It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Zipdot
Originally posted by shadarlocoth
well if it can lift 300 lb off of the users back then 300 pounds of gear/ammo/weapons/armor might come in handy on the battle field.
^^^ Truck / tank.
I could see a Heavy weapons oporator being added to a platoon inplace of one of the m16's. Not really that heavy a weapong but big enought to do a little more damage like a 50cal chain gun or somthing but most of the weight would be used for armor.
^^^ Tank. (EDIT: I should add, a machine gun is not a practical gun to tote around no matter how much muscle you have. It is simply more effective to fire from a stationary position or a mobile vehicle.)
I could just see a shell/gernade/somthing explode next to a guy in the suit and nocks him down or tosses him around then then after that he gets up and keeps on fighting becuase all the armor he as on stoped all the fragments from taring him to bits...
I can't. Any exoskeleton-like enclosure would be nowhere near a tank or even a Jeep with a .50 cal mount in terms of damage absorption or delivery.
Also if it could stop small arms fire would be very handy also. Not talking about stoping tank rounds or RPG just small arms. But the mobiltiy and speed would be a real factor in its effective ness. If a trooper can move around with 300 lb of armor and weapons like a grunt with out one holding 120 lb of gear then you would have a winner...
It is not only weight that burdens a soldier. Speaking strictly about weapons and ammo, what's the difference between 300 lbs and 50 lbs on a person? If a commander is sending troops so far out from a station or outpost that they need 300 lbs of ammo to make the journey, then that commander should rethink his position in the military.
If we're talking about carrying equipment to set up a station or outpost, then a truck can handle that job much better than a single man with a large backpack.
I see no practical military application for these things. I see limitless applications for empowering people with disabilities and other barriers to mobility.
Zip
[edit on 6/15/2005 by Zipdot]
Originally posted by Zipdot
(EDIT: I should add, a machine gun is not a practical gun to tote around no matter how much muscle you have. It is simply more effective to fire from a stationary position or a mobile vehicle.)
Originally posted by Zipdot
(EDIT: I should add, a machine gun is not a practical gun to tote around no matter how much muscle you have. It is simply more effective to fire from a stationary position or a mobile vehicle.)
Originally posted by American Mad Man
Why then are squad based tactics in the US military built around the SAW? This is nonsense. Ever since WWI the most effective infantry based weapon has been the machine gun.
Originally posted by Zipdot
While Full Metal Jacket was a good movie, Animal Mother wouldn't hit a damn thing firing a machine gun from the hip at such a distance...