RE: Obstacles, Part 3

You wrote: 

>It is not ineffective, It would cost a lot in men (not to mention the
>exposure to fire) but it is doable.  Whether by jumping on it pulling 

Have you ever done it yourself?  I'm saying that if the coils are 
secured to the pickets and eachother properly, throwing a 200lb weight 
on them shouldn't make a usable gap.

on >it with chains, firing a Carl Gustav round (not sure what the 

Don't pull on it with chains.  It's not worth the time.  There are 
these inventions called pickets, that get pounded into the ground.  You 
secure the wire to these 'pickets' and they don't go anywhere unless 
you blow them up.

Americans >use, but I know they have better) I'd even use some M72 
rounds for good >measure.  My point is that the nice text book wire obs 

You'd be surprised.  I wish we had a Carl Gustav.  It's the AT4 and the 
Dragon, nothing in between.  And the AT4 (aka M136, IIRC.  No one calls 
it that) is basically a one-shot Carl Gustav.  Feh.  

isn't going to >stay pristine for ever and that, with or without the 
help of engineers >it is passable.

OK, how would you rewrite the breaching wire rules?

>I've made the wire obstacle you are talking about an it ain't
>unstoppable.  You should join the infantry see what you can do without
>fancy explosives.

I can't be an infantryman, I passed the ASVAB[1][2].  Seriously, while 
it's not unstoppable, it will delay you for a couple of minutes, which 
is all it's designed to do.  Which is all my rules let it do, unless 
I'm mistaken.  

John M. Atkinson

[1]Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery.	Entrance exam for the 
service in US.
[2]I do respect and like infantrymen, but I have to make fun of them or 
they throw me out of the Regimental Association.  :)