From: Laserlight <laserlight@q...>
Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 09:37:53 -0500
Subject: [SG] HAMR
Under the section on snipers, it mentions the Heavy Anti Materiel Rifle or HAMR. What is this supposed to represent? A.50 cal rifle, or something bigger? Imapct 2d12 seems a lot for a.50 cal, but IIRC a recoilless has a
From: Randy Stoda <stodas@f...>
Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 09:10:55 -0600
Subject: Re: [SG] HAMR
> From the figures I've seen, I'd say it was some kind of mini-railgun - Well, wait - I guess that would be more along the lines of the Gauss sniping rifle, wouldn't it? > Laserlight wrote: > Under the section on snipers, it mentions the Heavy Anti Materiel
From: John Atkinson <johnmatkinson@y...>
Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 11:28:28 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: [SG] HAMR
> --- Laserlight <laserlight@quixnet.net> wrote: I always presume so, considering that "anti-materiel rifle" is what.50 cal rifles are called. Mostly because that's what they are used for since it's so much overkill it's ridiculous to shoot individuals with it. NRE has a 13mm Electrothermal-chemical rifle in that role. > Imapct 2d12 seems a lot for a .50 cal, but IIRC a Yeah.
From: Robert Makowsky <rmakowsky@y...>
Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 17:15:08 -0400
Subject: RE: [SG] HAMR
It is also counter to the Geneva Convention to use that round against human targets. Course I have always considered belt buckles and web gear to be material. Bob [quoted original message omitted]
From: Sutherland <charles@n...>
Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 07:50:46 +0900
Subject: RE: [SG] HAMR
How much signature would a cone rifle have? I would think it would have enough punch for anti-material work. And since we are talking about future weapons we can assume they have worked out all the bugs by then. That chuk Guy > -----Original Message-----
From: John Atkinson <johnmatkinson@y...>
Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 15:21:19 -0800 (PST)
Subject: RE: [SG] HAMR
> --- The Sutherlands <nma@kda.attmil.ne.jp> wrote: ^^^^^ What's that extension mean? > How much signature would a cone rifle have? I would I don't think they'd have much signature at first, but the rocket motor would have a good sonic/thermal signature. Depends on what your enemy's counter-sniper doctrine is and what kind of sensors are available.
From: DAWGFACE47@w...
Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 17:45:33 -0600 (CST)
Subject: RE: [SG] HAMR
LOL! GENEVA CONVENTION! IF I had a $1000.00 for every NVA/VC soldier i saw that was killed or wounded by a .50-cal round, i would be VERY RICH! IF I had $1000.00 for every NVA/VC killed by a 20mm round or a 40mm, I would have spare change! and if I had $1000.00 for every ARVN, GI, ALLY, etc, killed or wounded by 12.7mm or 14.7mm rounds, i would be VERY RICH! IF I had $1000.00 for every one on our side killed or wounded by 23mm and 37mm rounds, again i would have big pocket money! AND if I had $1.00 for each and every round in the above calibers fired by all combatants at enemy soldiers, during the RVN WAR, I would be a BILLIONAIRE!
From: DAWGFACE47@w...
Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 17:54:32 -0600 (CST)
Subject: RE: [SG] HAMR
GYROJETS (CONES), as i recall had completely burned their propellant charges by the time the round leaves the barrel. i suspect that there would be a signature caused by muzzle gases kicking up dust and vegetation near the muzzle, as well as a "flash" much like modern firearms do.
From: Sutherland <charles@n...>
Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 16:57:30 +0900
Subject: RE: [SG] HAMR
> --- The Sutherlands <nma@kda.attmil.ne.jp> wrote: jp is for Japan. I am not sure about ne. Might be a company or ISP
From: Michael Llaneza <maserati@e...>
Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 01:28:23 -0800
Subject: Re: [SG] HAMR
ne.jp is the Japanese-language equivalent of .net. attmil offers telecom services to military personnel, and apparently email as well > The Sutherlands wrote: > --- The Sutherlands <nma@kda.attmil.ne.jp> wrote:
From: Glenn M Wilson <triphibious@j...>
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2002 19:24:06 EST
Subject: Re: [SG] HAMR
On Tue, 19 Mar 2002 17:54:24 -0800 (PST) John Atkinson > <johnmatkinson@yahoo.com> writes:
From: Glenn M Wilson <triphibious@j...>
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2002 19:24:06 EST
Subject: Re: [SG] HAMR
On Sun, 17 Mar 2002 20:46:20 +1100 "Alan and Carmel Brain" > <aebrain@webone.com.au> writes: <snip good stuff> > But IANAL. Okay, translation time, please.
From: Glenn M Wilson <triphibious@j...>
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2002 19:24:06 EST
Subject: Re: [SG] HAMR
On Tue, 19 Mar 2002 17:54:24 -0800 (PST) John Atkinson > <johnmatkinson@yahoo.com> writes: LOL! Weren't we all?
From: Glenn M Wilson <triphibious@j...>
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2002 19:24:06 EST
Subject: Re: [SG] HAMR
On Sun, 17 Mar 2002 23:49:24 -0500 (EST) "John Crimmins" > <johncrim@voicenet.com> writes: <snip> > And yeah, the Cabal has yet to contact me. Bastards. I'm giving Smash your miniatures?!?!? Now *That's* a war crime!!! Gracias,
From: Glenn M Wilson <triphibious@j...>
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2002 21:05:49 EST
Subject: Re: [SG] HAMR
On Wed, 20 Mar 2002 17:47:10 -0800 (PST) John Atkinson > <johnmatkinson@yahoo.com> writes: And tried it anyway?
From: John Leary <john_t_leary@y...>
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2002 23:22:29 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: [SG] HAMR
> --- Glenn M Wilson <triphibious@juno.com> wrote: I think the phrase is 'gifted child'. But then every child must find its own gifts. Bye for now,
From: John Atkinson <johnmatkinson@y...>
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 15:18:52 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: [SG] HAMR
> --- John Leary <john_t_leary@yahoo.com> wrote: > I think the phrase is 'gifted child'. Do you have any idea how much I came to loathe that particular phrase?
From: Brian Bilderback <bbilderback@h...>
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 15:52:44 -0800
Subject: Re: [SG] HAMR
> From: John Atkinson <johnmatkinson@yahoo.com> > --- John Leary <john_t_leary@yahoo.com> wrote: *raising hand* Funny, adults thought they were complimenting - not stigmatizing - us. :-/ 3B^2
From: John Leary <john_t_leary@y...>
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 23:15:26 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: [SG] HAMR
> --- John Atkinson <johnmatkinson@yahoo.com> wrote:
From: Flak Magnet <flakmagnet@t...>
Date: 22 Mar 2002 09:30:14 -0500
Subject: Re: [SG] HAMR
Uh-oh... Mr. Atkinson takes exception to something someone has said, big surprise! > On Thu, 2002-03-21 at 18:18, John Atkinson wrote: