Sorry forgot to crop the photo - fixed
this post was submitted on 25 Jan 2024
260 points (98.9% liked)
NonCredibleDefense
3503 readers
3 users here now
Rules:
- Posts must abide by lemmy.world terms and conditions
- No spam or soliciting for money.
- No racism or other bigotry allowed.
- Obviously nothing illegal.
If you see these please report them.
Related communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
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.
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
Those reasons would apply to any air based anti-ground operations, even perfectly normal bomber or attacker planes.
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
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.