Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!uxc.cso.uiuc.edu!iuvax!rutgers!att!cbnews!military
From: mcgrew@topaz.rutgers.edu (Charles)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Tracer Bullets
Message-ID: <8237@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Date: 13 Jul 89 03:09:33 GMT
References: <8034@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Sender: military@cbnews.ATT.COM
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.
Lines: 22
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: mcgrew@topaz.rutgers.edu (Charles)

Henry Spencer comments:

>>I've heard that the guns on WW2 aircraft
>>would alternate tracers with other types, like armor-piercing...

>Not uncommon.  A lousy idea, as it turns out, because the ballistics are
>not quite the same.  At least one fighter commander improved his group's
>gunnery considerably by ordering the tracers deleted.

   Also, some pilots stopped using them because enemy pilots would be
able to evade surprise attack, since early (wide) fire from the
attacker would be very obvious and allow a good pilot the chance to
maneuver away.  I seem to remember reading this in Martin Caidin's
"P-38", if nowhere else.   If you've got a reliable gunsight, then you
don't need tracers to tell you where you're shooting.


Charles