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

RE: [SG2] AGL vs SAW

From: Ryan M Gill <rmgill@m...>
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2003 16:10:57 -0500
Subject: RE: [SG2] AGL vs SAW

At 1:58 PM -0700 10/28/03, B Lin wrote:
>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.

For pure HE function, you could probably dispense with the min arming 
distance when fighting from Power Armor. I can also see some nasty 
special purpose rounds (flechettes, gas, foam, chemical, irritant, 
sticky, etc) in the larger Grenade type rounds.
- Ryan Montieth Gill			     '01 Honda Insight -
-			    '85 CB700S -
-		 '76 Chevy Monte Carlo -
-		       '72 Honda CB750 -
-				      '60 Daimler FV701H Mk2/3 -
-				   '42 Daimler Scout Car Mk II -
-	      I speak not for CNN, nor they for me	       -
-	 The director of Home Security encourages you to       - 
-	   turn in your neighbor & spy on your friends.        -
-  C&R-FFL  /  Protect your electronic rights!	  \ EFF-ACLU   -
- SAF & NRA/  Join the EFF!   \ DoD #0780 -	


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