Running Gator Posted March 1, 2017 Group: Royal Member * Followers: 8 Topic Count: 91 Topics Per Day: 0.03 Content Count: 10,596 Content Per Day: 3.68 Reputation: 2,743 Days Won: 25 Joined: 06/16/2016 Status: Offline Share Posted March 1, 2017 9 hours ago, Churchmouse said: As far as me, I my primary was 16 Pa Pa, which is short range air defense. And the purpose of the 16P (or papa if you like, but not Pa Pa) is to destroy enemy aircraft and more than likely kill those inside said aircraft. The Chaparral has no other purpose but to do that one thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Churchmouse Posted March 1, 2017 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 4 Topic Count: 91 Topics Per Day: 0.03 Content Count: 2,216 Content Per Day: 0.80 Reputation: 1,014 Days Won: 0 Joined: 09/29/2016 Status: Offline Birthday: 04/02/1958 Share Posted March 1, 2017 44 minutes ago, Out of the Shadows said: And the purpose of the 16P (or papa if you like, but not Pa Pa) is to destroy enemy aircraft and more than likely kill those inside said aircraft. The Chaparral has no other purpose but to do that one thing. Did I not say short range air defense. Defensive is to deny access to to an area in question. It is a deterrent. Shooting down aircraft is a secondary function that certainly allows the flight personnel the chance to escape a damaged aircraft because the missile used is a heat seeker so it homes in on the tail end of the aircraft exhaust. It then has a proximity fuse which allows it to destruct as close to the heat signature as possible. That means it explodes at the rear of the aircraft, leaving the lions share of the aircraft to absorb any shrapnel and concussive force generated by the explosion. It is meant to take down aircraft, not destroy them or hurt any flight personnel. The chaparral also has a electronic transponder that broadcasts out a signal to any aircraft that comes withing our field of fire that is picked up by the target aircraft and sends back a signal which identifies it as either friendly, foe or unknown. To my knowledge all military aircraft has these transponders and are able to instantly know that they have been pinged by an air defense unit. This gives them the chance of turning tail, which goes right along with the defensive nature of the weapon system I was on. Even the rounds that are used in the M-16 rifle are designed to wound and not to kill because the strategy involved is that If you kill an enemy soldier you just eliminate one soldier, but if you wound one, you not only effectively take that wounded soldier out of the fight. You take out at lest one other soldier because the wounded soldier would need first aid and assistance in getting him off the battle field. The m-16 round is a .223, which essentially a 22 caliber round with more inertia behind it. It is an unstable round, which means at a certain distance from the barrel the round begins to tumble head over heals. It is designed that way so when it penetrates it doesn't go completely through the body. It is designed to maximize the damage, but not enough to kill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneLight Posted March 1, 2017 Group: Royal Member Followers: 22 Topic Count: 1,294 Topics Per Day: 0.21 Content Count: 31,762 Content Per Day: 5.23 Reputation: 9,763 Days Won: 115 Joined: 09/14/2007 Status: Offline Share Posted March 1, 2017 1 hour ago, Out of the Shadows said: It is not about "for you" or '"for me" it is about reality. The purpose of a military is to win wars, that is why the exist and why they have existed since the dawn of time. You win a war by killing enough of the enemy that they no longer have the will to fight. No war was ever won without a shot being fired or a sword being drawn. Anything else that a military is used for apart from winning wars is secondary to the reason they exist. Again, for the OP purpose, we are not at war with those who try to cross our borders, so let's not continue to derail this thread. If this is an important subject for you to want to continue, please start another thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Running Gator Posted March 1, 2017 Group: Royal Member * Followers: 8 Topic Count: 91 Topics Per Day: 0.03 Content Count: 10,596 Content Per Day: 3.68 Reputation: 2,743 Days Won: 25 Joined: 06/16/2016 Status: Offline Share Posted March 1, 2017 1 minute ago, Churchmouse said: Did I not say short range air defense. Defensive is to deny access to to an area in question. It is a deterrent. Shooting down aircraft is a secondary function that certainly allows the flight personnel the chance to escape a damaged aircraft because the missile used is a heat seeker so it homes in on the tail end of the aircraft exhaust. It then has a proximity fuse which allows it to destruct as close to the heat signature as possible. That means it explodes at the rear of the aircraft, leaving the lions share of the aircraft to absorb any shrapnel and concussive force generated by the explosion. It is meant to take down aircraft, not destroy them or hurt any flight personnel. The chaparral also has a electronic transponder that broadcasts out a signal to any aircraft that comes withing our field of fire that is picked up by the target aircraft and sends back a signal which identifies it as either friendly, foe or unknown. To my knowledge all military aircraft has these transponders and are able to instantly know that they have been pinged by an air defense unit. This gives them the chance of turning tail, which goes right along with the defensive nature of the weapon system I was on. Even the rounds that are used in the M-16 rifle are designed to wound and not to kill because the strategy involved is that If you kill an enemy soldier you just eliminate one soldier, but if you wound one, you not only effectively take that wounded soldier out of the fight. You take out at lest one other soldier because the wounded soldier would need first aid and assistance in getting him off the battle field. The m-16 round is a .223, which essentially a 22 caliber round with more inertia behind it. It is an unstable round, which means at a certain distance from the barrel the round begins to tumble head over heals. It is designed that way so when it penetrates it doesn't go completely through the body. It is designed to maximize the damage, but not enough to kill. The Chaparral is mobile for a reason, so it can provide support for the combat units that are getting attacked by air. No missile system is designed to lessen the chance of killing the occupant of the aircraft, but are designed for maximum effectiveness in knocking the plane out of the sky. My first job out of the Corps was with Raytheon, so I am well versed in their missile systems. I can assure you there was no thought to allowing the pilot to survive when they designed the missile system. I am also well versed in the .556 ball round, and the myth behind the idea that it was not designed to kill a target. I qualified as Expert during my time with the Corps, including taking out targets from 800 yards. Our PMI told us about the "injury, not kill" myth and they told us it was a bunch of malarkey, as the ball round bounces around inside the body doing more damage than if it were to just make clean shot into and out of a body. Nobody is shooting at an enemy to injure them just as they are not shooting at us for any reason but to kill us. That is how you win a war, going back to the dawn of time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Running Gator Posted March 1, 2017 Group: Royal Member * Followers: 8 Topic Count: 91 Topics Per Day: 0.03 Content Count: 10,596 Content Per Day: 3.68 Reputation: 2,743 Days Won: 25 Joined: 06/16/2016 Status: Offline Share Posted March 1, 2017 6 minutes ago, OneLight said: Again, for the OP purpose, we are not at war with those who try to cross our borders, so let's not continue to derail this thread. If this is an important subject for you to want to continue, please start another thread. The OP states that our border is "under assault", that sounds very much like a war time situation to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneLight Posted March 1, 2017 Group: Royal Member Followers: 22 Topic Count: 1,294 Topics Per Day: 0.21 Content Count: 31,762 Content Per Day: 5.23 Reputation: 9,763 Days Won: 115 Joined: 09/14/2007 Status: Offline Share Posted March 1, 2017 5 minutes ago, Out of the Shadows said: The OP states that our border is "under assault", that sounds very much like a war time situation to me. Come on, OOTS, you know as well as I do that is not what was meant. Dramatization is what draws crowds. Please don't take this thread in that direction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Running Gator Posted March 1, 2017 Group: Royal Member * Followers: 8 Topic Count: 91 Topics Per Day: 0.03 Content Count: 10,596 Content Per Day: 3.68 Reputation: 2,743 Days Won: 25 Joined: 06/16/2016 Status: Offline Share Posted March 1, 2017 10 minutes ago, OneLight said: Come on, OOTS, you know as well as I do that is not what was meant. Dramatization is what draws crowds. Please don't take this thread in that direction. People are willing to spend 20 plus billion dollars to build a wall and countless billions each year to maintain the wall but none of those same people are willing to even discuss the idea of using the military to actually defend the borders of our country. I honestly just do not understand it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneLight Posted March 1, 2017 Group: Royal Member Followers: 22 Topic Count: 1,294 Topics Per Day: 0.21 Content Count: 31,762 Content Per Day: 5.23 Reputation: 9,763 Days Won: 115 Joined: 09/14/2007 Status: Offline Share Posted March 1, 2017 6 minutes ago, Out of the Shadows said: People are willing to spend 20 plus billion dollars to build a wall and countless billions each year to maintain the wall but none of those same people are willing to even discuss the idea of using the military to actually defend the borders of our country. I honestly just do not understand it. It has already been addressed and nobody agreed that the main military should be involved. They did agree that the Coast Guard or National Guard could be used. So, the military, in a sense, was discussed and was agreed upon, just not in the way you see it. But that was not all that is being discussed. You and Churchmouse have been discussing different weapons, different ammunition, and what you both think is important in understanding their purpose. This conversation would fit better between the two of you in a different thread, don't you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Churchmouse Posted March 1, 2017 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 4 Topic Count: 91 Topics Per Day: 0.03 Content Count: 2,216 Content Per Day: 0.80 Reputation: 1,014 Days Won: 0 Joined: 09/29/2016 Status: Offline Birthday: 04/02/1958 Share Posted March 1, 2017 Just now, Out of the Shadows said: The Chaparral is mobile for a reason, so it can provide support for the combat units that are getting attacked by air. No missile system is designed to lessen the chance of killing the occupant of the aircraft, but are designed for maximum effectiveness in knocking the plane out of the sky. My first job out of the Corps was with Raytheon, so I am well versed in their missile systems. I can assure you there was no thought to allowing the pilot to survive when they designed the missile system. I am also well versed in the .556 ball round, and the myth behind the idea that it was not designed to kill a target. I qualified as Expert during my time with the Corps, including taking out targets from 800 yards. Our PMI told us about the "injury, not kill" myth and they told us it was a bunch of malarkey, as the ball round bounces around inside the body doing more damage than if it were to just make clean shot into and out of a body. Nobody is shooting at an enemy to injure them just as they are not shooting at us for any reason but to kill us. That is how you win a war, going back to the dawn of time. Please do some research on the chaparral. It is a converted ammo carrier for the 105 howitzer, which means it is not armored for any front line engagement. It is less armored than the apc, which a fly swatter could take out. It was retrofitted to allow the missile firing unit to be placed in the area to would be used to carry ammo in. I don't recall the nomenclature for that unit, being I left the military in "93" , but the defensive system is designed to be sat up in the dark, camouflaged and then utilized to defend and area of land, most likely an ammo dump or a headquarters or hospital unit. The platform that carries the operator and the missiles needs to be raised above the bed of the unit in order to swivel, track and fire upon those aircraft that penetrate the air space we are guarding, so it can not be used while in motion. Being a marksman at firing rounds at targets doesn't qualify anyone to determine what they would do when striking a body nor does it give you clairvoyance to see what another person is thinking. I have been shot at and my main concern was to get myself out of danger, but If that wasn't possible I would try to get that other person to stop anyway I could. It is the weapon that would determine how it was that I would accomplish that. I would also not presume to exchange my own opinions for the experience of a person who has access to data that proves or disproves the so-called myth of this wound, not kill strategy. The idea of winning a war is to remove the enemies will and capability to fight and that has been the case throughout time. We've done that by bombing infrastructure, industry, blocking ports and the like. War is not all about killing. It never has been. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Running Gator Posted March 1, 2017 Group: Royal Member * Followers: 8 Topic Count: 91 Topics Per Day: 0.03 Content Count: 10,596 Content Per Day: 3.68 Reputation: 2,743 Days Won: 25 Joined: 06/16/2016 Status: Offline Share Posted March 1, 2017 2 minutes ago, Churchmouse said: I would also not presume to exchange my own opinions for the experience of a person who has access to data that proves or disproves the so-called myth of this wound, not kill strategy. If I run across anyone like that I will keep it in mind. Thanks for the advice. But, it seems the Mods think we need to move on, so I will remove myself from the thread. Have a wonderful day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts