https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...USArmy03-1.jpg
---------- Post added at 10:33 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:32 AM ----------
ot bonus
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...infantry-1.jpg
Printable View
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...USArmy03-1.jpg
---------- Post added at 10:33 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:32 AM ----------
ot bonus
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...infantry-1.jpg
Lots of Reeves cans on hand for the 1917...they're doing fire support at a distance.
At the end of the day the MG firing is going to be more noticeable than a white belt like Jim said did not make much difference
Maybe you wanted to give us Axis guys some advantage;-D
I can't remember but didn't the tracer light up after a little ways out so the position is not exposed or are we just seeing fired hot bullets in the twilight? Anyway, can't count on my memory any more,
Attachment 82347
Nah, they ignite in the barrel, they are just traveling faster relative to the geometry of observation; as they recede they become more visible as they no longer appear to traverse. Some heavy artillery can also be observed but you have to be close to (but not directly) behind the cannon to do it.
From the receiver point of view, active MG positions can be actually easy to find (if you don't mind keeping your head up when it is firing), dust, debris, flash and tracers can give it away.
Was/is it a good idea to mark the medics helmet up with a big red cross? Wouldn't it make him vulnerable to enemy fire, especially that of a sniper?
It would, but we were fighting an enemy who was a signer of the Geneva accords. By and large both sides didn't fire at medics.
Bob
That's correct. They eye is too slow to pick it up is all. We all taught it didn't light until 125 Yds out or some garbage. A night shoot puts that to bed.
That's right too, by agreement you weren't ALLOWED to fire on any red cross symbol.