Orphan76
Member
I am confused about how to determining if the American Jeeps come with AAMG? Can someone please explain how the RF works?
Thanks,
Dan V
Thanks,
Dan V
This all seems bizarre to me. The AAMG is 2 FP while mounted on the jeep but when removed becomes a 4 FP medium MG and the 4 FP AAMG becomes a 6 FP heavy MG. Am I missing something or just dense in the old brainpan?I am not looking at the rules, but one is scrounged as a medium and the other as a heavy MG.
What is the reason for less FP when mounted, do you know? Harder or more awkward to service the weapon perhaps?MG when mounter on vehicles typically have less FP than their 1/2" SW equivalents.
Also the 4-FP AAMG on a Jeep is a .50-cal HMG.
Footnote 6 in Chapter D:What is the reason for less FP when mounted, do you know? Harder or more awkward to service the weapon perhaps?
Well done! Thanks!! Was feeding the hoard of felines while pondering this and didn't think to check the rules.??Footnote 6 in Chapter D:
6. 3.5 VEHICULAR MG/IFE FIRE: A vehicular MG is not given Multiple ROF capability unless it is listed as the vehicle’s MA because of the limited vision and multiple duties of its one-man crew. This is especially true of BMG/CMG armament, which is usually secondary armament and cannot even bring fire to bear without special movement of either the vehicle or the turret (which may well be a hindrance to other tasks of the vehicle with a higher priority). Similarly, although the AAMG of many tanks is often the equivalent of a MMG or HMG in terms of equipment, it is still manned by only one man—whose other duties are usually deemed more important (and less dangerous) than the manning of an exposed MG.
unless you are Brad Pitt.Footnote 6 in Chapter D:
6. 3.5 VEHICULAR MG/IFE FIRE: A vehicular MG is not given Multiple ROF capability unless it is listed as the vehicle’s MA because of the limited vision and multiple duties of its one-man crew. This is especially true of BMG/CMG armament, which is usually secondary armament and cannot even bring fire to bear without special movement of either the vehicle or the turret (which may well be a hindrance to other tasks of the vehicle with a higher priority). Similarly, although the AAMG of many tanks is often the equivalent of a MMG or HMG in terms of equipment, it is still manned by only one man—whose other duties are usually deemed more important (and less dangerous) than the manning of an exposed MG.
?????unless you are Brad Pitt.
Ever read The Haunted Tank comic book? Makes Brad look mild.unless you are Brad Pitt.
Even in reality the range and accuracy of a ground mount weapon system is usually greater and more accurate than a vehicle mounted weapon system. To illustrate this point I will use the M2 HB .50-cal. (I was looking for my old handy-dandy whiz wheel calculator here but couldn't find it. Be advised I'm going from memory here so those with hard/better data are welcomed to correct any inaccuracies):What is the reason for less FP when mounted, do you know? Harder or more awkward to service the weapon perhaps?
Damn that's probably one the best answers I've ever gotten. It's nice to get info from someone who knows his sh!t. ?????Even in reality the range and accuracy of a ground mount weapon system is usually greater and more accurate than a vehicle mounted weapon system. To illustrate this point I will use the M2 HB .50-cal. (I was looking for my old handy-dandy whiz wheel calculator here but couldn't find it. Be advised I'm going from memory here so those with hard/better data are welcomed to correct any inaccuracies):
Add in range cards and pre-mission planning for the use of the weapon in defensive postures and the disparities noted in ASL may seem a bit understated.
- The vehicle mounted M2 has a effective engagement range of around 1280m (IIRC) with an expected first round burst (6-9 rounds) accuracy of 15-25% and a sustained accuracy rate of 25-40% of rounds falling within the target area. The reason for this is kind of counter-intuitive being that one would think the vehicle pintle mount is a more stable firing platform affording a better engagement percentage, this is simply not the case. The vehicle mount system is normally fired by a operator placing the butterfly triggers about center mass of their chest, estimating range and deflection, and walking the the impacts into the target area. Because of the height of the firers eyes above the sight of the weapon (about a foot to 18") and the rise and right hand twist caused by recoil, every time he pauses in his fire the operator must again reengage the target area by estimation and bring the fall of rounds back on target. (BTW he must pause with his bursts as well, not only to reacquire the target, but to mitigate heat build up in the system).
- The Ground mount system by comparison has an effective engagement range of around 1800m (again IIRC) with a first burst accuracy of 30-60% and a sustained engagement rate of 40-80% falling within the engagement area. The reasons for this are varied. Firstly the weapon system mounted on a tripod mount is a much more stable firing platform, especially if given enough time to dig it in and set your target parameters. Reasons will include the use of a traverse and elevating mechanism attached to the gun and mount that allows the operator to make relatively minute adjustments to targeting and offers additional stability in to the firing platform which decreases re-engagement time and increases accuracy; The operator of a ground mount system sits (or is in a hole standing) with his face roughly aligned with the mounted sights of the piece and is better able to accurately assess the strike/fall of the rounds and make adjustments as necessary; The fact that a ground mount system is usually crew served and thus offers greater flexibility in ammo resupply, barrel change, or help in reducing stoppages, not to mention another set of eyes to assess targets of opportunity.
Very informative post!Even in reality the range and accuracy of a ground mount weapon system is usually greater and more accurate than a vehicle mounted weapon system. To illustrate this point I will use the M2 HB .50-cal. (I was looking for my old handy-dandy whiz wheel calculator here but couldn't find it. Be advised I'm going from memory here so those with hard/better data are welcomed to correct any inaccuracies):
Add in range cards and pre-mission planning for the use of the weapon in defensive postures and the disparities noted in ASL may seem a bit understated.
- The vehicle mounted M2 has a effective engagement range of around 1280m (IIRC) with an expected first round burst (6-9 rounds) accuracy of 15-25% and a sustained accuracy rate of 25-40% of rounds falling within the target area. The reason for this is kind of counter-intuitive being that one would think the vehicle pintle mount is a more stable firing platform affording a better engagement percentage, this is simply not the case. The vehicle mount system is normally fired by a operator placing the butterfly triggers about center mass of their chest, estimating range and deflection, and walking the the impacts into the target area. Because of the height of the firers eyes above the sight of the weapon (about a foot to 18") and the rise and right hand twist caused by recoil, every time he pauses in his fire the operator must again reengage the target area by estimation and bring the fall of rounds back on target. (BTW he must pause with his bursts as well, not only to reacquire the target, but to mitigate heat build up in the system).
- The Ground mount system by comparison has an effective engagement range of around 1800m (again IIRC) with a first burst accuracy of 30-60% and a sustained engagement rate of 40-80% falling within the engagement area. The reasons for this are varied. Firstly the weapon system mounted on a tripod mount is a much more stable firing platform, especially if given enough time to dig it in and set your target parameters. Reasons will include the use of a traverse and elevating mechanism attached to the gun and mount that allows the operator to make relatively minute adjustments to targeting and offers additional stability in to the firing platform which decreases re-engagement time and increases accuracy; The operator of a ground mount system sits (or is in a hole standing) with his face roughly aligned with the mounted sights of the piece and is better able to accurately assess the strike/fall of the rounds and make adjustments as necessary; The fact that a ground mount system is usually crew served and thus offers greater flexibility in ammo resupply, barrel change, or help in reducing stoppages, not to mention another set of eyes to assess targets of opportunity.