HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: manuelp@ecf.toronto.edu (MANUELPILLAI Gerald Nishanthan)
Subject: Re: Use of snipers
Organization: University of Toronto, Engineering Computing Facility
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 14:48:22 GMT


From manuelp@ecf.toronto.edu (MANUELPILLAI Gerald Nishanthan)

In article <Bt8GFu.Do3@lawday.DaytonOH.NCR.COM> Tony.Buckland@mtsg.ubc.ca writes:
>
>From Tony.Buckland@mtsg.ubc.ca
>
>
>From Tony.Buckland@mtsg.ubc.ca
>
> Regarding the use of snipers in the current conflicts in the former
> Yugoslavia: is this the first time that sniping has formed such an
> important part of ongoing assaults and sieges?  I think of sniping
> as an auxiliary method, employing scarce experts, for keeping the
> opposition harassed and heads-down, but in this case it seems to vie
> with mortar fire as a primary method of inflicting casualties.
> Please, oh please, no political comments. 
>

The Eastern front (WWII) comes to mind.  Both the Russians and Germans made 
extensive use of snipers all throughout the war.  In fact, sniping was made 
into a propaganda weapon, with top snipers on both sides being given honours,
etc.  A story comes to mind, during Stalingrad, there was a challenge between
the top German sniper (a Major, I believe) and the top Soviet sniper, 
climaxing in a dramatic face-off over the trenches - eventually won by the 
Russian who put a bullet through the German's eyes (but not before he had his
helmet holed - I think he stumbled, which saved his life!).
Stalingrad, or indeed any battle in which there was extensive street-fighting,
saw a significant use of snipers.  There's the story of a complete German 
platoon being wiped out by snipers.   Snipers usually had orders to target top
brass (for obvious reasons) who were also easily identified.  I read somewhere
that during the Battle for Berlin (Ryan's book - The Last Battle, I think) 
the Russian commander had just vacated an telescope, when the officer who took
his place was drilled clean between the eyes by a bullet that went right 
through the 'scope!  
The Russians place great emphasis on the psychological effect of snipers, and
as such most Eastern bloc armies have followed the same pattern.  As such 
snipers are a big part of the Yugoslav army.  In addition, some people have 
said that the 'snipers' in Bosnia are just 'rifle-men'.  Whereas there are
undoubtedly some of this type around, I would venture to say the majority are
actual snipers with proper equipment _and_ training.  (Thy're probably 
training & equipping some of the irregulars, too).  I have seen photographs of
snipers in Bosnia, and they most certainly do have hi-powered, scope equipped
rifles.

Gerald M  
 


Newsgroups: sci.military
From: conrad@pico.qpsx.oz.au
Subject: Light aircraft for CAS in Australia
Organization: NCR Corporation - Law Department
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 14:43:43 GMT


From conrad@pico.qpsx.oz.au

 Perry says:
 > I have always been intrigued by the following question:
 > 
 > twins?). What about the conversion of common STOL aircraft like
 > cropdusters (Pawnees, Fletchers etc) to a light strike role?
 > 
 > The reason I ask this question is because the Australian armed forces
 > believe that in the next 20 years or so they will face small numbers
 > of insurgents in the far north of the country (Northern TErritory).
 > [lots more deleted) 
 
 Well, I live near RAAF Pearse, (in WA) where they carry out jet
 training.  Until recently they used Macchis (now Pilatus).  Last time I
 visted the base (some years ago) they had one displayed with cannon
 attached to hard points under the wings.  During the early stages of the
 gulf crisis I saw several flying around in camoflage paint jobs (as
 opposed to the noraml red/white training colours).  Whether this was
 part of the gulf-hype or part of the pre-delivery to whoever bought them
 (does anyone know who??) I'm not sure.
 
 However it is clear that the use of the Macchis as CAS was part of the
 RAAF's (reserve?) strategy.  I would assume that they intend the Pilatus
 to have a similar role.  Comments from Raafies?
 
 One of the problems I see is the lack of viable GA aircraft: most are
 based on VW engine tech (thanks to USA liablity laws 1/2:-) and have no
 external store capability.
 
 Would modern trainers such as the Pilatus provide a better solution?
   or on that note
 What happened to the "Mudskipper?" (sic)

 Hmm, while on the subject of cheap munitions - how small (and
inexpensive) can a fuel-air explosive be made?  Surely a good
alternative to HE/incendaries against troops with light cover
 
 Conrad Drake


-- 
"There's something stirring in my loins and it isn't the spirit of Jesus"
                - Helen Razor, JJJ announcer, 1992.

Email: conrad@pico.qpsx.oz.au
Snail: QPSX Communications, Private Bag 24, West Perth 6005, Australia. 
Numbers:(ph) +61 9 324 1641, (fx) +61 9 321 2984 (dod) 0604
From: bphdarcy@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (SJ Roc D'Arcy, MBP)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: is the A-10 going bye-bye?
Summary: F16 problems
Date: 23 Aug 92 22:08:34 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo


From bphdarcy@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (SJ Roc D'Arcy, MBP)


Another question regarding the A-10 being replaced with the F-16 is
the problems of stress cracks found in some of the F-16 (unless these
were dealt with and I missed it).  Also, will the F-16 be able to
carry a heavy armament load?

SJRD
Newsgroups: sci.military
From: anasaz!anasaz.briand@enuucp.eas.asu.edu (Brian Douglass)
Subject: Re: Chinese fighters gain mid-air refuelling facility
Organization: Anasazi, Inc.  Phoenix, Az
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 13:35:42 GMT


From anasaz!anasaz.briand@enuucp.eas.asu.edu (Brian Douglass)

In article <Btspqw.16K@lawday.DaytonOH.NCR.COM> ppugliese@pimacc.pima.edu writes:
>It undoubtedly would have taken them a long time to get the hang of carrier
>operations anyway. Look at the old USSR the spent more than a decade trying
>to perfect their techniques ,using a mock carrier deck in the Crimea, &
>they still didn't have the hang of it when the Union collapsed.

When Victor Belenko defected from the USSR in ~76 with a Mig-25, the CIA
took him about to various places (supermarket) to prove to him the
Communist propaganda was false.  Instead, he just thought the CIA could put
on a far better show than the KGB.  That is until he requested and was
granted a visit to a US carrier and got to watch Air-Ops.  He was stunned
by the level of coordination and espirit-de-corps exhibited by all ranks.
If I remember the quote, it was something like:
	"This was the moment I knew all I had been taught was a lie....  
No amount of coercion or brainwashing to could get so many men to work
together as one... unless they truly believed in what they were doing."

__Mig Pilot__ by Victor Belenko.

-- 
"... For I have sworn upon the alter of god, eternal hostility against
every form of tyranny over the mind of man."  Thomas Jefferson
Brian Douglass		briand@anasazi.com 	602-870-3330 X657
From: ntaib@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Iskandar Taib)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Chobham Armour
Date: 23 Aug 92 22:04:19 GMT
Organization: Indiana University


From ntaib@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Iskandar Taib)

In article <Bt4opy.2B9@lawday.DaytonOH.NCR.COM> urf@sw2001.ki.icl.se (Urban Fredriksson) writes:

|The new "heavy" tiles incorporate depleted uranium, it is said, but
|what I find hard to believe is the statement that it takes just 15 per
|tank to open the pockets, replace the tiles and weld them shut again.

15 men or 15 minutes?  8-) 8-) 8-)

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Iskandar Taib                          | The only thing worse than Peach ala
Internet: NTAIB@SILVER.UCS.INDIANA.EDU |    Frog is Frog ala Peach
Bitnet:   NTAIB@IUBACS                 !
Newsgroups: sci.military
From: John Schubert <schubert@united.berkeley.edu>
Subject: a few questions about sci.military
Organization: NCR Corporation - Law Department
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 16:17:48 GMT


From John Schubert <schubert@united.berkeley.edu>


Hi,

I was just wondering if there is an ftp site that has the back issues of the
group.  My reason for asking is that I came across an old post I saved (last may
that involved the subject of the "military history degree".  I can't remember if
there was much discussion about this, but I just wanted to go back and check.

Thanks for your help,

-John 

John Schubert
schubert@united.berkeley.edu

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: Juha Veijalainen <juha.veijalainen@compart.fi>
Subject: Re:Photo -clearing mines
Organization: ComPart BBS, Helsinki-Finland, +358 0 506 3329 (14 lines V.32bis)
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 16:23:41 GMT


From Juha Veijalainen <juha.veijalainen@compart.fi>


>>From packer@amarna.gsfc.nasa.gov (Charles Packer)
>
>[Photo] shows seven mines resting on a street, arrayed in a circle about
>15 feet in diameter. A soldier has picked up one mine. Another
>soldier is bending doen to pick up another. The mines have 
>convenient handles for carrying.

Strange use of mines, though there are several possibilities.  1) Street 
surface is too hard or there was no time to hide the mines, 2) mines are 
fake and are just meant to stop and/or delay a convoy 3) mines are 
boobytrapped.

I remember only one situation where you would leave (anti-vehicle) mines 
on a road surface - when you have to create a protective mine field in a 
hurry.  You usually also want to dismantle the field in a hurry if it was 
not needed.  You also need to control the mine field with anti-tank etc 
weapons, otherwise it is not effective.

---
 . WinQwk 2.0 a#152 . Mielipiteet omiani/Opinions personal/Facts suspect
                                                    

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: tedwards@src.umd.edu (Thomas Grant Edwards)
Subject: Re: Nuclear War in the Middle East - Soviet Nuclear Weapons Stolen?
Organization: Systems Research Center, Maryversity of Uniland, College Park
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 16:34:51 GMT


From tedwards@src.umd.edu (Thomas Grant Edwards)

In article <BtGIuz.IA@lawday.DaytonOH.NCR.COM> stricher@masig.fsu.edu (Char Aznabul) writes:
>Anyway, my point is: the Soviets where always very careful keeping their
>nukes in reliable, dependable hands. I doubt very much any have gotten
>away from them. And if one did, I'm sure that they would go after it.

Check Jane's Intelligence for more info.  It turns out, with the
destruction of KGB internal security, the control of nuclear weapons,
especially tactical nukes, is coming into question.  

Whenever I hear someone say we are free of the past worries of nuclear
war, I have to laugh.  I believe that we are right now in much more
danger of a nuclear attack from the former SU than we ever were during
the 70's-90's, 60's not included however.  Of course, I doubt such an
attack would be a large scale attack, just a couple of warheads.

-Thomas



Newsgroups: sci.military
From: "William M. Aldo" <nzt1939@dsacg3.dsac.dla.mil>
Subject: green_submariners
Organization: NCR Corporation - Law Department
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 15:18:55 GMT


From "William M. Aldo" <nzt1939@dsacg3.dsac.dla.mil>


Along the same line....sending someone down to the Commo Shop for a can of
liquid squelch for the radios; how about getting over to Battalion Maintenance
for some rubber welding rods;...and once at Graf, it was forecast to be a very
hot, humid day, soooo we just had to send a 'new' 2nd LT downrange to turn on
the range fans;-);-)

--

Mark Aldo   UUCP: (osu-cis)!dsacg1!waldo   INTERNET: waldo@dsac.dla.mil
"...Hotel Quebec Six Six...You are clear to begin your night run on
Range Eight Zero....Good luck, good shooting...Tower, out" -- radio
transmission from Control Tower - Range 80 at Grafenwoehr,Germany (TCQC 8/72)
From: fiddler@concertina.Eng.Sun.COM (steve hix)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Wow! SAS use magic ammo!
Date: 27 Aug 92 16:24:31 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca.


From fiddler@concertina.Eng.Sun.COM (steve hix)

>From th2_oate@csd.brispoly.ac.uk (Tom Oates)
>
>I think that it's important to remember that the SAS, in common with
>other special forces such as the Germans' GSG9 anti-terrorist squad
>don't just use hand guns like those of you out there who don't
>have a firearms licence which permits a fully automatic weapon. They
>have access to *anything* they want - typically an MP5 (or derivative)
>for 'house-clearing'. 

SAS, GSG9, and the rest use whatever fits the mission...

>One shot stops aren't as crucial because they
>are using machine guns with a large magazine capacity.

Some missions don't permit the use of full-auto; such as retaking
an airliner from hijackers.  In this sort of operation, you want
to minimize damage to the aircraft and the hostages if you can.

>As you're doubtless aware, SAS policy is to fire until the target drops.
>It's called CQQ (Close Quarter Combat). Doubtless someone will protest that
>they'll run out of ammo if they do this. Just remember:-
>
>* They use machine guns, CS/stun grenades, night vision equipment etc.

But not necessarily all at the same time, one would assume.

>* No spray and pray. 
>
>* They work in teams - not alone.

The SAS is no place for cowboys (nor is Delta, GSG9, etc.)  You either are
a team player, or you get yourself and you mates dead.  It's dangerous
enough at best, you don't need to fear your buddies, too.

>* They practice more often than all us 'experts'. 
>
>Everyone seems to be concentrating on the merits of the ammo used to the 
>exclusion of everything else. I hope this post puts things into 
>perspective.

The equipment is only part of the package...the trained troops being the
important part.

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of making many books there is no end...  |  What's wrong with chasing 
                       -- Eccl. 12:12    |  nebulae till 3 am?  |-(
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: sci.military
From: Christer Palm <palm@admin.kth.se>
Subject: Re: Phonetic alphabet corrected 
Organization: NCR Corporation - Law Department
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 14:38:46 GMT


From Christer Palm <palm@admin.kth.se>


>The duality of C and O is due to a general failure to accept the new terms,
>and through common usage they worked themselves back to the original.
 
Charlie and Oscar is part in the running international alphabet. 
If they use Cocoa and Oboe in US domestic alphabet i don't knew.
 
/Christer
-- 
"Destiny makes relatives, selection makes friends."
 

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: Joseph F Baugher <jfb@ihlpl.att.com>
Subject: Eighth in the Series--The Boeing XP-8
Keywords: experimental, poor performance
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories -  Naperville, Illinois
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 15:06:40 GMT


From Joseph F Baugher <jfb@ihlpl.att.com>


The Boeing XP-8 was a new design initiated by Boeing to conform to  an
Air  Corps  specification  issued  in  April  1925 for a fighter to be
powered by the new 600  hp  Packard  2A-1500  inverted  liquid  cooled
engine.  It  was  built  under  a bailment contract, in which the Army
agreed to supply the engine and the military equipment and to test the
airplane, but Boeing would retain actual ownership of the airframe.

The  project  was  assigned  the  company  designation  of  Model  66.
Although  the Model 66 owed a great deal to the PW-9/FB series, it was
essentially a new design.  The Model 66 was a single-bay biplane  with
staggered  wings that were tapered in chord and joined by a single bay
of duralumin N-struts.  The span of the  upper  wing  was  reduced  by
almost  two  feet  from  the  PW-9,  while  that of the upper wing was
increased by the same amount. The fuselage consisted of a welded steel
tube  framework  forward section from the nose to the cockpit, whereas
the real of the fuselage including the rudder consisted  of  a  bolted
duralumin  framework.   The  wing was made of wood, and both the wings
and the fuselage were fabric covered.  The radiator was located in the
lower  fuselage,  situated  at  the  point where the bottom wings were
joined  onto   the  fuselage.    The  twin-bladed  propeller  had   an
aerodynamically-faired  spinner.   The  forward  landing  gear  struts
incorporated oleo-pneumatic shock absorbers, a  feature  which  became
standard on subsequent Boeing fighters.

Boeing delivered the Model 66 aircraft to the Army in July  1927.   It
flew for the first time in July 14, 1927. The designation XP-8 was not
assigned to the aircraft until the USAAC bought the plane from  Boeing
on  a  separate contract signed in January 1928.  The Army assigned it
the serial number 28-359.

Testing  showed  that  the  performance  of  the   XP-8   was   rather
disappointing,  and  the  Army  decided not to order the aircraft into
production.  The Achilles heel of the XP-8 was in its Packard  engine,
which  was  still  in  the experimental stage.  Performance included a
maximum speed of 173 mph, an initial climb  rate  of  2138  ft/min,  a
service  ceiling  of  23,000  feet, and a range of 325 miles.  Weights
were 2390 lbs. empty and 3421 lbs. gross.  Armament consisted  of  one
0.30  cal  and  one 0.50 cal machine gun in the upper fuselage decking
synchronized to fire thru the propeller

The sole XP-8 was surveyed at Wright Field in June 1929.

Sources:

  Boeing Aircraft since 1916, Peter M. Bowers, Naval Institute  Press,
  1989.

  The American Fighter, Enzo Angellucci and Peter Bowers, Orion Books,
  1987.

Joe Baugher       AT&T Bell Laboratories    2000 North Naperville Road 
		  Naperville, Illinois 60566-7033.   (708) 713-4548

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: barroux@licancabur.Corp.Sun.COM (Juan Carlos Barroux - CS Eng. - Latin America)
Subject: Re: light aircraft in strike role
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 16:19:56 GMT


From barroux@licancabur.Corp.Sun.COM (Juan Carlos Barroux - CS Eng. - Latin America)


>From     "Edward J. Rudnicki" (FSAC-SID) <erudnick@pica.army.mil>
>
>Cardoen, the Chilean cluster bomb manufacturer, has advertised the
>PJ-1, a 5 kg light bomb intended for use from ANY aircraft. It is of
>the "stick it out the window and let go" variety. Echoes of the Great
>War :)

  Yes. The requirement for this did came from the 1978 emergency, when
Argentina very nearly tried to invade Chile, and Chile was under an
arms embargo.

  The Army has a small civil flying club in addition of their normal
light observation planes and was getting ALL of their planes (Cessna
R172 and 337, etc.) and helicopters (Jet Rangers, BO 105, SA.315B
Lamas, etc.) with any kind of weapons. Even the Cessnas had weapons
pilons under their wings.

  The Navy, Carabineros (militarized police) and Air Force did the same
thing with their light and training planes.

  It is likely that, in the event of real war, they would have used all
the civilians lights planes this way.

  The idea was to use them as light attack planes for air support,
specially in the south, where the terrain is wooden and full of hills.
Maybe also for night arrasment missions (do not let 'em sleep).

  It was better than to stockpile stones.. :-(

  Speaking for himself,

  Juan Carlos

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: ghm@ccadfa.cc.adfa.oz.au (Geoff Miller)
Subject: Re: Use of snipers
Organization: Australian Defence Force Academy, Canberra, Australia
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 14:49:43 GMT


From ghm@ccadfa.cc.adfa.oz.au (Geoff Miller)

bwise@hemlock.mitre.org (Barry Wise) writes:


>From bwise@hemlock.mitre.org (Barry Wise)

>Louie L'Amour had a novel called _The Ferguson Rifle_. The protagonist had gone  
>west with a rifle he received as a gift from Major Ferguson as a young man.   
>The rifle was a breech loader.  Does anyone have more information on this  
>rifle.  In the story, Ferguson was killed soon after giving the rifle away and  
>it was not adopted by the British. I believe it used some sort of screw  
>mechanism for the breech.

While the story is fiction, the rifle design and its history are fact.  As
to its mechanism:

      "A single turn of the trigger-guard lever drops the attached 3 to
      12 thread vertical screw plug which passes throught the breech end
      of the barrel.  As the quick-thread screw goes down, the ball is 
      dropped into the chamber through the opening in the top of the
      breech, the powder poured in (or paper cartridge inserted) and the
      trigger guard swung back to elevate the breech plug.  The pan is
      primed, the hammer cocked, and the weapon is ready."

>From "Small Arms of the World", 10th revised edition.  The illustrations
in the book show the mechanism clearly  -  what is not clear from the 
above description is that the breech plug is attached to the front of
the trigger guard.

Geoff Miller  (g-miller@adfa.oz.au)
Computer Centre, Australian Defence Force Academy

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: morse@mprgate.mpr.ca (Daryl Morse)
Subject: Casualty Figures for Gulf War
Organization: MPR Teltech Ltd., Burnaby, BC, Canada.
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 15:23:40 GMT


From morse@mprgate.mpr.ca (Daryl Morse)


Sorry if this has been beaten to death before, but I'd like to know
what the *realistic* estimates for Iraqi casualties are.  (Greenpeace
members need not reply, thanks.)

I recall in his final briefing after the ground war was finished,
Norman Schwartzkopf's response to a question about where all of the
Iraqis where. The question was something like, "If there were
200,000?? Iraqi soldiers in Kuwait before the war, and there are only
50,000?? EPWs, what happened to the rest of the soldiers?"
Schwartzkopf's response was first silence, then something like, "There
were a lot of casualties." Those numbers, which may be incorrect,
would indicate 150,000 casualties.  However, since then, I believe the
estimates have been significantly lowered due to a better
understanding of how (in)accurate the intelligence was.

Does anyone have any references (e.g. AW&ST, etc.) that discuss this
issue?

Please respond by email, as I don't normally follow this newsgroup.

Thanks.
--
Daryl Morse                     | Voice : (604) 293-5476
MPR Teltech Ltd. 		| Fax   : (604) 293-5787
8999 Nelson Way, Burnaby, BC    | E-Mail: morse@mprgate.mpr.ca
Canada, V5A 4B5                 | Part of the B.C. Tel Group of Companies...

Newsgroups: sci.military
From: Dwight Jackson <jackson@cpsc.ucalgary.ca>
Subject: Re: KTW teflon coatings
Organization: NCR Corporation - Law Department
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 15:30:15 GMT


From Dwight Jackson <jackson@cpsc.ucalgary.ca>

RE: KTW teflon coatings...

Further to Mike Tighe's response:

||     . . .
||
||Kopsch: "Adding a teflon coating to the round added 20% penetration power
||on metal and glass. Critics kept complaining about teflon's ability to
||penetrate body armor. That was nonsense typical of do-gooders. In fact,
||teflon cut down on the round's ability to cut through the nylon or kevlar
||of body armor."
||   . . .
||
||In bumper sticker language, Kopsch's much-maligned invention was a
||cop-saver bullet.
||-- 
||Mike Tighe, (214) 497-4206
||tighe@convex.com
||

Good!  Someone else is trying to disuade the rumors! The Teflon does help
in penetration - not reducing friction in the bore.  The initial design
used Kenertium (spelling is aprox.) a tungsten alloy, which was shaped, then
coated in teflon, THEN this was crimped into a soft brass cup, which carried
the slug up the barrel, engaging the rifling - the teflon never contacted the
rifling.  The later rounds were either hard brass or machine steel (depending
on caliber), but I haven't taken one apart to see if they were still using the
brass cup.

...dwight

-- 
Steve Bridges, Programmer/Analyst| NCR - Law Department, WHQ-5
steve@lawday.DaytonOH.NCR.COM ___| Phone:(513)-445-4486 622-4486 (VOICEplus)
Reserve sci.military moderator| "The airplane does not recognize attitude,
providing a maneuver is conducted at one G" -- A.M. "Tex" Johnston
Newsgroups: sci.military