Soviet anti aircraft maneuver

Status
Not open for further replies.
Duck Season! :)

I don't want to be downrange where those bullets land. There is a reason to use shot for ducks and other game birds!
 
Last edited:
I don't know what year that was, but in the first half of the 20th century it was not uncommon for troops to engage the slow, low-flying early aircraft that might appear over their trenches. Sure wouldn't be hard to bring down a early Sopwith, SPAD, or Fokker with a well-placed .30 cal round.

Especially in volley fire, as shown.

I believe more than a few rotary-wing craft crashes as late as Vietnam were attributed to small arms fire -- AKs, SKSs, Mosins and the like being the most likely culprits.
 
This is not an ordinary infantry unit. It's a school for snipers. (Note the scopes on the Mosins, plus the inclusion of at least two women, in skirts.)

I would go with the theory that they're practicing anti-paratroop fire. (A scoped rifle is no good for anti-aircraft volley fire, because the field of view is too restricted, making it impossible to take a proper lead on a fast-moving airplane.) When deployed, they'd be in two-person teams.
 
In WW1, the infamous "Red Baron" (Von Richtofen) was engaged in a low altitude dogfight over enemy territory (a practice he ironically warned his disciples against doing) when he was brought down by enemy fire. For a long time it was debated who's bullet had done the deed, a British pilot who'd joined in the dogfight to aid an ally in trouble, or a soldier on the ground beneath them, one of a number who had been firing on the German ace.
From the wound in Von Richtofen's body it appeared that it had been groundfire that had hit the well respected pilot.
Even today a lucky shot from an AK could bring down a F-18 or similar fighter, but the fighter would have to be unusually low (perhaps a ground attack mission) and it could really only be a truly lucky shot. Get a bullet into the air intake and hit those compressor blades and the compressor self destructs. But this would be the exception not the rule.
 
I am currently reading a book on the Battle for the Falklands and the British and Argentine troops both used their automatic rifles (FAL's I believe) to fire at ground support aircraft. I am not sure if they brought any down but they put a few holes in some.
 
Even today a lucky shot from an AK could bring down a F-18 or similar fighter, but the fighter would have to be unusually low (perhaps a ground attack mission) and it could really only be a truly lucky shot. Get a bullet into the air intake and hit those compressor blades and the compressor self destructs. But this would be the exception not the rule.

Guy in my book does this to a high flying jet, but it's with an alien rifle and he's a supersoldier.
 
Take a look at the Japanese Type 99 rifle anti-aircraft sights.
Yeah, they used them to shoot at aircraft.
 
You won't find too many marine attack pilots laughing; no fun at all flying through a wall of small arms barrage fire. More than a few pilots got bagged by NVA golden bb's.
 
Sam 1911:
In the book "Chickenhawk", written by a brand-new Huey pilot who flew assaults in S. Vietnam, there was quite a surprise one day at a landing zone.

The VC had built a giant bow and arrow, using a tree as a bow and a long thick branch as an arrow. They must have had nightmares later about that. The VC usually knew where the Hueys were headed, it seemed-maybe the "chain of command" had too many leaks.
 
Last edited:
I think it's an example of buying into "Uncle Joe's" propaganda. They were no doubt told that Soviet sniper rifles being the pinnacle of pin-point marksmanship from the People's Perfect Proletariat Paradise - and thus worlds better than any other nation's rifle - could hit the moon. Here's the daylight phase of training.

I'm going anti-para though interesting points have been touched upon in jest. I find particular interest in the old training manuals that I collect when they refer to things like concentrated indirect fire (motor-like) of bolt action rifles and anti-aircraft training.
 
bushmaster1313 said:
Tommygunn said:
For a long time it was debated who's bullet had done the deed, a British pilot who'd joined in the dogfight to aid an ally in trouble, or a soldier on the ground beneath them, one of a number who had been firing on the German ace.

Snoopy
:what:
Yea, Snoopy WISHES!:rolleyes:

;)
 
I'd have to dig through two volumes of Airwar by Joseph Jablonski to find it, but he did make a remark somewhere about how in every war, the Generals always get a big surprise when they find out how vulnerable aircraft are to small arms ground fire.

And I would not assume that the Russian troops were looking through the scopes for anti-aircraft fire, but rather perhaps along the scopes. I suspect this because of the long "eye relief" of the guy on the extreme left in the picture, as well as some of the others. They might use the glass for paratroopers, though.

Pull!
 
Last edited:
Range and caliber of the single shot MN would be capable of bringing down aircraft. But it would be a very tough task and require some lucky hits. Hence the volley of shots... From the ground you'd have no way of knowing whether you scored a hit, and whether you needed to adjust fire to left, right, forward etc. without tracers.

With paratroopers you'd know if you scored a hit.

A few points... many of those Soldiers are looking at the iron sites under the scopes, or appear to be looking along the scopes.

Also interesting, I see at least one female and one asian amonst the soldiers.
 
It might be fifty two years too late to say this, but the Majors and Lt. Cmdrs should be in charge of the Pentagon.

The ticket-punching generals should be herded into the back rooms to process paperwork, in case some of them still have the "Maginot Line" mentality, in a relative sense.
 
I suspect this because of the long "eye relief" of the guy on the extreme left in the picture, as well as some of the others.

The "guy" on the extreme left is a woman. Notice the skirt. The Asian on the right is also a woman, wearing a skirt. The Soviets were well-known for using women as snipers in WWII. The men's uniforms in this picture are quite different from the women's.
 
You can tell these are Russian army troops. If they were marines they'd have their bayonets fixed. :D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top