[X] My Assistant

[Wounded Ronin]

That's why I feel it's best to have simulationistic and detailed rules, by the way. It's more interesting if things are realistic and require a lot of proper planning than if instead things are playing out like a four color comic book.

[Shadow]

I know I played way different after I got out of the Army than before. As I get older and study ore of the tactics I learned the big diff I notice between me and non military people is the gun blazing. I like to plan everything, have contngencies for my contigencies. So when it al goes sideways, I am already heading in that direction.

[DocTaotsu]

@Wounded Ronin. I hate you for getting to shoot a CIWS, I can only take pleasure in knowing that it was probably the earlier model that didn't allow for direct operator aiming. Was this CIWS on a ship? I've heard they have some version of them guarding gates in Iraq but I don't know how true that is.

[WearzManySkins]

@Wounded Ronin. I hate you for getting to shoot a CIWS, I can only take pleasure in knowing that it was probably the earlier model that didn't allow for direct operator aiming. Was this CIWS on a ship? I've heard they have some version of them guarding gates in Iraq but I don't know how true that is.

*cough cough*
The CIWS I fired was one of two mounted on board a ship. I fired it from a TDT due to "unauthorized" mod provided from a source in General Dynamics. I was trained on CIWS in GD's factory there in CA. Actually a TDT firing CIWS makes sense that is the reason why the USN did not officially have the mod. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

As for guarding the gates in IRAQ? It would look impressive and sound impressive but I would rather mount other weapons there, ie miniguns, and several Bushmaster II Mark 46 Mod 1's or Bushmaster II's.

WMS

[DocTaotsu]

Like I said I have no idea if those reports were true, if they did mount it I'm sure it was just the weapon and not the whole radar and so forth.

TDT?

[Daddy's Litt...]

My husband was in the army and he , in character and rl, is always contemptous of full auto/lead streams as a "waste of time and ammo ." He usually does not bring up his army days but anything more than burst fire, unless we wanted a noisy distraction, usually got a snort out of him. If he was feeling particularly ornery he would mutter something like "Great I'm running the bloody Somme again."

A dollar a bullet? Are you allow to bring your own? I know from him and Snow Fox that pistol rounds go for about $20 for a box of 50.

[Fix-it]

Like I said I have no idea if those reports were true, if they did mount it I'm sure it was just the weapon and not the whole radar and so forth.

TDT?

I've seen stuff like this. they mount it on a tractor-trailer, and use it against mortar shells, unguided rockets, etc.

[Wounded Ronin]

A dollar a bullet? Are you allow to bring your own? I know from him and Snow Fox that pistol rounds go for about $20 for a box of 50.

Like I said, that includes range fees and use of the weapon. So the price is a little inflated but that's a package deal.

Certainly after trying those weapons I'm not sure if it would affect my RPG playing style but if I were ever in a situation where I had to fire an automatic weapon at someone who is trying to kill me I'd do my best to not spray and pray, seeing as I now know that I probably wouldn't hit if that were what I was doing.

[WearzManySkins]

Like I said I have no idea if those reports were true, if they did mount it I'm sure it was just the weapon and not the whole radar and so forth.

TDT?

TDT was a system/method of aiming the Mk 86 (GFCS) Gun Fire Control System Mark 45 5 inch gun mounts. Normally the Mk 86 system took care of all the firing solutions for the ship, the TDT was a backup system in case the Mk 86 system was down.

It is/was a device that you mounted a set of binoculars to, and looked thru the binoculars, at each hand you had a control with buttons. When the buttons were activated the firing solution was calculated and the guns laid to bear on that target. You could fire the Mk 45 5 inch guns from the TDT.

The mod allowed the CIWS system to be fired and aimed the same way as the Mk 45 gun mounts. But using the TDT and CIWS you had to wear two layers of hearing protection, ie yellow sponges and mickey mouse ears. The TDT was mounted amid ships so the 5 inch guns did not much hearing issues, but the CIWS mounts were alot closer.

As for waste of ammo..... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif) Your husband must not have heard of the results of "Puff The Magic Dragon" in Viet Nam, or the Spooky gunships now the Spectre Gunships.

That is why the Bushmaster and minguns would be ideal for protecting the gates, no radars etc. The 30-40 mm shells would take care of most vehicles armored or not, tanks I think they would wear there way in eventually. But the factions over there have yet to have used any tanks against facilities. With the ATGM systems available tanks would not be much of a issue.

@Fix-it
Fired at incoming mortar shells etc? maybe you are thinking of counter battery radar/gun system?

WMS

[PBTHHHHT]

@Fix-it
Fired at incoming mortar shells etc? maybe you are thinking of counter battery radar/gun system?

Yeah, they modded a CIWS, phalanx, to shoot down mortars and the like from what I've seen, a friend of mine was a Raytheon engineer who worked on the software to allow for it to work on land and he mentioned to me about that. Pretty cool.

[WearzManySkins]

Yeah, they modded a CIWS, phalanx, to shoot down mortars and the like from what I've seen, a friend of mine was a Raytheon engineer who worked on the software to allow for it to work on land and he mentioned to me about that. Pretty cool.

Well they would not have to have modded it much at all. Since part of the testing was firing at 8 inch artillery rounds being fired over a CIWS that was barge mounted. It fired at them as incoming and outgoing. Recovered inert shells were most interesting, solid steel shells with the front and rear portions chewed off.

Typically you had to "break engage" when firing or CIWS kept firing at the pieces of the destroyed target, still inbound.

But again the MilThink process is, lets spend more money because we can. The only issues I can see if the limited amount of ammunition carried and the extreme rate of fire. IIRC if timed correctly it could fire at five targets before having to be reloaded, but was with ~990 round magazine and 20 mm projos.

My issue is that it has or had no B-Scan displays, if it was activated in a mode, you came within the engagement envelope, boom you got shot at.

Firing at incoming mortar and rockets from a land based version, well I hope there are a large battery of CIWS weapons to fire, relying on the mortars and rockets to come in singles and twos, is not something I would like to have.

WMS

[Fix-it]

I'm just glad they are replacing them with a missle-based system that can engage multiple targets simultaneously.

[WearzManySkins]

I'm just glad they are replacing them with a missle-based system that can engage multiple targets simultaneously.

*shudders*
Remember a Elephant is a mouse built to military standards.
Well maybe they are using or going to be using the RAM system or something like a FOG-M. But it sounds like the missiles will be fired from a box launcher, which limits the number of targets engaged.

WMS

[WearzManySkins]

here is link
CIWS in IRAQ link
EQ-36 Radar
LCMR Link

Just remember the Sergeant York Air Defense System aka the "Gun that could not shoot straight".

WMS

[Fix-it]

*shudders*
Remember a Elephant is a mouse built to military standards.
Well maybe they are using or going to be using the RAM system or something like a FOG-M. But it sounds like the missiles will be fired from a box launcher, which limits the number of targets engaged.

WMS

limits the total number, yes. but the CIWS doesn't exactly have endless amounts of ammunition either.

[Snow_Fox]

DLN's right, her husband, normally a pretty mellow guy, would make lots of noise about full auto fire.

I've only fired hand guns and bolt action rifles. I've seen a BAR and Chauchat fired.

[kzt]

which is why grenades are steel wire wrapped around a charge or brittle cases [rather than being big bombs], why bullets are generally small calibre [else everyone would being using shotguns], why the development for lasers was to blind [rather than turn people into charred corpses], etc

No, the steel wire produces a cloud of lethal fragments that will predictable kill everyone close and doesn't produce pieces that go hundred of yards like the old pineapple. Having someone put 40 holes in your body tends to be quite lethal.

Small calibers are because you can carry more ammo, and they actually do more damage than larger FMJ bullets. Look a the wound tracks someday. Shotguns are great, as long as you can assure the bad guys are all within 35 meters. At 250 meters you might as well just throw the shells at him.

Low power lasers are easier to make than high powered lasers. Nobody has a field reliable sold state 150 KW laser. The Chinese have had eye poppers for years.

[Ed_209a]

Small calibers are because you can carry more ammo, and they actually do more damage than larger FMJ bullets. Look a the wound tracks someday.

Big bullets (ie 7.62mm NATO) and small bullets (ie 5.56mm NATO) do similar damage if you assume human targets and military FMJ ammo. At typical engagement ranges, under 200m, 7.62 FMJ has the mass and speed to go straight through a person with barely a wobble. 5.56mm FMJ will typically tumble after a few inches travel through flesh. This makes the FMJ act more like a hollowpoint. It frequently breaks into several pieces too.

If you assume expanding ammo, like in big game hunting, there is no comparison, because expanding ammo lets the larger 7.62 round use more of it's energy damaging the target.

Low power lasers are easier to make than high powered lasers. Nobody has a field reliable sold state 150 KW laser. The Chinese have had eye poppers for years.

It will be a sad day for infantry when someone does have a 150kW laser suitable for battle. I imagine a computer-controlled laser firing a hundred 150kW pulses a second into a mass of infantry... Very few misses, plenty of steam explosion injuries to go around. That is what really happens when you are hit by a laser. No clean, cauterized holes. Your body's water turns to steam faster than the steam can escape, and it is like setting off a firecracker in your belly button...

[WearzManySkins]

Seems IRL there is a movement towards heavier rounds for Assault Rifles

Barrett M468 Assault Rifle Wiki
Barrett M468 YouTube Video
6.5 mm Grendel Link

WMS

[Wounded Ronin]

It will be a sad day for infantry when someone does have a 150kW laser suitable for battle. I imagine a computer-controlled laser firing a hundred 150kW pulses a second into a mass of infantry... Very few misses, plenty of steam explosion injuries to go around. That is what really happens when you are hit by a laser. No clean, cauterized holes. Your body's water turns to steam faster than the steam can escape, and it is like setting off a firecracker in your belly button...

That would make the Geneva Convention's ban on hollow point rounds seem really quaint by comparison.

[Arethusa]

That would make the Geneva Convention's ban on hollow point rounds seem really quaint by comparison.

Condi? Is that you?

[WearzManySkins]

It will be a sad day for infantry when someone does have a 150kW laser suitable for battle. I imagine a computer-controlled laser firing a hundred 150kW pulses a second into a mass of infantry... Very few misses, plenty of steam explosion injuries to go around. That is what really happens when you are hit by a laser. No clean, cauterized holes. Your body's water turns to steam faster than the steam can escape, and it is like setting off a firecracker in your belly button...

Well hate to rain on your parade, but the steam will keep the laser from penetrating that deep. That is why in Surgical use of YAG/Dye lasers their is a device called a smoke evacuator.

You would get surface steam explosions but no deep penetration. Also the cutting edge in todays lasers is not solid state, more along the lines of very toxic chemicals.

WMS

[Wounded Ronin]

Condi? Is that you?

I'm Rumsfeld, dumbass. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/rotfl.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/cyber.gif)

[Shrike30]

Having seen wounds from both 5.56 and 7.62, I'm going to argue on the side of 7.62 doing a hell of a lot more damage in a "single round hits a dude" kind of situation. 5.56, if it has enough velocity when it hits, can fragment and do similar amounts of damage... but frequently it doesn't, be it because it's being fired from a short-barrel weapon or because the target was engaged at a few hundred yards. It's a lot easier to use 5.56 in a firefight, however... lighter guns, less recoil, more rounds in the mag, more controllable weapon.

I think there's going to be a compromise somewhere in the middle, that'll work out pretty well. Some of the experimentation in the 6.5-6.8mm range built on an AR-15 platform seems the most promising. Not a massive increase in recoil, similar magazine capacities, and the slugs are heavy enough to penetrate cover and stay intact better than 5.56.

[MYST1C]

After many years of tinkeing with them in video games and RPGs today I went to a range and rented some automatic weapons and used them. I operated a Thompson M1A1, a M2 carbine,and a HK G3.

I thought I'd join the gun tales - my experience all comes from my army time (10 months in the German Bundeswehr as a conscript, left as Private 1st Class).

• P1 - Known to civillians as Walther P38 (slightly modified though, the P1 is part aluminum where the P38 is all steel). The grip fits your hand really well as it is quite slim (single-stack 8 rounds magazine). Loads of recoil - then again, it does fire 9mm NATO rounds and weighs only 890g (1.96lbs) fully loaded.
• P8 - Known to civillians as Heckler & Koch USP 9mm. More compact but heavier than P1 (950g, 2.09lbs), bigger magazine (15 rounds). Good fit despite wider grip. Less recoil (more total weight, different mechanism) with the same ammo (9mm NATO).
• MP2A1 - Known to civillians as IMI Uzi (with folding metal buttstock). Unfortunately, I never got to fire it in full-auto but I can say this: There is no (felt) recoil when firing single 9mm rounds from a gun weighing 4.5kg (9.92lbs)!
• G3A3 - Heckler & Koch G3. I never fired it in full auto but the kick it gives in semi is enough to convince me that it'd be totally uncontrollable. For this reason the British L1A1 (license-build of the Belgian FN FAL), firing the same 7.62mm NATO ammo, never had a full-auto mode.

And now for some heavy stuff - I used to be gunner on a Leopard 1A5 MBT so I didn't play with handguns only. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif)

• L7A3 - 105mm (4.13") main cannon. Fully stabilized, with laser range-finder, firing APFSDS-T (Armor Piercing Fin-Stabilized Discarding Sabot - Tracer) and HEAT-T (High Explosive Anti-Tank - Tracer) ammo. Really fun to shoot! The whole tank shakes and the gun recoils about 28cm (11"). What I found interesting: While the cannon causes a quite enormous "BOOM" inside the tank you hardly notice it. To me the metallic sound of the spent casing dropping out of the breech was more audible.
• MG3 - coaxial 7.62mm NATO machine gun, derivative of WW2's MG42. Using that gun was like playing a video game! No recoil, just find the target, measure the distance and pull the trigger. When firing at distances greater than 800m you could actually count the sconds till impact and see the arched ballistic flight path of the tracers really well.