Re: Ballistics

[Gurth <Gurth@xxxxxxxxx>]

According to Brian McDonald, on Sun, 21 Jul 2002 the word on the street was...

> i believe it was a morale thing more than any expectation of actual
> damage.  they guys had bolt action rifles so the number of rounds in the
> air would have been tiny by modern standards.

True, though they also had light and sustained-fire machine guns which had 
about the same ROF as their modern equivalents -- if you can aim a MAG 
skyward, then you can do the same with a Lewis gun.

But, like Rob Hansen said, the problem isn't hitting the aircraft, as WWI 
aircraft were slow and flew low for ground attacks (because they usually 
strafed the target with their MGs). The problem is actually causing enough 
damage to down the aircraft -- there's no all that much you can destroy on a 
WWI aircraft with a couple of bullet hits, unless you get lucky and hit the 
pilot, the fuel tank, or something similar. I think the main effect of having 
a platoon of infantry with bolt-action rifles and a couple of LMGs fire into 
the air, would be to make the pilot pull up and look for another target.

-- 
Gurth@xs4all.nl        -        http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
  Little ever changes, if anything at all
->       NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso        <-
->     The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com      <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++@ UL+ P(+) L++ E W--(++) N o? K w(--) O
V? PS+ PE@ Y PGP- t@ 5++ X(+) R+++$ tv+(++) b++@ DI- D+ G+ e h! !r y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998