thatguy96

This is an M129 grenade launcher. Its primary use was in the M28 armament subsystem for AH-1 helicopters.

I believe there was also a concern about even the 40x53mmR grenades spinning and arming properly when fired perpendicular to the flight paths. The last AH-1S operator manuals specifically say that the M129 can only be fired with the M28 locked in the forward position. There are various pictures of 40mm grenade launchers in door- mounted applications, either as tests or on improvised mounts, but I imagine these accuracy and reliability concerns pretty much doomed that from ever really taking off so to speak.

I'm not sure how long the Navy actually pursued the OV-12A project, but they canceled it before receiving any planes as far as I know and that designation appears to have existed entirely on paper. When the USAF acquired Armed Porters as part of the Credible Chase/Pave Coin projects, they asked for and got their own designation, AU-23A. Also note that when the US Army later acquired Porters for unarmed missions, they requested and got a third designation, UV-20A, rather than using something like UV-12B or U-23B.

So here is everything I have been able to uncover about N1111U: http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/22879/this-ghost-of-a-helicopter-likely-had-a-secret-role-in-reagans-tear-down-this-wall-speech

From this LinkedIn profile, the suggestion is that ATO stands for Aviation Technology Office and the change occurred in May 2017: https://www.linkedin.com/in/clayton-bronson/

The "Flight Concepts Division" name was still in use, at least publicly, as of 2016, based on environmental impact assessment documentation regarding the planned expansion of their facilities at Joint Base Langley-Eustis. Doesn't mean that this is actually the unit's present name, of course, or that its not a cover nomenclature for something else. Easiest way to find the reports is to do a google search for this string: site:www.jble.af.mil "Flight Concepts Division"

Always more questions rather than answers heh. Well then I'm glad I shared the report to add to the existing information.

Are we sure the 530Fs aren't from the 160th? In 1989, the Army Engineering Flight Activity published an airworthiness and flight characteristics review on the 530FF, which it had conducted in support of the plan to upgrade MH-6E and AH-6F with the 530FF engine and powertrain to form the AH-6G and MH-6H. Maybe the 530FFs that the Army acquired for those tests went to the 160th, as well. See: www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a218253.pdf

This is Lockheed's pitch (who now own Sikorsky) for the USAF's UH-1N replacement contract, not an actual helicopter. Here's another piece of LockMart artwork for the HH-60U in 1st Helicopter Squadron colors. Sikorsky HH-60U Black Hawk

These racks are commonly referred to as the "Kellet Pylon" or "Kellet Rack" and are most commonly associated with the auxiliary fuel tanks as already mentioned. However, the Kellet Pylon only referred to the actual bomb rack attached to what was called the "Bell Antler" mount - like the MA-4 rack inside the M156 universal mount. The antlers were also used on the XM47 and M56 mine dispensing subsystems. The combination of two antler-based mounts each with a 19-shot rocket pod as seen above was officially known as the XM17 armament subsystem, but I don't know how much that nomenclature was actua

You might find this link useful for researching Air America's aircraft: http://www.utdallas.edu/library/specialcollections/hac/cataam/Leeker/aircraft/index.html

To be fair, the last of the H models looked very different by the end of their service. 20mm guns removed, new sensors and defensive gear and lots of other mods.

Yup, AC-130U entered service in 1995.

Pretty sure they had replaced the old ramp-mounted launcher with the AN/ALE-47s in the fuselage by Desert Storm, though I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong. And the AC-130Hs flew their last combat missions over Afghanistan in 2013.

This is the report you want: http://oai.dtic.mil/oai/oai?verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix=html&identifier=ADA484753

These pics are from the Black Spot Task Force's time in South Korea, but I imagine it would've been pretty similar in South Vietnam. On the ground, no helmets, just caps. In the air, probably just headphones.

These are BRU-20/A bomb racks. USAF UH-1Ns used the same arrangement. Its indicative of the fact that VNAF advisory and technical support came from the USAF, not the US Army. So VNAF UH-1H gunships look essentially like USAF UH-1N gunships.

Not sure about observation helos working with AHCs/ASHCs, but I learned a long time ago to never say never. And if you're looking to stay away from the 1st Cav, just remember that every Vietnam-era division regardless of type had an air cavalry troop. The 11th Armored Cavalry Regiment had a unique MTOE air cavalry troop, too.

Some things worth point out. First, Vietnam-era Assault Helicopter Companies and Aerial Weapons Companies did not have any observation helicopters assigned to them. The only company-sized units that had slicks, gunships and observation helicopters (or even two of these types) all in the same place were air cavalry troops, provisional/MTOE units done up to a similar organization and separate divisional and group aviation companies. Second, the paper TOEs did not call for specific helicopters. The equipment lines called for things like "helicopter, observation" or "helicopter, utilit

Army Hueys: UH-1A, UH-1B, UH-1C, UH-1D, UH-1H, UH-1M Marine Hueys: UH-1E Navy Hueys: UH-1B, UH-1C, UH-1L, HH-1K, UH-1M Air Force Hueys: UH-1F, UH-1P, UH-1N Army Cobras: AH-1G Marine Cobras: AH-1G, AH-1J Marine H-53s: CH-53A, CH-53D Navy H-53s: RH-53A Air Force H-53s: HH-53B, CH-53C, HH-53C

2-135th Aviation of the Colorado Army National Guard has SOF support among its missions, though its officially classed as a "general support" battalion. Extortion 17, the CH-47D that crashed in 2011 in Afghanistan while transporting a SOF QRF, was from 2-135th.

NAVAIR installed all-new glass cockpits in the two OV-10Gs they got from NASA, per the official agreement (See: https://warisboring.com/nasas-antique-planes-return-from-combat-eb600859a9f9#.eew1etimt). While in the Middle East, the two aircraft were using APKWS II rockets, so no other precision guided weapons were necessary.

Might just be a trick of the light, too. Here's some more pics of an MH-60S with rocket pods. You can see what actually looks like a door-mounted GAU-21/A again in the second pic. Also, in both cases this should be an USAF/USN LAU-61C/A or D/A pod rather than an Army pod of any kind.

Interesting image of an MH-60S assigned to HSC-14 aboard the USS Stennis from its recently completed cruise. The new M197 cannon pod on the left side and a 19-shot rocket pod on the right. There's also a .50 caliber machine gun (likely a GAU-18/A) poking out of the right side cabin doorway. From http://www.navy.mil/submit/display.asp?story_id=96145

Circa late 1966-early 1967. I wrote up what we do know about this - which isn't much: https://warisboring.com/the-u-s-air-force-tried-turning-nuclear-rockets-into-cluster-bombs-937b407dcd69#.4oio284dx