-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
At 04:04 AM 6/14/00 -0400, you wrote:
>Matt:
>>I just got around to reading the print article in the July 2000
>>issue of Wired "Welcome to Sealand, Now Bugger Off" By Simson
>>Garfinkel (pages 230-239). Here is a quote: "The Sealanders are
>>arming themselves for self-defense: Plans call for "50-caliber
>>heavy machine guns, 5.56 automatic rifles, and 12-gauge shotguns."
>
> I'd suggest to them (those that read this anyway) that they
>supplement those with Glocks in a .45 for inside work. Why
>specifically Glock? Good guns, and pretty resistant to corrosion.
>
>
>>Several points come to mind as I read this. First and foremost,
>>while the .50 caliber machine guns are fine weapons, I don't think
>>it is a smart idea to install weaponry that could be perceived to
>>be a threat to commercial fishing or low flying aircraft. If the
>>UK needed an excuse to shut down Havenco's operations, the .50s
>>would be a great one.
>>
>>Secondly, the twelve gauge shotgun is a top choice for home
>>protection and police work due to lack of penetration. The shotgun
>>works great on thin skinned game 35 yards and closer (And yes I
>>know you can use slugs or sabots, but better choices exist).
>>Shooting from atop a concrete pad in the North sea with a shotgun
>>is
>
> I'd imagine that the .50 is to keep off the
>boats/helocopters, and the .223/12 gauges are for more up close and
>personal work.
>
> While the .308 is an excellent choice for a full on battle
>rifle, the .223 is *much* better close up--you get over penetration
>less often (at least according to one of the gents from the
>International Wound Ballistics Assoc.), and the rifles based on it
>are much lighter and easier to handle in a structure.
>
>
>>ridiculous. The 5.56mm is somewhat better, but the round is
>>designed for anti-personal use in short to medium ranges. Their
>>threat model, I assume, is some sort of sea borne or light air
>>craft marauder. A better choice would be scoped .308 (7.62 NATO)
>>rifles with armour piercing ammo. Surplus black tipped AP with a
>>tungsten carbide core
>
> That's what (I'd assume) the .50s are for.
>
> Unless you're going to waste a *lot* of time on training and
>hiring Mercs who have the experience, those .50s aren't going to do
>you a lot of good anyway.
>
I suspect you're right about the intended use of the .50 cal. I
haven't read the article start to finish yet, but I did catch an
interesting shot of the CEO being towed aboard. That is some moat
they have. They probably figure they don't need much that can take
out a vehicle. Keep the copters off, yes. Stop a battleship? No.
Just keep the boarders from walking away under thier own power. It
looks like you pretty much need someone on the inside to get in
conveniently, and anything that those weapons couldn't threaten could
probably take out the whole platform from 12 miles off anyway.
Hence, shotguns and rifles intended more for anti-personel uses.
Just my uninformed opinion.
Good luck,
Sean Roach
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.1 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>
iQA/AwUBOUdLm5HDoiHtqFDZEQLqSACfQ4AL6NnQpfEiG0DxPDymflYYMyUAn1wC
Uz+8wQpJp/hWgx4nc/7OsCob
=Vx56
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
