Ace42X
07-31-2006, 09:50 PM
http://www.guardian.co.uk/military/story/0,,1834481,00.html
The UK military once again demonstrating their superior prowess in battle...
The gunner - who was just 20 metres from Sgt Roberts - had not been warned that his weapon was only accurate over distances of more than 200 metres.
Gunners are now told that rounds from the weapon veer off to the left at closer range but the report said all tank crew members must be warned of the risks.
That makes no sense to me whatsoever. "The gun is only accurate at long distances" "the bullets veer off at closer range."
So, like, the bullets veer back on target as they get further away?!?
I am assuming the guns are not mounted centrally on the vehicle, and the targeting system is, or is more so, so the bullets do not "veer off target" but start their trajectory from further to the sides of the crosshairs while "veering" towards the target, and at closer range the bullets haven't had a chance to intersect with the line-of-sight. In which case, Jesus, what sloppy reporting. No wonder there are so many conspiracy theorists about.
Anyway, back on topic, urm "with friends like these..." And "How can they expect to descriminate between hostile and non-hostile targets if they can't even avoid the friendly they were deliberately trying to protect?" etc etc.
Shouldn't be over there, and that sort of thing.
The UK military once again demonstrating their superior prowess in battle...
The gunner - who was just 20 metres from Sgt Roberts - had not been warned that his weapon was only accurate over distances of more than 200 metres.
Gunners are now told that rounds from the weapon veer off to the left at closer range but the report said all tank crew members must be warned of the risks.
That makes no sense to me whatsoever. "The gun is only accurate at long distances" "the bullets veer off at closer range."
So, like, the bullets veer back on target as they get further away?!?
I am assuming the guns are not mounted centrally on the vehicle, and the targeting system is, or is more so, so the bullets do not "veer off target" but start their trajectory from further to the sides of the crosshairs while "veering" towards the target, and at closer range the bullets haven't had a chance to intersect with the line-of-sight. In which case, Jesus, what sloppy reporting. No wonder there are so many conspiracy theorists about.
Anyway, back on topic, urm "with friends like these..." And "How can they expect to descriminate between hostile and non-hostile targets if they can't even avoid the friendly they were deliberately trying to protect?" etc etc.
Shouldn't be over there, and that sort of thing.