Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac,att!cbnews!cbnews!military
From: davecb@nexus.yorku.ca (David Collier-Brown)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Accuracy of M203? (was Re: Small Arms)
Message-ID: <1991Mar18.133405.15853@cbnews.att.com>
Date: 18 Mar 91 13:34:05 GMT
References: <1991Mar4.212601.9682@cbnews.att.com> <1991Mar6.042515.25383@cbnews.att.com> <1991Mar8.023826.10803@cbnews.att.com> <1991Mar14.040807.28534@cbnews.att.com>
Sender: military@cbnews.att.com (william.b.thacker)
Organization: York U. Computing Services
Lines: 26
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: davecb@nexus.yorku.ca (David Collier-Brown)

mtxinu!Ingres.COM!daveb@uunet.UU.NET (Dave Brower) writes:
| If the thing fires ~400m with an arced trajectory, what kind of accuracy
| can the grenadier have firing it hand-held?  You'd think it would take a
| few shots just to find the range, or a hell of a lot of practice with
| dummy rounds.

  Well, if you define hand-held as butt-on-ground, the second shot at 200
yards should be within 3-4 yards: at that range I could hit a (somewhat
used) tank with a 60mm mortar.
  Firing offhand (butt off ground) might well be much less accurate:  I
could only hit on about the fourth shot firing flat-trajectory with the 60,
and that was will the spade still on the ground. I'd expect 50 yards would
be reasonable...

--dave
Disclaimer: the 60mm mortar was about the only weapon I could hit
	anything with.  People with normal reflexes may do better (:-)).
-- 
David Collier-Brown,  | davecb@Nexus.YorkU.CA | lethe!dave
72 Abitibi Ave.,      | 
Willowdale, Ontario,  | Even cannibals don't usually eat their
CANADA. 416-223-8968  | friends.