263
submitted 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) by Track_Shovel@slrpnk.net to c/noncredibledefense@lemmy.world

Sorry forgot to crop the photo - fixed

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] schmidtster@lemmy.world 14 points 9 months ago

It’s safer than putting 88 people in the line of fire with the same circumstances. Theres the whole it’s less accurate angle, but its safer, man power not put in line of fire could be used to reload and swap magazines.

[-] RedditRefugee69@lemmy.world 31 points 9 months ago

The biggest reasons this straight sucks are: identification of friendlies/civilians from the air, not getting blown up at extremely low altitudes, how crazy spread out everything in real life combat

[-] waigl@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

Those reasons would apply to any air based anti-ground operations, even perfectly normal bomber or attacker planes.

[-] RedditRefugee69@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

The spread of an explosive bomb is WAY more than a bullet. So you only bomb places you know there are no friendlies unless you’re using forward facing guns

[-] Diplomjodler@feddit.de 4 points 9 months ago

This thing is getting shot down the second it comes into view. It's never going to even get close enough to an enemy formation to be used effectively.

this post was submitted on 25 Jan 2024
263 points (98.9% liked)

NonCredibleDefense

3530 readers
126 users here now

Rules:

  1. Posts must abide by lemmy.world terms and conditions
  2. No spam or soliciting for money.
  3. No racism or other bigotry allowed.
  4. Obviously nothing illegal.

If you see these please report them.

Related communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS