AA used against infantry?
-
LeoBloom.
- Posts: 138
- Joined: 2007-03-02 04:40
AA used against infantry?
Is this a valid tactic in real life?
-
MadTommy
- Posts: 2220
- Joined: 2006-05-23 11:34
hell YES
AA guns have always been used as multi purpose.
EDIT: hehe be nice if the insurgents got one of these, on the back of a HiAce flatback.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZcEFYfYrhiE
AA guns have always been used as multi purpose.
EDIT: hehe be nice if the insurgents got one of these, on the back of a HiAce flatback.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZcEFYfYrhiE
Last edited by MadTommy on 2007-11-06 16:51, edited 1 time in total.
-
Dunehunter
- Retired PR Developer
- Posts: 12110
- Joined: 2006-12-17 14:42
I believe that the USSR designation for their AA guns even mentioned them being used against ground targets, but I'm not sure as to exactly how.
Also, the Germans 88mm gun was both AA and AT, so it's not like it's rare for AA to be used for other roles too.
Also, the Germans 88mm gun was both AA and AT, so it's not like it's rare for AA to be used for other roles too.
[R-MOD]Jigsaw] I am drunk. I decided to come home early because I can''t realy seea nyithng. I hthknk i madea bad choicce.
-
robbo
- Posts: 1159
- Joined: 2006-10-25 15:14
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=7UOp8iSNn2s
Ive seen some videos of the Ruskys using them against chechens too, google it.
Looks fairly effective.
Ive seen some videos of the Ruskys using them against chechens too, google it.
Looks fairly effective.
-
MadTommy
- Posts: 2220
- Joined: 2006-05-23 11:34
-
CareBear
- Posts: 4036
- Joined: 2007-04-19 17:41
no its a joke, because they banned my beloved HAT V infantryMadTommy wrote:Is this true??
So you cant use commander placed AA to defend against infantry attacking your position??
This will be ignored by players in the heat of the battle.
Sounds nuts to me.
and because there was a thread exactly like this for the H AT when u were away i think

-
Eddie Baker
- Posts: 6945
- Joined: 2004-07-26 12:00
Yes, even since WWII, with the Germans and their carriage mounted light, rapid-fire flak gunsLeoBloom. wrote:Is this a valid tactic in real life?
In Vietnam the Vulcan Air Defense System was used for counter-ambush fire in jungle convoys.
The Russians used to include ZSU-23-4 SPAAGs in convoys through the mountain passes in Afghanistan, since their weapons could elevate to a greater angle than the other vehicles and engage guerrillas on the high cliffs. ZSU-23-4s and 2S6s were also used in Grozny to clear basements since they can also depress their guns pretty low, and because of the incredibly high rate of fire that 4 linked automatic cannons can produce. Their rates of turret traverse are equal to or better than most modern infantry fighting vehicles.
-
LtSoucy
- Posts: 3089
- Joined: 2007-03-23 20:04
-
LtSoucy
- Posts: 3089
- Joined: 2007-03-23 20:04
-
LeadMagnet
- Retired PR Developer
- Posts: 1372
- Joined: 2007-02-09 20:11
-
LtSoucy
- Posts: 3089
- Joined: 2007-03-23 20:04
ya and all of those thing ill anything. I saw a movie a day or 2 ago on youtube and it killed so many insrgents in Vietnam that some USMC soldiers after a siege walked around after and that and some bombers leveled a 2 mile+ ring around the base. Only thing were tree stumps and trees on the ground if not burned by naplam. I love how deadly the US is. WOOT WOOT!
-
Eddie Baker
- Posts: 6945
- Joined: 2004-07-26 12:00
The Israelis also used it at the time, and I think they may have knocked down a MiG or two. They still use it and offer upgrade packages for export.Clypp wrote:From what I've heard, the Vulcan Air Defenses System never shot down a plane however it did make a whole load of infantry kills in Vietnam. It's a very valid tactic.
Soucy, the Vulcan is on almost all US fighter aircraft, too (with the exception of the A-10, Harrier and JSF) and has been the standard since the F4 Phantom II. The Spectre and Spooky AC-130 Gunships will be losing all but their 105-s for Bushmaster II 30mm cannons, which fire the same ammunition family as the A-10's GAU-8 cannon.
-
Mongolian_dude
- Retired PR Developer
- Posts: 6088
- Joined: 2006-10-22 22:24
Well, if he means AAVs (linebacker+Tunguska), yes waste em as you wish. I dare you not to kill them with it! 
If he means AAA (air defense cannons) Yes, I'd think they would be used against INF like anything else.
However, if he means MANPAD AA (hand-held stinger/ Grail) then i wouldn't think it would be in the interest of conventional militaries to piss all their ammo at INF.
I think MANPADS are just like HAT but a little less in demand in PR and probably IRL (more important than LAT but not HAT).
It's not so bad imo, to fire an RPG at a concentration of INF/Squad, bunker, tower building window or any other fortified position, but at a single or couple of guys just fun/experience degrading spam.
HAT just shouldn't be fired at INF full stop (unless to TK two guys when you have capped out the enemy and there is 1 ticket left lol)
...mongol...
If he means AAA (air defense cannons) Yes, I'd think they would be used against INF like anything else.
However, if he means MANPAD AA (hand-held stinger/ Grail) then i wouldn't think it would be in the interest of conventional militaries to piss all their ammo at INF.
I think MANPADS are just like HAT but a little less in demand in PR and probably IRL (more important than LAT but not HAT).
It's not so bad imo, to fire an RPG at a concentration of INF/Squad, bunker, tower building window or any other fortified position, but at a single or couple of guys just fun/experience degrading spam.
HAT just shouldn't be fired at INF full stop (unless to TK two guys when you have capped out the enemy and there is 1 ticket left lol)
...mongol...
Military lawyers engaged in fierce legal action.
[INDENT][INDENT]
[/INDENT][/INDENT]


Jaymz