Something about getting rid of oversized trees/bushes?So what was Op LEYLAND then?
Something about getting rid of oversized trees/bushes?So what was Op LEYLAND then?
The thing is, which really is quite funny, you're totally out of your depth here and have no idea what you're talking about. Absolutely none. It's got nothing to do with "explosive safety" or "HCC 1.2F" or "susceptibility to RF hazards" or "constraints on trundling" or "pre firing checks". You may well have been an SME on ammo and explosives, but that has nothing to do with Milan's "USE OR OPERATION IN THE FIELD" which you also absurdly claimed to be an expert on, saying equally absurdly I knew nothing about it.The thing is John, I’m the SME on Ammunition and explosives, which includes GW.
You’re a mediocre, passed over major. You’ve heard a little information and adopted it as gospel.
What constraint would you like to hear about? It being HCC 1.2F (do you know why?). It’s susceptibility to RF hazards? Constraints on trundling?
Or are you referring to pre firing checks? Which are not classed as constraints.
As I said, ambiguous, your stupidity doesn’t remove that.
The thing is, which really is quite funny, you're totally out of your depth here and have no idea what you're talking about. Absolutely none. It's got nothing to do with "explosive safety" or "HCC 1.2F" or "susceptibility to RF hazards" or "constraints on trundling" or "pre firing checks". You may well have been an SME on ammo and explosives, but that has nothing to do with Milan's "USE OR OPERATION IN THE FIELD" which you also absurdly claimed to be an expert on, saying equally absurdly I knew nothing about it.
Your field of expertise, where you used to be an SME, has nothing to do with that at all. It's about Milan's "USE OR OPERATION IN THE FIELD" - your words, not mine, about which you obviously know nothing. Zero. Zip. Nada.
It's not your fault - there's no possible reason why you could, would or should know anything about Milan's "USE OR OPERATION IN THE FIELD" . It's simply not your area of expertise so it's understandable that you don't know the first thing about it. What's less understandable is why you'd feel the need to pretend to.
Hate to disillusion you, but unlike mine where there is only one correct and obvious answer, yours is very ambiguous.Let me ask you an unambiguous question
What is the effective range of Milan?
agreedThe thing is, which really is quite funny, you're totally out of your depth here and have no idea what you're talking about. Absolutely none. It's got nothing to do with "explosive safety" or "HCC 1.2F" or "susceptibility to RF hazards" or "constraints on trundling" or "pre firing checks". You may well have been an SME on ammo and explosives, but that has nothing to do with Milan's "USE OR OPERATION IN THE FIELD" which you also absurdly claimed to be an expert on, saying equally absurdly I knew nothing about it.
Your field of expertise, where you used to be an SME, has nothing to do with that at all. It's about Milan's "USE OR OPERATION IN THE FIELD" - your words, not mine, about which you obviously know nothing. Zero. Zip. Nada.
It's not your fault - there's no possible reason why you could, would or should know anything about Milan's "USE OR OPERATION IN THE FIELD" . It's simply not your area of expertise so it's understandable that you don't know the first thing about it. What's less understandable is why you'd feel the need to pretend to.
Hate to disillusion you, but unlike mine where there is only one correct and obvious answer, yours is very ambiguous.
You really are being even more stupid than normal on this.It has everything to do with use and operation in the field. You really need to get a little more educated John.
Why don’t you say what you think it is, then I (and the other ATOs on here) can have a good laugh.
You still haven’t told me what the effective range is.
You really are being even more stupid than normal on this.
Limitations on "USE AND OPERATIONS IN THE FIELD" has absolutely nothing to do with what you or any other ATOs are taught / know. Absolutely nothing.
Milan's use and operation in the field is limited by the system, and that dictates how it can be used and operated effectively. If you don't know those limitations, which have nothing to do with "trundling", "explosive safety", etc, then you have no idea how to use and operate Milan in the field. None. Nada. Zip. Your constraints are all factors to be considered, particularly when it comes to handling and storage, but they have nothing to do with its use and operation in the field.
I'll give you a hint that has to tell you the answer.
All your constraints are the same wherever the system's used. Mine aren't.
The limitations on how you can use Milan effectively as it has been in a number of theatres from the Falklands to Africa, Syria, both Gulf Wars (both sides), Afghanistan (both sides), etc, are totally different to how it could be used effectively in BAOR which is what it was bought for (hence the question).
Are you seriously that stupid you still can't see it and don't know the problem?
Limitations on "USE AND OPERATIONS IN THE FIELD" has absolutely nothing to do with what you or any other ATOs are taught / know. Absolutely nothing.
Not "struggling" at all, apart from with your question which is meaningless apart from to an AT reading the book, not someone using the system. You're asking a question from an AT's perspective, not that of someone using the weapon operationally.As you are struggling with the effective range of a guided weapon, as an ATO, I’m here to help. The minimum range at which the system can effectively engage a target to the maximum range it can effectively engage a target. I would like to see an answer in the format: xxxM to xxxM.
Really John, potential ATs on their basic course never struggled with this, it’s a bread and butter question.
I think that's a bit of a given.Caveat. I know next to nothing about Milan
Are you serious?This just looks like utter bullshit.
Not "struggling" at all, apart from with your question which is meaningless apart from to an AT reading the book, not someone using the system. You're asking a question from an AT's perspective, not that of someone using the weapon operationally.
Minimum effective range? It depends entirely on the target. Officially it's 200m. In practice the first stage takes it about 3m so in theory it's not effective at all until then but I wouldn't volunteer to put my head in front of it 2.95m away. You might, up to you. In practice it's 300-400m as that's how long it normally takes the firer to get full control of the missile, but as long as the target didn't change speed or direction an experienced firer who could pre-aim and judge the vehicle's speed and direction correctly and apply the right lead, or against a static target, could make it 200m - even less if it was a big static target, and obviously targets and how much of them are visible varies.
Maximum effective range? Technically first 1,990m then 2000m, but in practice around 2,100m as that's when the wire runs out, at least on Milan 1 and 2 which is all I've used and have experience of (the others, as I've said, are after my time but pre-yours) Again, I wouldn't like to have stood 2,110m away to prove a point, but if you would up to you.