Prev: RE: [SG2] AGL vs SAW Next: RE: [SG2] AGL vs SAW

RE: [SG2] AGL vs SAW

From: "B Lin" <lin@r...>
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2003 13:58:03 -0700
Subject: RE: [SG2] AGL vs SAW

I would think the SAW is more generally useful - for instance it is
single-man portable.  From the stats of the AGL, just the weapon itself
is 77 lbs, not counting mount, tripod or ammo.	IIRC the SAW is just 1/2
that weight, and so can be carried by a single man.

You can carry more ammo for the SAW.  You probably get 30 AGL round per
can and it's looks larger than a similar ammo can for the SAW.	In
addition, the SAW is useful at ALL ranges.  If the AGL is similar to the
standard GL grenades, then minimum distance is about 45 feet (or however
many rotations of the shell in flight (7?)) before it arms.  If it hits
you at 20 feet, you are going to have a nasty bruise, but aren't going
to be tomato sauce spread over the landscape.  The SAW on the other hand
will turn you into swiss cheese at that range.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: []
> Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 1:42 PM
> To:
> Subject: RE: [SG2] AGL vs SAW
> Okay, the AGL is wonderful -- for what circumstances would 
> you prefer a SAW?
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> mail2web - Check your email from the web at
> .

Prev: RE: [SG2] AGL vs SAW Next: RE: [SG2] AGL vs SAW