Prev: Re: FT Battle Scenerio Next: RE: Mines 6

RE: Mines 8 (!)

From: John Skelly <canjns@c...>
Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 12:36:33 -0400
Subject: RE: Mines 8 (!)

Now that I think about it having lanes marked was SOP for our mine
fields.  Obviously it wouldn't be marked until right before it was
needed.  If I remember correctly there was usually a dog leg in it.

Is this something not practised by Americans?

> -----Original Message-----
> From: jatkins6@ix.netcom.com [SMTP:jatkins6@ix.netcom.com]
> Sent: Friday, May 15, 1998 10:27 AM
> To:	FTGZG-L@bolton.ac.uk
> Subject:	RE: Mines 8 (!)
> 
> You wrote: 
> 
> <re: Lanes>
> 
> >What about a provision to have them only known to the layer (he said
> >layer)?  
> 
> Kinda difficult.  Have to remember, safety first.  Unless a lane is 
> clearly marked, you will have people thinking they are in the lane, 
> only to find out wrong when they trip a tripwire and send a bounding 
> fragmentation[1] mine up to wipe out their platoon.
> 
> John M. Atkinson
> [1]AKA "Bouncing Betty"  US version has lethal radius of 27 meters, 
> danger radius of 183 meters.

Prev: Re: FT Battle Scenerio Next: RE: Mines 6