PK of Igla vs. airliner?

"John R Weiss" wrote in message
...
"Tarver Engineering" wrote...

If the target is an airplane, it would be more a matter of skill than
luck.

Even with a lot of skill, you aren't going to hit a flying 747 engine
with a
50 cal, except by luck.

Here we go again... Tarver realizes his previous statements are pure BS,
but
instead of retracting them or admitting his error, he simply changes the
topic
and/or parameters in mid stream...

No John Weiss, it is you that changed the subject, one having to do with the
striking the engine compressor with a sholder fired 50 cal. I do wish you
would work on your reading and comprehenbsion, Weiss.

Initially, the target was an airplane, the weapon was a high-power rifle,
and
the range was a few hundred yards. Now, according to Tarver, we're
reduced to a
747 engine, a "50 cal," and 1000 yards...

Nope, the discussion is tied to a URL for a specific exploding ammunition in
50 calibre. The fact that you can't read is not a reason for you to become
insulting, Weiss.

Still, I contend that a skilled marksman or sniper, after a reasonable
amount of
specific training and practice, could consistently hit an engine on a 747
flying
at 120 knots, on a stable path perpendicular to the bullet path, from a
range of
1,000'.

LOL

First you can't read and then you have a brain fart.

At 120 knots, an object is moving about 200 feet per second. At a
range of "a
few hundred yards" (1,000', for a round number),

1000 yards is about the effective range of the weapon, on a stationary
target.

So, the stated range is well inside the effective range -- not a problem!

Big problem, as the flying airplane is well outside the parameters of
"stationary".

the time of flight for a round
from any modern, high-power rifle would be much less than a second.

With the target moving at 200 feet a second there is little chance of
hitting an engine.

When the target is at a nominal range of 1000 feet, the crossing angle
rate is
just over 11 degrees per second, well within the capability of a marksman
to
follow a target in stable flight and hold aim on a target several feet
high and
several feet wide.

Lead becomes the problem and I think you know I lowballed the airspeed.

What is the crossing rate of the clay pigeons on a trap or skeet range,
just for
comparison purposes?

Our skeet expert is Art, so you'll have to ask him.

You don't gat a couple of bracketing shots, by then the target is gone.
What are you dreaming of Weiss, a 50 cal mounted on a Humvee?

For an engineer, you sure demonstrate a significant lack of capability for
simple analysis!

I have a real problem with the idea of bracketing shots from a sholder fired
50 caliber at a target traveling at 3 miles a minute. Perhaps you could
head for a shooting range and acquire some knowledge, Weiss.

The weapon could be "a 50 cal mounted on a Humvee," an M-60 on a bipod, or
a
shoulder-mounted rifle of almost any description.

No, the thread is specificly about a sholder fired 50 calibre, of which a
single shot and a semi automatic are available to the public, using specific
ammunition and striking the compressor face.

Of course, if we change the subject to some completely different set of
parameters, Weiss might be correct. A tripod mounted 50 calibre machine gun
could do the job.

Assume a conservative field of fire -- 30 degrees either side of a line
perpendicular to the flight path. At a perpendicular range of 1000' the
length
of the flight path within the field of fire is 1154', placing any point on
the
airplane within the field of fire for 5.77 seconds. That gives the
marksman
more than sufficient time to accurately place shots.

That should get you all of one shot with a sholder fired 50 calibre, no
bracketing shots there, Weiss.

A sniper can consistently place shots within a minute of arc. With a
nominal 2'
cross-section, an aircraft engine subtends almost 7 minutes of arc at
1000'.
The probability of a skilled marksman hitting a 747 engine with multiple
shots
from a 10-round clip under the stated conditions is very high. If the
target is
the airplane instead of just the engine, the probability of multiple hits
approaches 1.

I think Weiss has us back to a Humvee mounted machine gun.

Of course, Weiss has a habbit of changing the subject such that what he
wrote previously isn't as luney as when it was penned. Educational though.