🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1993Jan11.103744.23729@actcnews.res.utc.com>,
 Bob.Clarke%bbs@actcnews.res.utc.com (Bob Clarke) writes:
> In message <1993Jan10.001114.1112@cmkrnl.com>
> dated 10 Jan 93 08:11:14 GMT
> jeh@cmkrnl.com writes:
> > [...]
> Your comments are not justified!  Actually you are quite rude.

Yes, I certainly was.

> 1) NVGs are not keyed to the LSS for the M16.

They certainly are in other systems; why not for this one?  It's much easier to
pick a weak signal out of background noise if you know exactly what the signal
looks like. 

> 2) I don't read Guns and Ammo.
> 3) I do read Defense Electronics. I have a MS in Physics (optics)
> 4) I designed and built a Helmet Mounted Infantry Display for the ARMY
>    , Fort Belvoir.  I am somewhat familar in this area.
> 5) The right minds in the military do bother with a LSS that is good for 
>    50 yards, and actually they love it!

Can you explain anything about the intended application?  What situation or
tactics would lead to the need for such a device?  

The one use I can see is in the (unlikely) event that your enemy doesn't know
you're there.  e.g., an ambush.  But if they have IR sensing gear, won't they
know you're there as soon as you switch on the laser? 

> 6) "I'll Just empty a clip in his general direction" shows your level of
> thinking.  Such as Soldier of Fortune.

*My* level of thinking?  Not at all.  It's the level of thinking of the folks
who are only 50 yards away.  They're going to be emptying clips in *your*
direction, throwing grenades, etc., while you're busy trying to get that little
aiming dot on a target...

...which reminds me of another question:  Why bother putting a precision
targetting system (*any* precision targetting system) on an M16?  I suppose
because "that's the rifle the Army uses", and I'm not being facetious here,
that's a perfectly valid reason -- it just seems a little mismatched, like
using a laboratory balance to weigh mail.  

> Christ, grow up.  For the rest of you, please forgive my reply, I will not
> response further.

I hope you will respond; if I'm to take your comments at face value, there is
clearly something about this that I'm not understanding.  Or else it's another
instance of the military's enthusiasm for high-tech gear -- not all of which
proves practical in battle.  (But, often they don't know which ones until they
test them) 

	--- Jamie Hanrahan, Kernel Mode Consulting, San Diego CA
Internet:  jeh@cmkrnl.com, hanrahan@eisner.decus.org, or jeh@crash.cts.com
Uucp:  ...{crash,eisner,uunet}!cmkrnl!jeh