This is how you do a machine gun in the sky. Dillon Aero makes a self contained gun pod that you can mount under the wing of your airplane. It is a minigun for your plane, as long as your plane has a NATO bomb rack.

  • Self-contained system
    –   Dillon M134D-H Minigun
    –   3,000-round magazine capacity
    –   Rapidly removable nose and tail cone for easy gun or magazine access
    –   Conformal Remote Gun Control Unit (RGCU)
    –   Conformal dedicated 24 VDC Li-ion battery
    –   Trickle charge capable from aircraft power
    –   Quick Change Ammunition Magazine
    –   Last Round Switch (approx. 100 rounds remaining) with pilot override interrupt
    –   Integral bore sight adjustment +/- 2.5°
    –   Mounts to 14” Standard NATO bomb rack
    –   Optional Dillon hardback mount available to integrate the Gun Pod onto the standard Russian bomb rack used on
    –   Russian aircraft, Mi-24, Mi-17 etc.
    –   Capable of 400 kt airspeed at sea level
  • Weight
    –   162 lb (73.5 kg) empty
    –   350 lb (158.8 kg) estimated when loaded
  • Dimensions
    –   Height: 15.4” (39.1 cm)
    –   Width: 13.1” (33.3 cm)
    –   Length: 92.9” (236 cm) with long barrels
  • Aircraft interface cabling
    –   Master arm
    –   Trigger
    –   Last round switch override
    –   Battery trickle charge
    –   Optional indicator light signals

 





Advertisement

  • Giolli Joker

    TFB, always the same… all the data, never the price.

    • HenryV

      If you have to ask the price you can’t afford it. 🙂

      • Major Tom

        Certainly explains H&K.

        • mosinman

          The HK has the same performance, a huge red HK rollmark on the side and 3x the price

          • Gary Kirk

            And 1/900th the performance..

          • mosinman

            my bad

      • Mystick

        An HJ is $5, a $BJ $10, and a ZJ $20.

        • Phillip Cooper

          … same as downtown!

    • Gary Kirk

      If you can afford to feed full auto.. Ya don’t really care..

      • Arnold Ziffel

        That thing is full auto squared.

        • Lars Thorsen

          Full Auto Cubed

    • Full Name

      If you don’t have other peoples’ money to spend, you can’t afford it

  • Drew Coleman

    I need one of these. For hog hunting.

    • Edeco

      It’s ethical because they’re an invasive species threatening, erm, horned lizards.

      • Rick O’Shay

        They’re an invasive species that causes over a billion in agricultural damages. Forget threatening horned lizards, they’re threatening livelihoods.

        • Edeco

          I’m sure what you say is true, but for my part that matter can stay between the farmers and the hogs. (Long story, short version is I think our aggro sector, such as it is, is a wolf-by-the-ears / millstone-about-our-neck)

          • KestrelBike

            I hear the plight of all these farmers with hog problems, yet never get a single invitation to come onto their land to be hog-rambo.

            I’m sure there’s places where I can pay $3,000 for a weekend at their ranch for the hog hunting experience, though!

          • Big Daddy

            I live in Texas and they charge you for doing something they NEED doing. No thanks. I’d love to do it for fun but charge me, no.

          • KestrelBike

            Exactly. I understand that they don’t want just anyone coming onto their land and to start blasting everywhere, but the amount these places are charging is a serious gouge.

            Wayyy back in 2007 or so, I had frequented a gaming community website that a guy in Texas was a member of. Guy was kinda rare for that community in that he was a total gun lover (especially the tacticool guns), but his day job was in IT.

            One day this guy’s at a gun store and he gets in a conversation with an old rancher who was complaining to the clerk behind the counter about a hog problem on his ranch. The rancher was pretty old and his family had long since scattered out of state to the winds (and they didn’t really concern themselves about him or ranching, they were too far removed with their own families). Because of his age, he was starting to have issues keeping the brush clear on his ranch, and the limited amount of livestock he had were starting to suffer for it.

            Now, the IT guy is definitely a good ole’ boy who is always helping out strangers (especially on the website), so naturally he offers the rancher to help him clear off some of the brush with the rancher’s machinery, as well as see what’s up with those hogs. Rancher accepts his offer, and after the first visits or two, is so impressed with the amount of brush that’s been cleared that he tells the IT guy to come over whenever he wants and to shoot all he wants. Within months the rancher basically makes it clear that he’s going to Will all of his land over to the IT guy, because his remaining family doesn’t care about any of it and they sure didn’t offer to help him. IT guy tries to talk him out of doing so- he honestly finds the brush clearing to be satisfying on its own and a nice break from the office, but Rancher ain’t hearin’ it- he knows IT guy will appreciate and maintain the land like no one else will.

            Now, I was on the same gaming community website with the IT guy for a a good five+ years before any of this happened, and he told this story over the course of half a year as it supposedly developed. So, I tend to believe him, but even if it’s all hot air, it’s still a nice day-dream.

          • Rick O’Shay

            And that’s a position I’m completely in opposition to. We don’t charge the exterminator to come in and kill the cockroaches, I don’t understand why farmers and ranchers want to charge folks to kill off feral hogs.

          • Vizzini

            Because, apparently, there are enough people willing to pay.

          • Gordon Couger

            Most of them need the money and most hunters need cleaning up after.

            If you want to hut free do like the IT guy did show up and help some.

          • Rick O’Shay

            I’m very well aware that most farmers and ranchers could always use more money. Trying to make money off an invasive species that’s impacting your livelihood is a really lousy way to address your fiscal problems though. I can’t think of a single rancher I know who’d make more money by selling hog hunts than he’d make by keeping them from destroying his land in the first place.

          • Beaugrand_RTMC

            If someone was willing to pay me for killing ants and cockroaches in my place, I’d take their money.

          • Gary Kirk

            You just went about as far over most head’s, as the aircraft this’ll be attached to..

          • KestrelBike

            @disqus_0cUFy6XGuu:disqus I’d read what you have to say about the aggro sector if you find the time to describe further your thoughts.

          • Edeco

            Thanks! I’m out of shape on the topic but will post if I can think of an OK way to say it

          • Edeco

            😀 *bows*

          • Brett baker

            Read “The Taste of War:World War 2 and the Battle for Food”, before you run down strategic industries more important than your own.

          • Rick O’Shay

            My in-laws are in the agricultural industry, and we’re of the mindset that if we see hogs, we do everything in our power to make sure they’re eradicated. We don’t think highly of the neighbors who see the hogs as a way to make a buck, and it really is that mindset (as well as the subsidies issue) that makes farmers and ranchers look bad. We’re able to take care of the hog problem on our land sufficiently well that we don’t need to hire outside help. But personally I have a huge problem with folks charging to hunt hogs.

    • tiger

      a burst would destroy them.

  • MrBrassporkchop

    I want a nato bomb rack on the roof of my car.

    • Stan

      I would happy to weld a Russian bomb rack to the roof of your vehicle of choice. Just wire me 2,000 USD!

      • jonp

        I’ll do it for $1,500 and include a young Russian woman that loves American men! They want to meet you.

        • KestrelBike

          For those who stay in Russian hotels- without fail and within the first 15min of your stay, someone at the front desk will call asking if you want a girl to come up to your room.

          • jonp

            Will she urinate on the bed if someone famous was there before me?

    • Gary Kirk

      You wouldn’t happen to be a refugee would you??

  • TheNotoriousIUD

    And once installed you will be automatically qualified for the Russian Air Force.

  • ActionPhysicalMan

    We already got one… and it’s very nice!

  • Jim Slade

    Does it come in .45ACP for ‘Mericans?

    • Cal S.

      Why would you waste the potential of a minigun on .45ACP?!

      • valorius

        or 7.62mm for that matter.

        • Major Tom

          They did experiments with Miniguns chambered in 5.56 in the 70s (Microgun).

          They were less than useful compared to 7.62 Miniguns. Too much wind/motion deflection, insufficient range, insufficient firepower and it was too heavy to be man portable.

          • valorius

            Miniguns are most appropriate in .50 BMG.

          • Raufoss

            This in GAU-19 flavor would be the sauce,
            Especially loaded with M8 or Mk 211…
            Mmmmmm

          • valorius

            Oh. Hell. Yes.

          • Nicholas C

            Have you not seen Empty Shell’s Micro Gun?

          • Major Tom

            I saw it, frankly color me not that impressed.

          • roguetechie

            Same, honestly even for 7.62 NATO miniguns are plain suboptimal…

            Especially when you discover that the Russians have a whole cornucopia of gas operated rotaries that spin up wicked fast!

          • AA

            .338 Norma version anyone?
            PAGING GENERAL DYNAMIC S!
            Seriously though, the main touted benefit is that they function without supplied power… what good is your attack helicopter or muti-role fighter without electricity?
            You cant even aim the damn thing. Plus the ridiculous rate of fire and relevant maintenance.
            Cut the ROF in half and maybe.

          • noob

            it would apply if your control wiring loom is intact but you have an engine out and are gliding down. This means that even if your wing and engine have taken catastrophic damage so long as you have airflow over that ram air turbine powering the gun….

            “From Hell’s Heart I Stab At Thee” indeed.

          • Phillip Cooper

            Bonus points for quoting KAAAAAAAHN!

            You win Teh Intarwebz today.

          • roguetechie

            The main touted benefits are lower parts count, lighter system weight (more room for bullets), faster spin up, and less maintenance, cost in spares inventory, and cost to train maintainers etc!

            Also you must be really really bad at math, essentially totally unable to do geometry, and believe trigonometry is a specialist training course jointly put on by Glock and Black hawk’s Serpa holster subject matter expert about how to avoid Glock leg while operating operationally!

            ROF and dispersion along with any lag time between mashing your gun trigger on the HOTAS and when it ACTUALLY starts firing are ALL primary drivers of your chances of putting bullets into what you aim at!

            Know what’s worse than lag? A lag time that is HIGHLY VARIABLE, you know like the minis will be if you don’t prespin up the barrels!

            Aka EXACTLY the scenarios when you need consistency and bullets virtually the instant your brain registers a threat and slams your finger into the trigger frantically!

          • Brett baker

            Actually, they had plenty of firepower. The problem was carrying the ammo! 12,000 rpm rate they used 500 round boxes to feed it.

          • Phillip Cooper

            Sounds like a Red Jacket Firearms episode…

            NEVABINDUNBEFO!

      • Phillip Cooper

        LOTS and LOTS of ammo….

  • paulm53

    Always teasing us. They wouldn’t let me put one on my ambulance either.

  • valorius

    7.62mm exposes the host aircraft to too much return fire.

    • Major Tom

      Everything that’s not bloody battleship artillery or cruise missiles exposes anything to too much return fire.

      • valorius

        GAU-8/A 30x173mm for the win bruh 😀

        • Gary Kirk

          Ya might wanna centrally mount that.. And check your hp rating…

          • valorius

            They do make a lighter weight GAU-13 4 barrel variant, for wimpy little planes like the Lawn Dart. 😉

          • Gary Kirk

            Ya know, I understood why they called the 16 the “lawn dart”.. But always thought that designation originally belonged to the X 15.. Could be wrong??

          • Tim

            They called the F-104 the lawn dart.

            In some circles the call the Emb-145 a lawn dart too…

          • valorius

            I honestly cannot comment on the X-15’s nickname, as i know next to nothing about it.

        • tiger

          Bit over kill for most targets

          • valorius

            That’s what makes it so glorious 😀

        • Major Tom

          Only as long as they shoot back.

          • valorius

            The A-10 is legendary for taking enormous damage and still continuing the mission.

      • noob

        Introducing the Lockheed-Martin CUDA Beyond Visual Range Air-to-Air hit-to-kill missile. They took an AIM-120D and took out the warhead and miniaturized the seeker head. Now you can have twice as many air to air missiles on your airplane.

        https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/9bb6cc38abac938acb8cfcc021876b2308644829b4dc79d68f3812b61b19b63f.jpg

        • AA

          Interesting.
          Even with component removal for fuel replacement and decreased surface drag, can’t imagine the range is the same or better.
          Should be capable of course change quickly though
          Still, even with guidance enhancements kinetic-kill is a overall fail.
          Cram a grenade in the tip for cristsakes at least.

          • roguetechie

            In a head to head / anything other than a stern chase where the missile starts low aircraft high really…. You’re talking very very high convergence rates and an impacting object which is still going to weigh well over 30 pounds!

            In a head to head engagement you’re likely talking mach 4 plus impacts at least…

            Modern combat aircraft are pretty survivable against lots of really high energy but light shrapnel or even close proximity blasts, but they fall down rather spectacularly against big heavy point impacts.

            This has actually been studied and things like aircraft cannon ammunition designed specifically to do damage in ways similar to Cuda.

          • noob

            additionally one more facet to this puzzle is that the CUDA was designed for 5th gen aircraft – which are characterized by features like stealth, sensor fusion and midcourse guidance updates for weapons on low probability of intercept data links.

            So this means that you could have a really good target quality Distributed Aperture System lock on an enemy on your 6 o’clock and kinematically you are at a disadvantage. But your software (assuming it worked like it did in the brochure or at least as good as it worked in testing last Tuesday) has sent a message to your buddy who is scissoring towards you and has already launched a CUDA before you noticed the enemy on your tail.

            Midcourse guidance tells the CUDA to fly around you and hit the enemy plane in the nose. In theory.

            The next generation of EWOs will be sitting in the back seats of aircraft trying their hardest to steal their enemy’s missiles and turn them against them in a kind of cyber-jujitsu. Sometimes the person bringing the most missiles to the fight will be sealing their own demise.

          • Tassiebush

            I’m not that knowledgeable about this type of stuff but the use of the software communicating with the missile to put it on a course but it having a miniaturized seeker to finish things makes me think of the Iron dome system developed by Israel. It seems to dramatically lower the price of the system.

          • noob

            It does say that it has a teeny tiny “lethality enhancer” bursting charge. The munitions gossip says that this means that just before impact the charge splits apart the rocket motor casing. if the solid rocket motor burns from back to front this sudden loss of containment sends chunks of burning rocket fuel into the target, which hopefully will have an incendiary effect. I have not seen the true specs for the CUDA munition so this is all guess work based on Lockheed open source press releases.

  • jonp

    Can I fit it on my ultralight?

    • Lars Thorsen

      Can your little rotax generate 24 volts? Then sure, but you wont be going anywhere but backwards. 🙂

      • jonp

        If i point it straight down at the target i can destroy it while hanging in mid air

        • Lars Thorsen

          Make sure you wear a Wile E. Coyote costume for the full effect.

          • jonp

            Don’t worry. I’ve got the helmet.

        • SGT Fish

          IIRC, a minigun has about 300lbs or recoil. is you may need a few as it can barely support itself fully loaded. though it will have a lot more lift once your fuel(ammo) gets expended. 3000rds equals what, 60 seconds of hover time?

      • jon spencer

        I think that this is powered by a self contained 24V LI battery.
        But the battery is able to be charged by the aircrafts installed power.

    • Phillip Cooper

      Yes, but it will then no longer be ultralight….

  • Gary Kirk
  • tiger

    A. .50 BMG pod is preferred. Rifle caliber MG’s are too light for Air to Air & Lack punch for vehicles. The RAF learned that in WW2 putting 8 .303 in Spits & Hurricanes. A lot of firepower,but little throw weight. The .50 BMG & 20mm cannon were the right mix. The Japanese & Italians made the same error in going with rifle caliber MGs on planes.

    • Major Tom

      In 1940 most aircraft that weren’t heavy bombers pretty much fell apart in flight against anything thrown at it. In 1942/1943 and a few upgrades and newer models later and then rifle caliber lost all effectiveness.

      • tiger

        If you like to waste time making pencil holes….. The Zero would have been a real Grumman killer without the 7.7’s.

        • Major Tom

          And yet those 7.7’s shot down a lot of our aircraft in the war. A lot.

          • tiger

            A .50 bmg & 20mm mix would have made a difference. Rifle MG’s are fine on people, but not much else. A pilot kill is as good as a fuel tank or a engine I guess?

          • Major Tom

            Not quite. Early WW2 airplanes notoriously lacked on armor and durability to enemy fire. For many airplanes, a handful of rifle bullets would tear off a wing or blow out an engine the same as heavier calibers would.

            (Largely because of insufficient engine power to lift up more armored
            aircraft. That would change rapidly in the course of the war.)

            Given that plane to plane combat in WW2 was on average at 300 meters or less (often less than 100), rifle bullets packed a lot of punch against interwar period and 1939-1940 era aircraft.

          • tiger

            I guess it comes down to a mix of tech & WW1 tactics The pre war designs were not based on the lessons of say modern experience in the Spanish Civil War. The focus was more on speed than weapons used. So nations wised up. Others like Italy never did. Although by Korea we seemed to be the folks behind the tech curve with the F-86. Even Navy & Marine plane had moved to cannon.

          • AA

            And that is why Ariskas and Mosins had low-level anti-aircraft provisions and training, overall ineffectual as it was.
            Good luck nowadays. I’d bet heavily that a dozen+ M4A1s, M27s, hell even M240s and M107s would have nyet effect on a strafing Su-35.

            Would love to see real world results of a “Battlefield”-esque lucky 40mm strike to canopy or intake though.

          • Major Tom

            The 40mm hit would be similar to if you hit a plane with say a 30mm Bushmaster II or 40mm Bofors autocannon. Painful and potentially devastating.

          • Brett baker

            And remember, everybody thought heavy bombers were the thing. Chamberlain sold out the Czechs to buy time to build more bombers. Obviously, that didn’t work out.

          • AA

            Would be interested to see what even a “lucky” modern GPMG round would do to the most vulnerable sections of modern combat aircraft.

          • AA

            Forgot to add;
            In flight. However legitimate scientific testing would likely be nigh impossible.
            Might be much closer to realization with modern advances in drone technology though.
            A glancing blow on an airborne fighter banking away on extreme angle at high speed would likely result in far less damage than a 90 degree hit to a stationary aircraft, or a clamped evaluation section.

          • Major Tom

            British riflemen shot down an Argentine Pucara over the Falklands in 1982. So the answer is, if you hit it enough and/or in the right spots you can bring down a modern plane.

            Utility, reconnaissance and transport helicopters are still somewhat vulnerable to small arms fire too.

            And the thing about rifle caliber hits is, even if you don’t shoot it down, the plane/heli in question will often need a ton of work in repairs, tests and checks before it flies again. Many hours of it. Even if the number of hits was just one.

            Tanks and armored cars able to shrug off everything in rifle caliber with little more than paint damage, they are not.

        • jay

          The 7.7mm guns on the zero were secondary armament. All zero variants carried 20mm cannons.
          The early ones had drum fed guns with low ammo capacity, but later they got beltfed guns with decent ammo supply.

          • Secundius

            The “Zero” had One of Each, 1×20 and 1×7.7…

          • tiger

            Rifle caliber MG’s in general were lousy. Great on people. But lack the punch to damage planes, ships, tanks, trucks, trains, etc. They were a carry over from WWI armaments. As was the mounting of gun firing through the props. The Spitfire had the same issues in it’s early cannon armed models as the Zero.

  • noob

    “Optional Dillon hardback mount available to integrate the Gun Pod onto the standard Russian bomb rack”

    Didn’t Erik Prince get a scathing report on The Intercept for kitting out an Air Tractor AT-80U/Thrush 510G with dual compatible Russian/NATO bomb rack mounts and a custom retractable ISR pod as part of his Airborne Technologies/Frontier Resource Group/Frontier Services Group effort to blow up people on the African continent under contract to the Chinese and possibly Saudis?

    But when Dillon makes a dual mount it’s A-OK? Their export control officer must be very, very good.

    • Stephen Paraski

      I believe these are for Princes Company. His sister is Betsy Devos.

    • B-Sabre

      Prince broke multiple laws in multiple countries doing what he was doing (including Austria, which doesn’t like people developing combat aircraft in the country without informing the government) and (supposedly) without the knowledge of the logistics company he was employed by. The fact that the aircraft can use NATO or Warsaw Pact weaponry is mostly incidental to the outrage. And yes, the article was on The Intercept.
      Dillon has just made a weapons pod, and they haven’t sold anything to anyone yet. If they sell it overseas without clearing it through State, they deserve everything coming to them.

  • Jim_Macklin

    The aircraft appears to be a Beech 90 series King Air. That is a turbo-prop with 700 hp engines on each wing. It is offered to governments with hard points for maritime patrol. Not just for weapons but to carry S&R equipment and dropping inflatable boats.
    The 7.62×51 Mimigun’s recoil even at 2,000 rpm is manageble. It would be good for training in ground attack.
    Cost is probably above $250,000.00 and ammo cost at least $2,000 per flight.

  • Paul Rain

    Good stuff. That may allow the F-35 to take on attack and fighter-bomber roles.

    • noob

      Oh no getting flashbacks to that email virus with the subject line “f35b gun pod.ppt” from 2012 again. That one was embarrassing.

    • Secundius

      Only if the Tanks were made in WWI…

  • Phillip Cooper

    Looks pretty hack and sloppy with the cables hanging in the slipstream.

    Also, why are they worrying about putting it on Russian aircraft?

    • Brett baker

      Some allies use Russian gear.

  • Secundius

    And the Likelihood of Anyone actually being able to get one, IS WHAT?/!

  • Trotro

    All these guys on here saying they need one are ridiculous. Ya gotta get two in order to balance each wing! And you call yourselves gun enthusiasts…

    • Drew Coleman

      Just center mount it 🙂

      • Trotro

        2 guns > 1 gun

        It’s simple math.

  • jay

    This thing is heavier than the FN’s FN® HMP250/400 pods, armed with the .50cal M3P machine gun.

    For airborne weapons, the .30cal is very limited, specially for fixed, forward firing mounting solutions.

    The FN pods come in a large variety of options, even combined in MG/rocket launcher pods, see this minigun pod selling very well.

    • jay

      I don’t see this minigun pod selling very well.

    • Secundius

      That’s without the Magazine?/! The HMP250 has a 250-round magazine and the “400” a 400-round magazine. The Dillon 134D-H is the Lightweight Variant with a Titanium Framing at ~41-pounds and the FN M3P still “Tips the Scales” at ~81.5-pounds. The weight difference is the 3,000-rounds of 7.62x51Nato…

      • jay

        What on earth are you talking about?
        I’m talking about the ready to install pod. Nobody cares about the bare machinegun, because the article is about a ready to install pod.
        The loaded Dillon pod weights 350 lbs and the FN® HMP400 LCC pod mounting a .50cal M3 machinegun with 400 rounds and a case collector box weigh only 308 lbs.

        The pod loaded with an m3p and 3three 70mm rockets, fully loaded, weigh 360lbs.
        For just ten extra ponds to a rifle caliber machine gun, you could have a fast firing .50cal, with 250 rounds and three hard hitting rockets.
        That’s a lot more potent, versatile and useful firepower.

        • Secundius

          A I recall, YOU were Complaining about the Weight of Dillion 134D-H Gun Pod being “Heavier” than either the FN M3P HMP-250/400 Gun Pods. And BOTH the HMP-250 and 400’s are Stand Alone Gun Pods which “CAN BE” Adapted to “Fit” other Supporting Weapon Systems. I suspect YOU could probably do the SAME with the Dillon Gun Pod or the “Sargent Fletcher” Gun Pod, or any other Gun Pod Ever Made…

          • jay

            The Dillon pod IS heavier than both FN .50cal offerings.

            Nobody is using .30 cal for fixed airborne installations anymore, because of poor performance on target and no stand off capability.
            Remember, this pods have to be mounted firing forward on a flying platform and the more range the weapon has, the sooner you can pull out from the dive, during a firing pass.
            then the faster the plane or helicopter is, the sooner you have to pull up, so you don’t crash into the ground.
            Thirty cal doesn’t offer enough standoff range for safe strafing attacks.
            This is why the Dillon minigun pod is just a gimmick, without a real tactical purpose.

            The rifle caliber machine gun was obsolete as as main gun for aircraft in 1941. EVERYONE moved on and except USA everyone else skipped even the .50cal and jumped straight to Cannons.

          • jay

            The payload on an aircraft is a premium and the only reason you would want a .30cal fixed pod on a plane is if it’s lighter than anything else.
            This Dillon .30cal pod is heavier than the available .50cal weapons.
            There’s no reason to install it in a plane/helicopter that can take a .50cal with longer standoff range.

          • Secundius

            I suspect if you took the XM215 5.56x45Nato Microgun Pod and added 3,000-rounds of 5.56 to it would weigh more than a Dillon 134D-H with either 250-rounds or 400-rounds too. Keep in mind the “Mossy” only mounted Four .303’s in the nose and was an extremely effective Heavy Fighter/Bomber…

          • jay

            What are you talking about?
            All Mosquito fighters and night fighters carried FOUR 20mm Hispano cannons PLUS FOUR .303 Brownings.

          • Secundius

            Not all!/? At least one Also mounted a 57mm QF-6-pounder in the nose to…

          • jay

            The bomber mosquitoes didn’t carry forward firing guns at all.
            The 5.56 mm microgun pod is also a retarded idea for aircraft/helicopters, because in order to use it withing the machine gun’s effective range, you have to get the expensive aircraft and expensive to train pilot, within the range of every weapon on the battlefield, carried by any illiterate goat herder.
            Would you do that if you had to pay for the plane and pilot? I don’t think so.

          • Secundius

            At WHAT point in my Comment did I say the 5.56 Microgun was a GREAT Weapon?/! What I mentioned that with a 3,000-round load it would probably also Outweigh the Dillon 134D-H Minigun us either a 250 or 400-round load…

  • Evan

    If I had a minigun and an airplane, I’d want this.

  • Mike55_Mahoney

    .22, .223, 7.62, ???

  • IN Dave

    “Removable gun nose and tail cone for easy access to gun or magazine”. Tell that to the co-pilot that you send out there at 10,000 feet lol

  • Kurt

    All just wannabe nonsense. Grow up guys and put your energies and money into something that will really help our gun rights.

    • No one

      How about “—- off and stop whining about what people should or shouldn’t do?”