Thread replies: 11
Thread images: 3
Thread images: 3
File: dialsights.jpg (73KB, 519x551px) Image search:
[Google]
73KB, 519x551px
Why don't modern rifles have volley sights?
Especially considering how much volume of fire a modern Semi-automatic or automatic rifle can put out. Volley fire on entrenched positions could be a good way to break the moral of the defenders and even kill some of them.
With all of the various rail attachment points, it would not be hard to mount a volley sight to the rifle.
So why are there no modern volley sights.
>>
>>34637012
Because machine guns, mortars, artillery, tanks and airstikes exist.
>>
>>34637012
Because machine guns and artillery work better. You killed a thread, retard.
>>
>>34637035
There is no reason you cannot supplement those support assets by giving the average soldier the ability to volley fire.
>>
>>34637051
No reason you can't =/= a reason why you should
>>
File: 124124313.jpg (19KB, 351x468px) Image search:
[Google]
19KB, 351x468px
>>34637012
Because the average fire team lacks the amount of people necessary to get an effective volume of fire.
>>
>>34637012
Isn't the modern equivalent just GL sights?
>>
>>34637071
What about a battalion ?
>>
File: 1498920473740.jpg (18KB, 351x468px) Image search:
[Google]
18KB, 351x468px
>>34637174
Now we're talking.
>>
>>34637174
The minimum number of soldiers for a us battalion is 330 soldiers, but often much more than that. You'd be ok with a platoon or company
>>
>>34637012
Kind of surprised volley sights didn't pop up as a ready made solution to the Afghanistan pop shots people keep bitching about as an excuse to replace with 308. With Picatinny rails, it is easy to mount a replacement rear BUIS that can accomodate extreme range area shooting
Thread posts: 11
Thread images: 3
Thread images: 3