Quote:
|
Originally Posted by M21Sniper
The 5" gun is more versatile just as a 60mm mortar is more versatile than a 155mm gun.
Does that reflect negatively on the 155mm gun?
Not in my opinion.
|
Naturally, you are correct; what I was trying to say and the impression I gave might not have come out quite right.
Quote:
|
As far as what marines say what about the 16" system, there aren't that many around that would even know- one way or another.
|
One example that sticks out in my mind was is aging, retired Marine Colonel who had experience in both Korea and Vietnam had several poor experiences with that system and naval gunfire in general.
He liked the timeliness and accuracy of CAS much better.
The Colonel had a very low opinion of ANGLICO and would very much like to have killed some of their people after a few botched jobs. Too, he liked CAS becuase it was nice to be able to get different types of ordnance or cannon fire and considered it a much safer than getting shelled by your own boats.
Naturally, I am sure that things have progressed significantly since those days but the Colonel had some legitimate gripes, I think. Having few or no people between the shooter and the spotter and having as little distance between the supporting units and the target were the gist of his problem, I think.
When the US went into Afghanistan, the Colonel thought that the orbiting B52s plinking bunkers with JADMS on request was the cats meow. He does not think naval gunfire should be done away with, he just feels that it is easy to over rate and is not always delivered by people who are on the ball or situationally aware which makes it part of the problem, not part of the solution.