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

Noslack71 · 11-19-2008, 20:14

I recall the term "beaten zone or beating zone" used to describe indirect fire from an M-60, or machine gun. It was indirect, plunging fire used either for recon by fire, or if we had spotted some folks that were in range, but not from direct fire weapons, and we could not get a fire mission quick enough. I seem to remember he would traverse the area, and it appeared from the tracers that he got ok coverage in a small area arcing or lobbing the rounds in. The only other time I saw this used was a Quad .50 worked over a valley below a small fire base I was on. They had literally a ton of ammo in the bunkers, and it impressed me.

Noslack

11-19-2008, 20:14	#23
Noslack71 Guerrilla Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: East Coast Posts: 116	Beaten Zone or Beating Zone I recall the term "beaten zone or beating zone" used to describe indirect fire from an M-60, or machine gun. It was indirect, plunging fire used either for recon by fire, or if we had spotted some folks that were in range, but not from direct fire weapons, and we could not get a fire mission quick enough. I seem to remember he would traverse the area, and it appeared from the tracers that he got ok coverage in a small area arcing or lobbing the rounds in. The only other time I saw this used was a Quad .50 worked over a valley below a small fire base I was on. They had literally a ton of ammo in the bunkers, and it impressed me. Noslack
Noslack71 is offline