Narrowmaster
Posts: 6
Joined: 4/24/2001 From: Leavenworth, Kansas Status: offline
|
Thanks for the warm welcome! To answer a few questions, I would say first off, yes I think minimum ranges should be implemented if they aren't already, or at least take into account a long delay (high angle=long time of flight) and an inherent inaccuracy associated with that kind of extreme measure. Generally speaking, firing at targets that you can see (and thus they can see you!) isn't something you should be doing for extended periods of time-I think we played with it on the range a few times across a valley-called it "plinking". As long as you keep the rate of fire down, holding on to the tube isn't bad. Its only when you get two ammo bearers, each with two rounds, one in each hand and they steady hammer rounds as fast as they can, where heat would be a problem. (Can't imagine that happening without the bipod legs on, or you'd just be chucking rounds all over the neighborhood anyways.) Just as a bit of useless trivia, when I was a newly assigned Specialist to the Division, I heard more than one story about those "Crazy Rangers" and all the wild things they've been known to do. At one point, I was told they have been known to jump into a dropzone with a 60mm mortar round 100mph taped in the tube, set on Proximity. The mortar was supposed to of had the small square M3 baseplate attached. Anyways, I guess the idea was, when our Fearless Ranger hit the DZ, in the event he landed on contested turf (say like, in front of a DSHK or something) he could find himself something sturdy to back that thing against, trigger fire that thing in a truly DIRECT fire mode, and have himself a 60mm cannon basically. Whether or not this is true, I don't know, but it had this Specialist wide-eyed when I heard it. Anybody else heard anything like that?
_____________________________
|