Posted on 06/13/2015 4:58:11 PM PDT by Second Amendment First
The big flaw in everybody’s reasoning is the employment of snipers for engagements where a sniper has to be exposed to return fire from automatic weapons. Anything beyond 500m should be 60mm mortar meat.
The problem are the Rules of Engagement: they are using snipers to take out enemy targets because all of those in the chain of command are loathe to get in trouble. Accordingly, the putzes are using long-distance shooters to try to surgically kill targets at excessive distances while exposing those shooters to machine gun fire.
In the days when leaders actually had gonads, a good 60mm mortarman could and did hit individuals out to 1,000m, first shot. Beyond that range, we have bigger and even more precise stuff but the candy-butts in charge won’t use them.
It’s called a “hipshoot”.
OK, understood. I spend a month with a 105 Battalion up at an Arty range at the DMZ in Korea. I was the ALO (Air Liaison Officer) tasked with moving the guns by CH-53 helo. They’d do the exercise with both 6-bys bringing the guns to the firing positions and the -53’s dropping them in.
“Shoot & Scoot” is all that comes to mind.
Here’s a YouTube of 155SP’s (???) doing it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPpM-f_zNPU
Makes you wonder what happened in between and how long it took.
At one point in time, I led the development of an artillery system that fired accurately while on the move. The "artillery mafia" at Fort Sill and Quantico couldn't understand why you'd want to be able to do that.
"Hey, which one of you idiots has the key to the padlock on the travel lock?"
"...an artillery system that fired accurately while on the move. The "artillery mafia" at Fort Sill and Quantico couldn't understand why you'd want to be able to do that."
After all, we'd much rather sit here and time how long their counter-battery fire takes, right?
/s
Amazing, isn’t it? I have been in and around hard-core artillery for over 40 years and you really see the highs of brilliance but more often the lows of mediocrity.
I led a team of government designers and we built an advanced- technology artillery weapon called the XM-326 Dragon Fire 120mm Automated Rifled Mortar. Fire missions took 18 seconds from target received to round on the way. CEP of 15m at 8,000m, first round. One maybe two crewmen, 10 rounds per minute, electrically actuated traverse, elevation, loading and firing - it aims itself. Look it up on Google..
No interest. Tried to take it to Iraq to provide near-instantaneous counterfire. Wouldn’t let me do it. Meanwhile our troops got minimal fire support. Our artillery leaders wanted 155s and sneered at smaller stuff.
Darn thing’s rusting away at Picatinny Arsenal today.
Right on.
The problem is one of aimed, precision slow fire with a rifle -- vs max elevation, full auto, "dump rounds on 'em" with a MG.
A rifleman with a .50 BMG Barrett or McMillan is at a "risk disadvantage" when up against a (also ,50 BMG) Ma Deuce which can back off behind cover and hose you and your environs with, essentially, "Area Saturation".
That's called a "firepower deficit"...
~~~~~~~
Maybe someone can come up with a sniper weapon that fires rounds designed for the A-10's 30mm GAU-8... '-}
But, until then, I understand that the .416 is one sweet-shooting sniper round...
If that were me, the frustration would have shoved me over the edge!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5wE1HEtSLQ
“Ultimate Weapons- Dragon Fire II”
Is this you?
Awesome weapon!
Couple that with an updated Ontos and we’d have both direct and indirect fire support that was immediate, lightweight and could be organic to a reinforced battalion.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XxRzZMuvrg8 “The Ontos”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUpl4vf5juA “M-50 Ontos in Vietnam”
We had both a M-48 and an Ontos with us guarding Namo Bridge. They had a shooting match one day. The Ontos beat the M-48 easily!
It was a phenomenal leap forward: it was designed to make direct support artillery immediately responsive to the supported squad. All a Marine needed was a laser rangefinder that was set up to transmit target grid and altitude over the radio, and put the crosshair where you wanted the round to hit and in less than 40 seconds total, you had a huge explosion laced with steel where you were looking.
When I was in Vietnam - as an artillery scout observer - I remember very clearly how long it took to get a fire mission on target. Five minutes could seem like an eternity! The Dragon Fire was my gift to the Marine Corps and the army to make DS artillery what it was always meant to be.
The Artillery Mafia was rabid about the threat it posed to the lightweight 155 project and the army-like future they had planned and most of all, to a system that replaced the whole circus of FDCs, comm platoons, and large gun crews that make up our DS batteries.
They are just hiding under the blankets - automated fire support is the future, even if they've managed to avoid it so far.
I always like the ONTOS and it's funny how the Marine Corps used it for all sorts of "pocket battleship" roles instead of the micro tank killer it was designed to be. They were used for position defense, convoy security, they even accompanied the grunts into the field as a sort of "assault gun" on patrols. The crews could hit anything they wanted to within the range of those 106s - I even saw one crew hit a running man at about 1,000m after two quick spotters were shot at him. Vaporized him!
When were you in Vietnam? I was there from January '66 to May '67.
Semper Fi,
Chainmail
But you're right about Obama wanting his own private military armed to the teeth to go after & kill "civilians" who don't agree with him.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.