F-16s Intercept Pilot, 75, in Restricted Airspace

[Broomstick]

Define "serious damage".

You can shoot the thing full of holes and it will keep flying. It won't fly as efficiently, but it will fly. The wing coverings are essential, but you could peel the skin off the fuselage and take out the windows and still have a working airplane. Even on vital areas, airplanes have kept flying after losing significant portions of tails or wings, as a rough rule of thumb up to one third (though that's very rough).

The control cables and such are pretty small, I don't see how you could hit them with a bullet from a gun except by freak accident, between the distance, size of target, and the vibration of both flying machines.

You could try shooting the engine, but it's unlikely to result in a stop. That would force a landing, but wouldn't automatically translate into a crash.

You could try to shoot the prop - uh, good luck with that. You might severely damage a blade, which would again result in a forced landing, but more likely you'll just chip the prop, if you hit it at all.

Really, the best target in that scenario is probably the pilot.

Matching the speed of a Cub is no big deal. The biggest problem is that helicopters are so full of vibration aiming at a small target will be hard to impossible.

[HMS Sophia]

I was thinking in terms of shooting the pilot or engine block. The size of that plane, the pilots is a relatively large target compared to the plane, so hitting them couldn't be that hard? And you don't fill the area with hundred of burning rounds, so advantageous no?

[Broomstick]

The engine block is a hunk of steel and aluminum, how much damage is a bullet or three really going to do? In a plausible scenario, that is, not a Mythbusters style over-the-top keep hitting it with bigger stuff until it bows up scenario. The engine is the most durable bit of the whole thing. Maybe if you take out the accessories - fuel lines, etc - but again they're very small targets.

Nope, the pilot is the best target. As you note, also a large one relative to the rest of the airplane, with no real protection around him.

[Zaune]

The engine block is a hunk of steel and aluminum, how much damage is a bullet or three really going to do? In a plausible scenario, that is, not a Mythbusters style over-the-top keep hitting it with bigger stuff until it bows up scenario. The engine is the most durable bit of the whole thing. Maybe if you take out the accessories - fuel lines, etc - but again they're very small targets.

Nope, the pilot is the best target. As you note, also a large one relative to the rest of the airplane, with no real protection around him.

I've heard of specialist shotgun ammunition for use at vehicle checkpoints that will trash the engine block of a car without punching through to the passenger compartment, which I imagine would be equally efficient versus an aircraft engine. A .50-calibre rifle has been successfully used to disable speedboats from a helicopter, but that scenario doesn't have the problem of over-penetration to think about.

[Broomstick]

I was not aware of the existence of such special-purpose ammunition, although give the large variety of ammo out there it's not entirely surprising.

By the way, the engine on a J-3 is about the size of a push lawnmower. It's not as large as an equivalently powerful car engine. It's a small target, but I'd expect that if there's a bullet that can disable a car engine it would work on a Cub...if you can hit the target.

[Mr. Coffee]

Nope, the pilot is the best target. As you note, also a large one relative to the rest of the airplane, with no real protection around him.

I've heard of specialist shotgun ammunition for use at vehicle checkpoints that will trash the engine block of a car without punching through to the passenger compartment, which I imagine would be equally efficient versus an aircraft engine. A .50-calibre rifle has been successfully used to disable speedboats from a helicopter, but that scenario doesn't have the problem of over-penetration to think about.

Well, to me the biggest difference here would be when you shot the engine of a speed boat is kind of drifts to a stop. Do the same to an aircraft and it'll "drift" into the ground. Not something you really want to have happen over populated areas, even if it's an itty bitty aircraft like the one Granny from the OP was puttering around in.

[Broomstick]

J-3 Cub can glide just fine, Coffee. Assuming you don't kill the pilot and he or she doesn't panic there's no reason for the landing to end in a fireball, or even scratched paint.

Of course, if you DO kill the pilot, or the pilot is a batshit crazy suicide terrorist, all bets are off anyway.

[Mr. Coffee]

J-3 Cub can glide just fine, Coffee. Assuming you don't kill the pilot and he or she doesn't panic there's no reason for the landing to end in a fireball, or even scratched paint.

Of course, if you DO kill the pilot, or the pilot is a batshit crazy suicide terrorist, all bets are off anyway.

Still, shooting holes in the engine is probably not the preferred method of bringing down an aircraft like that.

[Broomstick]

True.

At one time there was a military version of the J-3, used for reconnaissance. The preferred method to bring them down, if I recall correctly, was to shoot at them until you killed the pilot.