Re: [SG2] AGL vs SAW

At 4:11 PM -0500 10/28/03, FlakMagnet72 wrote:
>Where I would prefer a SAW:
>
>Close-in terrain where the arming distance of the grenades (or the
possibility
>of "friendly fire") precludes using an AGL.
>
>Mobile operations without mechanized assets.  They're big, heavy, and
designed
>to fire either from a mount or tripod, so they're slow to deploy. 
Unless
>you're gonna give the AGL to a power-armored trooper, then he could
keep up
>and still fire snap-shots if that's how your PSB for powered troops
goes.

If you've got hover sleds, they'd be more portable. I'm starting to 
think that the light cav doctrine that you get with small ATVs and 
such might give you more heavy weapons in an otherwise light force.

>Missions with a high chance of non-combattants being stuck in the
crossfire.
>It's hard to really _aim_ a grenade.

OCSW is going to be better at point targets. Being able to laser 
range a target, set a detonation distance and fire to get enfilade 
bursts will be fancy and expedient.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/ocsw.htm

-- 
--
----------------------------------------------------------------
- Ryan Montieth Gill			     '01 Honda Insight -
- rmgill@SPAmindspring.com			    '85 CB700S -
- ryan.gill@SPAMturner.com		 '76 Chevy Monte Carlo -
- www.mindspring.com/~rmgill		       '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!  http://www.eff.org/   \ DoD #0780 -	

----------------------------------------------------------------