Where you been, This was high angle fire in the FIRST World War. Ian Hogg goes into great detail about setting the machine guns to cover certian areas. This is why 30-06 long range ammo was developed, to give better range to MACHINE guns. As a matter of fact this was one of Hiram Maxim's selling points in 1900 to the British and they tested this agains a wagon caravan at 2500 yards with, PLUNGING FIRE.
I recently read that the only British heavy tank protected by Chobham composite armor to be destroyed in battle was in a friendly fire incident when a high explosive shell landed on the commanders hatch. Even then it was spalling of the inside surface of the hatch that killed the crew.Originally Posted by missionary5155
While ultra long range volley fire could occasionally cause a casualty , I've read of incidents where troops that had become used to it would go about their business while holding a rations crate or piece of duck board over their heads, the bullets no longer having the energy to penetrate even the lightest cover or helmets.
At worst wounds would be shallow and could kill by infection, no effective anti-biotics being available at the time.
At extreme rage flat base bullets often overturned and settled into a base down or side on attitude, gretly reducing penetration and slowing down the bullets.
The term "Strafing" appears to predate the use of aircraft guns, and the term was commly used for high angle long range MG fire.
A visitor of my neighbor told me he had narrowly avoided courtmartial when he defied a standing order not to continue firing at German bombers that escaped after a raid by flying over an arab town.
After the raid an arab policeman brought a cart to the camp with the corpse of a child who had been looking up at the bombers when a .50 bullet fell and lodged in his eye socket. The wound might not have been fatal to an adult. The father of the child was given a blood debt pay off by the CO, which the machine gunner had to pay back over the course of several months.
Huh??
I think the concept and practice has been around for a long time. It is one of the reasons the longbow was so effective in battle. Also, during seiges, both longbow and slingshot archers would cast heavy AP tipped arrows and lead sling projectiles at high angles into fortresses. The US Mil. did such testing in 1879 to improve the range and the penetration at long range of the 45-70 and that led to the 500 gr Govt round. Write up here-- http://www.researchpress.co.uk/longrange/sandyhook.htm
For infantry on foot carrying their own ammo supply, it can become a logistics issue since high volume, high angle volley fire consumes lots of ammo.
I learned something very interesting about German Tiger Tanks on the Military TV channel. I love to watch the old WWII videos. They learned later in the war that a German Tiger Tank could be taken out with a glass bottle full of gasoline. Throw it on the engine air intake vents that would do the job every time. Flame thrower worked great too. Its a bit funny that a machine that could hold up to enemy tank bullets could not hold up to burning gas.
Hay.....you guys are missing the whole point. You know how the men in the field can call in artillery support. Artillery needs to know the location of the enemy so the guys in the field call it in. The artillery gunner sets his gun to shoot at that location to take out the enemy.
Why can't they call in rifle bullets artillery support on the enemy like they do with real artillery. When did anyone every set up a rifle to shoot on the same principle as artillery. The guy in the field calls it in and the guy with the rifle sets the gun to shoot at that exact location then shoots off a few 1000 bullets.
I know there has been many times in history where they shot bullets into the sky hoping to maybe hit the enemy but not knowing for sure the exactly location where the bullets would come down.
Plunging fire has been used for a long time.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita.../23-65/Ch6.htm
It has been used with rifles, bows, ect. Since the beginning of projectile weapons. I read of it being taught to Army troops using the trapdoor Springfield rifle for area denial.
As weapons advanced, i think it was deemed obsolete. Why lob bullets when an m-79 or M203 is available, or you can call arty?
Because it sometimes takes FOREVER nowadays to get 105mm, 155mm or airstrikes cleared. Long Range fire still has a purpose but the Army no longer teaches it for the most part. We always stuck to 81mm and 120mm mortars for troops in contact missions since it only took a the Battalion Operations officer or Battalion Commander to authorize the clearance of fires. This was back in 06-07 in Iraq in my case.
The M-79 and M203 fire a 40mm grenade. They have no where near the range of a rifle projectile so youre area denial is limited to 450 yards and in, where a rifle can cover that same area with direct fire. Now the MK19 grenade launcher is a whole different story. With the firing tables you can do amazing things.
Ok.... wouldn't it be harder to adjust your fire? When an artillery round impacts, you know where it landed and can call in the corrections. With a rifle bullet - standard ball - you won't always be able to see the strike.... Right?
Warning: I know Judo. If you force me to prove it I'll shoot you.
A friend of mine walked in 7.62 NATO fire from his M-14 by accidentally hitting a cow during a firefight near Yusufiyah Iraq. He guesstimated and eventually killed the guy by holding off slightly more. He hit a guy using a slick M-14 with irons at 600 meters! It can be done, he was exceptionally good with just about any rifle.
You have to consider that when plunging fire is used it is with a machine gun. There will be many impacts and should be easier to spot depending on the terrain the bullets are landing in. Plunging fire is mainly used from the defense and static positions so you are shooting known range, and can lock in your T&E. Plunging fire is not something that is "on call". Most of the time I have seen plunging fire used was shooting up hill to cover hill tops. An experienced MachineGunner can work magic.
That isn't really plunging fire, thats direct fire with a little kentucky windage. Plunging fire is using the downward trajectoy of the bullet after it reaches max ord to fall onto the enemy or into open top positions like behind sandbags or in a fighting hole or on a hilltop or in a depression. Think defilade.
Plunging fire can also be used to bring fire down onto the opposite side of a hill, but if you have mortars n call than I would much rather call them!! Unless of course they are too busy playing spades.
Last edited by Love Life; 10-31-2011 at 11:31 PM.
Never had to use plunging fire in my short time in the Infantry. In this case my friend used Kentucky elevation, the rifle was zeroed to 300m. 60-81-120mm were our friends.
We finally got 120mm's, but they went to arty and are now as usless as arty and air is nowadays.
*****************DISCLAIMER***************
I am not saying that field artillary or Air are useless in and of themselves. I am saying they are useless because our lawmakers have tied our hands behind our backs and kicked us in a sensitive area with stupid ROEs
*****************DISCLAIMER***************
Very well put!...when did they change the MTOE? I was in a Light Infantry unit, we had two 120mm tubes per BN Mortar platoon if I remembered correctly. We could never get the USAF to do anything in Iraq when I was there...the Navy and the RAF were much more useful. But then again....it has been almost five years since I was overseas.
We could never get the USAF to do anything in Iraq when I was there...the Navy and the RAF were much more useful
That is too funny. We use to say the same thing about the Airforce and the Navy doing nothing for us, but the Army was always willing to roll out tanks or strikers to support us if we got into a bad spot. God forbid a Marine Corps tank get dirty rolling through the desert!!
Back in Iraq in 2005 and then again from 2006-2007 it was very hard to get authorization to drop mortars, arty, or get air. Although we were in densley populated cities relatively speaking, and that played a major part. No worries though. We just used AT-4 rockets, LAWS, and my favorite, the SMAW firing thermobaric rockets. Those things would fold a small mud hut, and turn anybody inside the color of purple. Got to love death by overpressure.
Back on topic. To answer the OP's question it is because it is very inefficient with an infantry rifle and unit.
Anybody want to do some research and find out why the Buffington sight (Trapdoor Springfield) is mounted at the angle it is and why the elevator shifts as you rise it? Something to do with compensating for the effect of the right turn of the rifling on the impact of the bullet? At what ranges do you need to be shooting before that becomes a significant effect? Yet it was built in to the sight.
Methinks they might have been planning on using them for indirect fire?
Wayne the Shrink
There is no 'right' that requires me to work for you or you to work for me!
Obviously you've never looked at the range on the sights of a turn of the century through mid 1940s rifle or machine gun. Most of them are graduated out to about 2000 yards to do precisely this.
Posting Permissions
| BP | Bronze Point | IMR | Improved Military Rifle | PTD | Pointed |
| BR | Bench Rest | M | Magnum | RN | Round Nose |
| BT | Boat Tail | PL | Power-Lokt | SP | Soft Point |
| C | Compressed Charge | PR | Primer | SPCL | Soft Point "Core-Lokt" |
| HP | Hollow Point | PSPCL | Pointed Soft Point "Core Lokt" | C.O.L. | Cartridge Overall Length |
| PSP | Pointed Soft Point | Spz | Spitzer Point | SBT | Spitzer Boat Tail |
| LRN | Lead Round Nose | LWC | Lead Wad Cutter | LSWC | Lead Semi Wad Cutter |
| GC | Gas Check |
Reply With Quote