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger (D- Md.), the highest ranking Democrat on the House committee, received the most amount of money. He was given $363,600 with $124,350 of this coming from a single company — Northrop Grumman. As the Center for Public Integrity notes, Rep. Ruppersberger’s Maryland district includes the NSA. He is also a member of the “Gang of Eight” and receives extremely detailed intelligence reports that many other members do not receive.

  The second highest amount was given to Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D- Md.) who received $210,150. Sen. Mikulski also happens to be chairwomen of the Senate Appropriations Committee — a committee which allocates federal funds to a majority of government programs, including intelligence.”

 

 

Read the rest

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

—-

 

Army Says No To More Tanks, But Congress Insists

 

 

 

” Built to dominate the enemy in combat, the Army’s hulking Abrams tank is proving equally hard to beat in a budget battle.

Lawmakers from both parties have devoted nearly half a billion dollars in taxpayer money over the past two years to build improved versions of the 70-ton Abrams.

But senior Army officials have said repeatedly, “No thanks.”

Yet in the case of the Abrams tank, there’s a bipartisan push to spend an extra $436 million on a weapon the experts explicitly say is not needed.

“If we had our choice, we would use that money in a different way,” Gen. Ray Odierno, the Army’s chief of staff, told The Associated Press this past week.

Why are the tank dollars still flowing? Politics.”