answer my question
good luck!
Lol! I reckon he’s Alistair Cambell in disguise! :lol: :shock: :lol: :shock:
[quote=“IRONMAN”]
Sorry, but I go with the manufacturer on that one. They say 500m, so I go with them. I think they know more about it that either you or I do.
There you go with section fire again. It’s simple. Assult rifles are not effective at 600m. Just because 100 men can shoot one at a something 100m beyond thier effective maximum range does not make the weapon effective at that range. :roll:[/quote]
I would like to point out that the manufacturer tells us the effective range of one weapon. Now, when the weapon is being used on a two way range, it is not normally being used on its own. This is where section fire comes into it.
Let me try to explain in simple terms for the hard of thinking.
One man firing a defined number of shots from his weapon at a target 600m away has a (relatively) low chance of hitting it (for arguments sake, let us say 15% - although I think that is low).
8 men, assuming they are all of the same standard at shooting, firing the same number of rounds each, are therefore 8 times more likely to hit the target.
I will agree that it uses up more ammunition but with the round still travelling very fast at 600m, it is enough to wound if not kill.
Therefore the assault rifle is effective at 600m when used in section fire.
It is also effective even if it does not hit the target. Have you ever heard of suppressing fire? They must have that in the games you play.
Ask the manufacturer. They say it’s not effective at 600m.
They didn’t use the M1 Carbine at 250 yards at Chosin that I am aware of. Most of the fighting with that weapon at Chosin was done at up to 1500-200 yards maximum from what I have been told by vets.
Once more my Dense One, shooting 1 thousand billion of them at the enemy does not increase the effectiveness of the weapon itself. The debate was that someone stated that they could shoot a man with an assult rifle at 600m with open sights, and I and Pretorian proved that this is so unlikely as to be unplausible. Then the debate went to “assult rifles are effective at 600m”, which they are not, so states the manufacturer.
If you don’t like that, bitch at the manufacturer, not me. I don’t make the weapon kiddo.
I could care less about “section fire”. Section fire does not change the ballistics of the weapon.
Let me know when you can hit a man at 600m with an assult rifle using open sights. I want to see it.
Ask the manufacturer. They say it’s not effective at 600m.
They didn’t use the M1 Carbine at 250 yards at Chosin that I am aware of. Most of the fighting with that weapon at Chosin was done at up to 1500-200 yards maximum from what I have been told by vets.[/quote]
Presuming that Ale being a ballistics geek will have read that from a ballistics almanac I presume the figures he has given you are those of the manufacturer!
You are confusing cartridges with weapons, the weapons is effective to 500 metres in individual fire - is that who Ale should be asking?
Ale has told you how effective the cartridge is at that range.
and has asked for you to answer his question as you are the only one with the answers - you smartie!
what happens at metre 501,
If Ale stands 500 metres from you
and I stand 501 metres from Erwin
and you both shoot, do we both die?
presuming they have simplifed an SA80 so that it is as easy to fire as a left click on a mouse button of course!
Bluffcove, I will not debate with anyone who claims:
You are a little kid who knows nothing and constantly insults. You have nothing to offer here except ridiculous claims. Post whatever you like. I won’t respond to it.
I could care less about “section fire”. Section fire does not change the balistics of the weapon
do you mean “I could not” I presume you did
You cared alot about it before I wonder why it has fallen from favour!
weapons dont have ballistics cartridges do as far as I know, but Im not an arrse so if I am wrong I will retract that.
Section fire is effective at 600, Im not even trying to convince you I jjust like hearing you deny it!
oh and tell me about metre 501, where it all goes into bullet time and bullets stop being dangerous!!!
Once more my Dense One, shooting 1 thousand billion of them at the enemy does not increase the effectiveness of the weapon itself. The debate that someone stated the weapon was effective at 600m, and it is not.
If you don’t like that, bitch at the manufacturer, not me. I don’t make the weapon kiddo.[/quote]
You are damned right you don’t make the weapon. I do, however use it.
Read my posts properly. I say that the weapon is effective in section fire. Not on its own. As you set so much store by what vets say, I would have thought you might listen to me as I am a veteran of the Iraqi war and have used this particular assault rifle more times than you have had Big Macs!
Effectiveness is, by definition, the ability of the weapon, when used correctly (in section fire) to put the enemy either down on his arse for good or (in the part of my post you have missed out) as suppressing fire.
Hi tubby, did you ever get to lug a cannon into battle?
tell me about it, is it F9?
So you concede that assult rifles are not effective at 600m?
Now if soldiers only used assult rifles for section fire at 600m…
IRONINGMAN the section fire practice we refer to is what happens when 8 infantry men or a “section” all use their assault rifles to fire together at a target up to 600 metres away.
it happens its real its killed more people than you have its a big evil nasty fact that wont go away.
DEAL
WITH
IT
Yes, very handy if your detachment happens to have a GPMG, or a LSW. How about if your soldiers only have SA80A2s with iron sights? Hypothetical you say? No. Been there.
Edit: let the record show that ironingwalt’s post was as I quoted when I posted.
More importantly he seems to have removed cannon from his post!
Damn I was really looking forward to handing that to a squaddy and saying, “its got a handle on it of course its man portable”
more importantly what can I put in the F9 slot now IRONINGMAN
Gawd everyone knows cannon is fired from one hip and is on Ctrl+Shift+F12!
Hmm no response from ironingwalt…
Make of that what you will.
Now I wonder why you ignored my post at
http://www.ww2incolor.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=60&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=240
…that proved your claims about the M1 Carbine were false. No comment eh? Nothing to argue about there eh?
Let’s recap shall we?
“I can make out the leg of a man with unaided eyes at 600m.”
No. You cannot.
“The M1 Carbine uses pistol ammunition.”
No, it does not. The ammo fits no pistol in the US WWII arsenal.
“The M1 Carbine was not used to kill numerous men at Chosin.”
Yes, it cetrtainly was.
“The M1 Carbine was not used as an assult rifle in WWII and Korea.”
Yes, it most certainly was, quite extensively.
“Assult rifles are effective at 600m.”
No. They are not.
“Assult rifles are used for section fire at 600m.”
No, they are not. Not in any army in the world. You are confusing AR’s with MG’s.
Ironing Man you are confusing the real world with PC games. Section fire at 600m is an effective way of limiting your enemies movement while calling in support , ask your dad or someone who has been at the pointy end like Bluff or Tubby, you numpty
Ironman wrote :
[i]“NATO) The maximum distance at which a weapon may be expected to be accurate and achieve the desired result.”
If the result is to kill a man by penetration, and the effective range of an AR is 500m, then at 600m an AR is not going to do that effectively. I mean, yea you could get lucky and hit a man in the head or throat if you fired 5,000 rounds in his direction at 600m with an AR. lOl One might actually hit him there! [/i]
And if the desired result is to keep the enemy’s head down while you manoeuvre?
When you hunt, I can’t think of any situation where you might want to scare the game away, agreed?
However, in combat, there are many occasions where keeping the enemy quiescent and unable to effectively target YOU is a result much to be desired.
THIS is where section fire is effective at 600yards, and yes, you will occasionally “get lucky”, and make a kill, even although this is not always the “desired result”.
I have indeed spoken to my father about it. I told him that someone in a forum contends that assult rifles are effective at 600m. She shook his head as he set his coffee mug down and said plainly, “No. You couldn’t hit a thing with one at that range. And if you did, you probably would not do much damage either.”
Then he took another sip of his coffee.
Who said section fire cannot be effective? Not me. What I said is assult rifles are not used for section fire at 600m. And they are not. Why do you suppose that is my misguided friend? It’s because if the effective maximum range of a weapon is 500m, at 600 meters the weapon is no longer effective, and bullet drop at that range would be horrendous and completely impossible to estimate. Now if you were shooting at a man on a large, open dirt field where you could see the bullets making a puff of dirt 20 meters in front of the enemy, and had a spotter working for you with a sp[otting scope so he could actually see those little puffs of dirt…
But that’s not the real world, is it?