Professional Soldiers ® - View Single Post - Indirect fire VS direct fire (M240, M2, M249, ETC. ETC.)

blue02hd · 11-18-2008, 06:06

I saw this in practice as a PVT in the RGR Bn. We were training in Yakima, and the plunging fire theory was actually tested with a company's compliment of 240's. I remember seeing the guns lined up and super elevated about 2 km's away from our obj that we built. I was in a line platoon, so I couldn't give you any more details on how they set it up. I will say that this was the one and only time I ever saw this, and for good reason. The ammo requirements were insane, the accuracy was very limited, and the effects on the target were minimal.

Kind of a neat story though, but not as cool as the Chechyans using RPG's in plunging fire mode against the Russians at Grozny.

Anyhow,,,,,

11-18-2008, 06:06	#12
blue02hd Quiet Professional Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Near the flag pole Posts: 1,168	I saw this in practice as a PVT in the RGR Bn. We were training in Yakima, and the plunging fire theory was actually tested with a company's compliment of 240's. I remember seeing the guns lined up and super elevated about 2 km's away from our obj that we built. I was in a line platoon, so I couldn't give you any more details on how they set it up. I will say that this was the one and only time I ever saw this, and for good reason. The ammo requirements were insane, the accuracy was very limited, and the effects on the target were minimal. Kind of a neat story though, but not as cool as the Chechyans using RPG's in plunging fire mode against the Russians at Grozny. Anyhow,,,,, __________________ "It's not my aim, it's these damn crooked bullets,,," Verified Tax Payer and Future Sex Symbol Last edited by blue02hd; 11-18-2008 at 06:09.
blue02hd is offline