Furballers Vs. Toolshedders

[ColKLink]

Ty laz, i have givin class's to boot's (boot bein young fresh marine)  on the
'crew served weapon" ..its maximux EFFECTIVE range was 2000yrds in 19801984. although you might get lucky from further, if n panic situations. ty I understand the ballistics would be different with a 400mile an hr headwind i.e. aircraft. They are steller weapons if used within itsrange, they make things melt before your eyes. I e, sand bags,:(  carry on.)

[lazs2]

beet... if you think the navy is saying that 6,000 lbs of energy is not "effective" or the effective range (accuracy?  power?)  is 333 yards.... then yes... I am calling the navy guy a liar or a fool.  

maybe you feel that colklink is a liar or a fool?

you seem to be saying that you don't really care how realistic the gunnery model is so long as they can make it so bad that no one ever get's better than the WWII airmen and their hour or two of actually shooting practice/experiance...and the fear and and and...  silly...

At a 1000 yards a .50 will smash an engine block to pieces (as it passes through the skin and the oil/fuel lines or whatever other soft crap it hits on the way)

even in a 6 year old thread I was consistent.... I was saying that the guns were not effective enough in some long forgotten (by all but you) version of WB.... as I recall.... they changed it too.

anyhow... I guess this all has to do with how us mean old furballers aren't using realistic modeling either...

sure seems like we are using some of the best possible to me...  We aren't flying a 30 crew three plane box by ourselves and manning every gun with a gods eye view... apparently that is very realistic to you or...

as realistic as the occassional ping from 1000 yards?

lazs
Public Relations Officer for the BK's

[AKFokerFoder+]

Originally posted by lazs2

as for the navy report... It is simply wrong.   A .50 is extremely effective out to 2000 yards... the amount of energy is many times that of a .30 out to 1000 yards even when you measure the .30 at the muzzle (that's point blank to you).   The navy is wrong if what you state is true.   "effective"? how is having thounsands of pounds of energy (enough to smash an engine block) at 1000 yards not "effective"?


lazs
Public Relations Officer for the BK's

Well if my memory serves me right, (and too often it doesn't) Ma Duece (the US 50 cal M2 machine gun) was listed in the books as being effective out to 1800 yards.  This was of course using the ground mounted tripod mount.

Now put the M2 in a ring mount on a 6X6 truck, and move it down the road at about 45 mph, and the effective range is another story.  I have never fired a 50 cal from a airplane, but I have fired one from a truck.  I am a crack shot with a rifle, but hitting anything man ized past about 70 yards from a bouncing truck is extremely lucky.  The 50 has a slow rate of fire, (adjustable from I think around 250 rpm to close to 500 rpm, again it's been a long time) and you just shoot all around things.  Anything you hit, well, as a Marine Gunnery Sgt once described it as being "like a truck hitting a puppy."

My point being that the effective range of any weapon depends greatly on the stability of the gun platform.

I seriously doubt that the individual 50s on a buff were effective beyond 300 yards.  Now a whole box of buffs, say 8 buffs is 80 guns, all firing at some poor sot in a 109, that could be say half the guns coming to bear would be 40 guns at say 500 rpm is 20,000 rpm flying out there.  It would be like flying through a rainstorm and hoping not to get wet.

Note that aircraft 50s are set to fire at a higher rate than the ground due to short burst of airplane guns vrs lots of sustained fire by ground guns.  Our M2s we mostly to be used against ground troops by ground troops.  You need to reduce the rate of fire to conserve ammo, and to reduce barrrel heating during sustained fights.  Who knows, the modern 50s may be set for a lot more these days.

And last but not least, I just have a gut feeling that US 50 cals were a lot deadlier in WWII than they are in AH2.  But how do you prove that?

Due note that the US 50 cal is much more powerful than the German or Russian 12.7mms

[beet1e]

Originally posted by lazs2
beet... if you think the navy is saying that 6,000 lbs of energy is not "effective" or the effective range (accuracy?  power?)  is 333 yards.... then yes... I am calling the navy guy a liar or a fool.  

Alrighty then. Let it be noted that Lazs thinks the US Navy is a liar or a fool.

As for your consistency, first you say that the .50cal is effective to 2000yds (despite the fact that the USN 1944 manual said it was not accurate beyond 333yds) but in another thread some years earlier you said

I have allways gotten in close to kill and even ol' 350 kill Eric felt cannon only worked at point blank range and he had the film to prove it. Hopefully all guns in WB will be a guaranteed kill or cripple with a 2 sec burst on target when under 100 yards.

Hi DS - Mr. Realism personified.

[AKFokerFoder+]

Here is a site that seems somewhat respectable.  It is supposed to be for US Army NCO training.

M2 machine gun

[ColKLink]

i beg to say that had to be a typo of 3333 yrds, becouse a crew served is effective to 2000 METERS, although i may have said yrds, by gosh think of a .50 cal only reaching 333yrds, lol comon sense comes into play here, if you have ever fired or seen a .50 fired, it travels 333yrds, in a big hurry, and then alot more, LOL think about it.

[DipStick]

Muzzle Velocity > 3,050 ft per sec = 1016 yards in 1 second.

Maximum Range > 6,764 meters =  7,397 yards = 22191 feet.

Maximum Effective Range > 1500 to 1,830 meters = 1,640 to 2,001 yards = 4,920 to 6003 feet.

Although the .50 cal from WWII may not have been as good as todays M2, it would've been close.

Seems to me a few hits from 800 to 900 yards would not be impossible, eh?

[ColKLink]

you are exactly correct sir.

[beet1e]

Originally posted by DipStick
Seems to me a few hits from 800 to 900 yards would not be impossible, eh?

Correct.

pssst... dispersion!

[beet1e]

Originally posted by AKFokerFoder+
Here is a site that seems somewhat respectable.  It is supposed to be for US Army NCO training.

M2 machine gun

I had a look at that site - the .50cal used by the army.

support the infantryman in both attack and defense, destroy lightly armored vehicles, provide protection for motor movements, vehicle parks and train bivouacs, and reconnaissance by fire on suspected enemy positions

- in other words, used on the ground, ie. slow moving targets, NO buffeting due to air turbulence, NO 400mph headwind, NO rounds fired under G forces, NO dispersion due to flexing of wings... so a lot easier to get shots on target. The data looked interesting though.

[ColKLink]

if your talking disperstion within 333yrds with a .50 cal, it ain't gonna be much if any, i can throw a rock accuratly 100 yrds, man, common sense, or go to a range and see for yourself, 333, yrds to a .50 cal is nothing. common sense, 333 yrds IS NOT VERY FAR, that sounds redicules, and don't whisper, if you have something to say speak up, as you were,

[Flayed1]

This thread is just sad now...... It keeps going and going and...... Well you know....     Let it die I say just let it DIE!!!!!  Or not. lol

[ColKLink]

as of oct 15, 2005 max effective range of .50 cal heavy machine gun is 1830 METERS w/ rapid fire, it is effective at 1500 METERS, for 1 shot. I dunno you math fellers convert it, and show him how little 333 yrds is to the .50 , under any circumstances its gonna fire effectively at 333 YRDS. C'mon man. common sense im screamin as you be.

[Schatzi]

Common sense?? HERE???????

[ColKLink]

yeah, that true shatzi, what am I thinking ? LoL:confused: