NationStates

Fordorsia wrote:

Premislyd wrote:Then suddenly, something infantry-related was posted.

---

Guards mechanized infantry section (Revised; Present day)
Squad "A"
-Section leader (Sgt./Any derivative of Sgt.; TBK-022PM w/ 1.6x optic, basic infantry radio)
-GPMGer (Pvt./PFC.; Uk vz. 59L w/ 3.4x optic, 2 x 250 round belt)
-Ast. Rifleman (Spc..; TKB-022PM w/ 1.6x optic, 4 x 50 round belt)
-AT rifleman (Pvt./PFC.; TKB-022PM w/ 1.6x optic, 2 x 50 round belt, RPG-22)
-DMRman (Pvt./PFC.; SVDS w/ 4.8x optic, 2 x 50 round belt)
Squad "B"
-Squad leader/Section SiC (Jr. Sgt.; TKB-022PM w/ 1.6x optic)
-Grenadier (Pvt./PFC.; TKB-022PM w/ 1.6 optic, 4 x 5.5 cm direct fire rifle grenades [HE])
-Grenadier (Pvt./PFC.; TKB-022PM w/ 1.6 optic, 4 x 5.5 cm direct fire rifle grenades [HE])
-Rifleman (Pvt./PFC.; TKB-022PM w/ 1.6 optic, 2 x 5.5 cm direct fire rifle grenades [HE])
-Rifleman (Pvt./PFC.; TKB-022PM w/ 1.6 optic, 2 x 5.5 cm direct fire rifle grenades [HE])

---

Also, I'm surprised none of you brought up that Denmark picked the M60E4 over the HK121 to replace their MG 3s.

What kind of silly person replaces their MG-3s at all, let alone with the M60?

Coltarin wrote:

Paddy O Fernature wrote:
And your "cav" is wearing a Muppet on their head. The point?

Hakkapeliitta>Winged Polish Hussars>American cav> all others

Premislyd wrote:

Fordorsia wrote:
What kind of silly person replaces their MG-3s at all, let alone with the M60?

Easier control when firing (550 rpm [M60E4] compared to ~1200 rpm [MG 3]), also easier to conserve ammo and better accuracy.
According to the Danish army website, the M60E4 was more reliable.
Also, the M60E4 is about 3 kg lighter than the MG3.

Fordorsia wrote:Stop spamming shit about cavalry.

Coltarin wrote:

Paddy O Fernature wrote:
And your "cav" is wearing a Muppet on their head. The point?

Winged Polish Hussars>American cav> all others

Paddy O Fernature wrote:

Fordorsia wrote:Stop spamming shit about cavalry.

A discussion is hardly "spamming"..

Fordorsia wrote:Stop spamming shit about cavalry.

Premislyd wrote:
Easier control when firing (550 rpm [M60E4] compared to ~1200 rpm [MG 3]), also easier to conserve ammo and better accuracy.
According to the Danish army website, the M60E4 was more reliable.
Also, the M60E4 is about 3 kg lighter than the MG3.

Huh, I was always under the impression that the MG-3 was one of, if not the most reliable GPMG ever made. I thought they weighed around the same too.
I'm learnding.

Paddy O Fernature wrote:

Fordorsia wrote:Stop spamming shit about cavalry.

A discussion is hardly "spamming"..

United states of brazilian nations wrote:-Snip-

Fordorsia wrote:

Paddy O Fernature wrote:
A discussion is hardly "spamming"..

I could have a discussion about the possibility of life on Mars in this thread. It would still be spam.

Kouralia wrote:Infantry Question: So, who uses mounted (horse mounted) infantry (i.e. dragoons) in their military?

If you no longer use them, when did you stop?

Premislyd wrote:

United states of brazilian nations wrote:

correction:

(Image)
(Image)
(Image)

Winged Polish Hussars> Brazilian buffalo-mounted cav > all others

This is probably the best thing somebody has ever spammed.

Fordorsia wrote:Stop spamming shit about cavalry.

Premislyd wrote:
Easier control when firing (550 rpm [M60E4] compared to ~1200 rpm [MG 3]), also easier to conserve ammo and better accuracy.
According to the Danish army website, the M60E4 was more reliable.
Also, the M60E4 is about 3 kg lighter than the MG3.

Huh, I was always under the impression that the MG-3 was one of, if not the most reliable GPMG ever made. I thought they weighed around the same too.
I'm learnding.

Bratislavskaya wrote:Would there be a point in having cavalry as border patrol? Horses are better off road than vehicles, and the people would get off the horses to do stuff. Am I on to something here or have loads of people been doing it for ages?

Bratislavskaya wrote:Would there be a point in having cavalry as border patrol? Horses are better off road than vehicles, and the people would get off the horses to do stuff. Am I on to something here or have loads of people been doing it for ages?

Paddy O Fernature wrote:

Bratislavskaya wrote:Would there be a point in having cavalry as border patrol? Horses are better off road than vehicles, and the people would get off the horses to do stuff. Am I on to something here or have loads of people been doing it for ages?

Yes actually, and the US has been doing it for quite some time now.

Bezombia wrote:PKP

Gallia- wrote:(Image)

viking bear border patrol > all other mounts

Gallia- wrote:(Image)

viking bear border patrol > all other mounts

Kouralia wrote:Infantry Question: So, who uses mounted (horse mounted) infantry (i.e. dragoons) in their military?

If you no longer use them, when did you stop?

Gallia- wrote:(Image)

viking bear border patrol > all other mounts

Kouralia wrote:Infantry Question: So, who uses mounted (horse mounted) infantry (i.e. dragoons) in their military?

If you no longer use them, when did you stop?

United states of brazilian nations wrote:snip

Premislyd wrote:

Fordorsia wrote:Stop spamming shit about cavalry.



Huh, I was always under the impression that the MG-3 was one of, if not the most reliable GPMG ever made. I thought they weighed around the same too.
I'm learnding.

It is. The competition was between the Hekler and Cock 121 and the M60E6 (which is basically an M60E4 with a different bipod and foregrip).

Premislyd wrote:It is. The competition was between the Hekler and Cock 121 and the M60E6 (which is basically an M60E4 with a different bipod and foregrip).

Puzikas wrote:*M60E6.