Alan Siegrist wrote: > > At this far distance, though, we do not know if the helicopter was also > firing its guns because the muzzle flashes would probably be too faint to be > seen. It is however unlikely that they would be firing guns at the same time > as they were deploying anti-missile countermeasures and taking evasive > action because this would degrade accuracy.
As a former soldier and pilot, I have to disagree with you in this point. Accuracy in firing guns is normally considered for sharpshooters and in some degree for artillery, but firing "bursts" with automatic weapons is done mainly to keep others from firing at you, to try to demoralise the enemy, and to keep up the morals of your own troop. "Accuracy" of automatic weapons is an oxymoron like "military intelligence". With hand-held weapons, even 25 m is already far away, and with mounted machine guns, a good gunner may be able to hit targets at 100 m, while helicopter-mounted machine guns are only effective for "suppressive fire" or against massed targets. I forgot the statistics, but I remember that it takes several thousand rounds to kill one soldier. If the soldiers in hte helicopter considered themselves as under attack, it is most probable that they woule be firing. Roland --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Persons posting messages to not_honyaku assume all responsibility for their messages. The list owner does not review messages prior to posting, and accepts no responsibility for the content of messages posted. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
