search results matching tag: sniper

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (155)     Sift Talk (2)     Blogs (26)     Comments (518)   

Taiwanese performers show off tricks using traditional toy

Battlefield 1 Official Reveal Trailer

AeroMechanical says...

I hope they have some sort of plan in place to prevent every battle devolving into each team consisting entirely of snipers camping out in their trench and taking pot shots at each other.

This would also be a good time for them to finally put some AI bots back into their online play. They'd almost have to. I'm pretty sure their programmers could implement human wave attack AI without too much trouble.

The Most Costly Joke in History

transmorpher says...

I have not agreed that my position is wrong on the performance and capability designs of the F-35 and modern air combat. Please read the rest of my post above.... I'm still saying that dogfights have ended with WW1. I've never said we don't need ANY dog fighting capabilities. I'm saying that it's never the primary design idea of a modern fighter jet. You still have a cannon for back up. Just like soldiers have a side arm and a knife. Just in case you do get caught with your pants down or the main weapon fails at a critical moment.

I have agreed on the waste of money aspect of course. I'll also agree that if test goals are being downsized to accommodate flaws, then that's just terrible. If it's not able to perform to it's design then it's useless.

The F-4 != F-35. I can see why people draw parallels. But that only works if you ignore that absolutely everything on the planes is different, the adversaries are different, and stealth is requirement for survivability. You don't use stealth planes in the way you use an non stealth plane. Have you ever heard of a sniper wearing a ghillie suit run across the open battlefield with a sword or pistol? There were so many tactical mistakes in Vietnam as well. The conditions in which that article talks about are also different. Those planes were flying low and slow for a bombing run. Because they didn't have laser, gps guided bombs, infrared fire and forget air to ground missiles or cruise missiles back in those days. You don't get fog at 40,000 feet. They had to fly that low to get a visual identification of their bombing target. That does not happen anymore either. You scream past at mach 1 above the clouds and the bomb hits where it was programmed to hit. Also the phantoms missiles were unrelaiable. That hasn't been the case since the 80s. And their training was poor. None of that is true these days, and has not been true since the 80s either. That's why every single fighter plane apart from the F-16 (which is made mostly as an export product anyway) has been created to fight at long range primarily. The F-15 which is the main air superiority fighter for the US, is heavy and has a worse maneuverability than any Russian plane. But it's still the most feared plane, with no loses in combat. The article you linked even says that. So it's basically contradicting itself. At the start it says, F-4's lost because they couldn't maneuver, and ends with therefore the US made the F-15 which has worse maneuverability than the Russian planes lol.



Edit: Cracked.com doesn't count as a reputable source for anything, including basic sentences, spelling and punctuation.

Edit2: Here is an article from an actual F-35 pilot that says the F-35 dog fights better than a F-16 since they keep tuning the fly-by-wire parameters. http://theaviationist.com/2016/03/01/heres-what-ive-learned-so-far-dogfighting-in-the-f-35-a-jsf-pilot-first-hand-account/

So even if it came to a dogfighting encounter, the F-35 is still the best plane in the US arsenal for dogfighting.

newtboy said:

Well there YOU go.
I'm not sure if you're aware, but WW1 ended well over 25 years ago, so your repeated contention that 'dogfights ended in ww1' so we don't need any dogfighting capabilities is clearly 100% wrong. I hope you'll stop repeating it now, as it's ridiculously annoying to have a conversation with someone who agrees that their position is wrong, but continues to stand on that position nevertheless.
http://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2015/07/06/usaf_promised_the_f-4_and_f-35_would_never_dogfight_108180.html
and (the last one mentioned here is INSANE)
http://www.cracked.com/article_19396_5-aerial-battles-that-put-top-gun-to-shame.html

I hope you've also arrived at the position now that, if they have to change the testing parameters/minimum acceptable requirements to turn massive fails into 'success' that it fails miserably and can't possibly ever be prepared for real deployment and has become nothing but a massively expensive, poorly preforming jobs program.

The Most Costly Joke in History

newtboy says...

What? Helicopters are LESS vulnerable? How do you figure? They're vulnerable to small arms fire from ground troops, unlike a Warthog (unless you have a super sniper around that can do supercomputer type calculations in a fraction of a second and hit it on the fly with a 50 cal. depleted uranium round). They can pop up and down behind cover and do awesome targeting tricks, but in my eyes, for every advantage they have, there's another disadvantage.

But then you hit the nail on the head. Drones do it ALL better, for exponentially less, without putting a highly trained pilot in danger. I think it's just plain dumb to make piloted planes when we have working drone tech. For the current cost of the R&D on this single plane, not including the cost of building a single working F-35, we could have 1.3 million drones (+-, if we make that many, I'm sure we can make them for <$1 million a piece) and own the skies of the entire planet for eternity....or at least until Skynet takes over. Drones are far cheaper to maintain, don't have the G-force limitations human pilots do, can do far more dangerous jobs because we can afford to lose them, etc. We should never make another fighter that has a pilot IMO....maybe not any kind of military fighting plane.
I also love the A-10, but I've never had to fight in one. That cannon though, so satisfying.

transmorpher said:

I'm saying that the F-35 doesn't need to do the job of the A-10 in the same style, because helicopters and drones already fill that loitering style of close air support. And they fill it better than the warthog. Drones loiter better and longer, and helicopters are less vulnerable while having just as much fire power, with the ability to keep enemies suppressed without stopping to turn around and run in again. Helicopters don't even fly that much slower than the A-10 and they have the advantage of being able to stay on the friendly side of the battle-line while firing at the enemy, as well as being able to use terrain as cover.
And fast movers do a better job of delivering bombs.

The warthog was created as a soviet tank killer and hasn't been used in the role ever, since the cold war never became a hot war. It was created in a time where high losses were acceptable. You could argue it was made to fight a war that didn't happen either. But it's been upgraded with all sorts of sensors that are already in helicopters and drones to extend it's role into something it wasn't really designed for in the first place.

I'm not beating up the warthog, it's my 2nd most favourite plane. I've logged some 400+ virtual flying hours in the A-10C in DCS World. I know what every single switch does in the cockpit. And I've dropped thousands of simulated laser and GPS guided bombs, launched thousands of mavericks, and strafed thousands of BMPs. I love the thing really
But it's duties are performed better by a range of modern aircraft now.

The Most Costly Joke in History

transmorpher says...

Overpriced? Definitely. But turd? no chance. F-35's would be covering other F-35's. In the unlikely case of someone getting in that close. As soon as an enemy plane (somehow magically gets by all defenses and sensors) pops up behind a fellow pilot, they'd be getting shot down by another F-35.

You might have a valid point with the electronic warfare, but it comes with it's own disadvantages. For example as soon as someone starts jamming, they appear hostile (or atleast "unknown")to even their own friendly forces. So it has to be used appropriately. Jamming also only works at certain ranges, and once you are close enough there are ways to get around it.
Jamming also means that you're broadcasting your own position. It definitely makes things harder for the enemy, but it's not a show stopper.

Continuing the sniper analogy. If for some reason the sniper was alone and not part of a combined force, and someone did sneak up on him with a sword then he might be in trouble. Yet do you see snipers being trained with swords in the military? No, because it's so unlikely to happen. But still they carry a knife just in case. As does the F-35. Missiles that shoot almost backwards and a cannon in case sensors fail.


These 40 year old pieces of shit you are talking about are flying at the limits of physics for human pilots by the way

Asmo said:

The sheer energy advantage of jet aircraft overwhelms any maneuverability advantages of WWII aircraft, so when a modern aircraft can't outturn and/or out-energy a 40 year old fighter, it's a steaming pile of shit...

And it's always completely irrelevant until it's completely relevant. eg. new technology comes online jamming guided missles and reducing planes to cannon warfare...

And I'd love to see how your prancing sniper does when he has to get in to knife range (close ground support where cannon fire does matter...).

The plane is an overpriced turd that has been repeatedly polished to give it the shine of a gem, but ultimately it's still a turd.

I love the last line though... "then the rest of the enemies would be mopped up by..." By? By the 40 year old workhorses that the turd is supposed to replace... X D

The F-35 will replace the US Air Force A-10s and F-16s, US Navy F/A-18s, US Marine Corps AV-8B Harriers and F/A-18s, and UK Harrier GR7s and Sea Harrier

Two of your three mop up planes are already F35's. Good luck with that!

The Most Costly Joke in History

Asmo says...

The sheer energy advantage of jet aircraft overwhelms any maneuverability advantages of WWII aircraft, so when a modern aircraft can't outturn and/or out-energy a 40 year old fighter, it's a steaming pile of shit...

And it's always completely irrelevant until it's completely relevant. eg. new technology comes online jamming guided missles and reducing planes to cannon warfare...

And I'd love to see how your prancing sniper does when he has to get in to knife range (close ground support where cannon fire does matter...).

The plane is an overpriced turd that has been repeatedly polished to give it the shine of a gem, but ultimately it's still a turd.

I love the last line though... "then the rest of the enemies would be mopped up by..." By? By the 40 year old workhorses that the turd is supposed to replace... X D

The F-35 will replace the US Air Force A-10s and F-16s, US Navy F/A-18s, US Marine Corps AV-8B Harriers and F/A-18s, and UK Harrier GR7s and Sea Harrier

Two of your three mop up planes are already F35's. Good luck with that!

transmorpher said:

The F-35 can't maneuver as well as an F-16. But F-16 can't maneuver as well as P-51 from World War 2.

There hasn't been a dog fight since the first world war. Even in WW2 it was about strategy, positioning and team work. It had very little to do with plane performance, expect for when there was a huge gap like the invention of the jet plane.

Air combat for the last 60 years has been about situational awareness first and foremost. And the F-35 has this nailed.

It's like saying that modern soldiers don't have any sword fighting skills. It's completely irrelevant. You wouldn't use a sword against a camouflaged sniper. The F-35 is a camouflaged sniper, hiding in the trees. Who would silly enough to run through an open field with a sword? Or even a pistol? The sniper will have killed you before you even know you are being targeted.


Now the people making the F-35 are probably incompetent in delivering a plane on time and on budget(either that or they are milking it). But the plane once finished, will be a winner.


The other thing is, the F-35's will always be part of a force of other planes in a large scale conflict. If for some reason it does come down to dog fighting - e.g. if there are just tons of cheaper planes going against it (with suicidal pilots) that they simply cannot carry enough missiles, then the rest of the enemies would be mopped up by F-15, F-16s , F/A-18s etc.

The Most Costly Joke in History

newtboy says...

No, but the F-16 can out accelerate the P-51, but I don't think the F-35 can out accelerate the F-16, can it?

If the stealth tech worked every time, yes, it would have it nailed. I don't think it does, and even if it does, it's methods will be 'cracked' as soon as they're known and we'll need an entire new plane with new systems. You're right, when it goes as planned. It does not always go as planned, and we don't want to lose an F-35 every time we make a mistake in predictions, do we?

I think it's more like a camouflaged sniper hiding in the trees that's taken over the responsibility for also being an artillery brigade and a front line infantry brigade.
It can't do most of what it's designed to do, can barely do what it's best at, and if it's caught, it can't defend itself.

I really don't think there's a job they have for it that can't be done by the F-15, F-16, F/A-18, F-117, B-2, A-10, etc....meaning there's no need for it at all, and we could have had hundreds of those planes for the cost of the R&D done so far for a plane that doesn't yet work, and costs a mint when it is finally deployed, not just to build but for upkeep too.

I'm pretty sure a lot of pilots in WW2, and Korea, and Vietnam would disagree about dogfighting ending in WW1 and about it being all strategy and not performance. For instance, in WW2, we kicked ass largely because a zero was made of paper and couldn't take a hit while the mustang was a flying tank....or so I've read.

I can sure think of a bunch of other things the fed could have spent $1.3 Trillion on....we could all be traveling in tubes for that much money! The Republican's could make a camp to send all Muslims to on the moon for that kind of money.

transmorpher said:

The F-35 can't maneuver as well as an F-16. But F-16 can't maneuver as well as P-51 from World War 2.

There hasn't been a dog fight since the first world war. Even in WW2 it was about strategy, positioning and team work. It had very little to do with plane performance, expect for when there was a huge gap like the invention of the jet plane.

Air combat for the last 60 years has been about situational awareness first and foremost. And the F-35 has this nailed.

It's like saying that modern soldiers don't have any sword fighting skills. It's completely irrelevant. You wouldn't use a sword against a camouflaged sniper. The F-35 is a camouflaged sniper, hiding in the trees. Who would silly enough to run through an open field with a sword? Or even a pistol? The sniper will have killed you before you even know you are being targeted.


Now the people making the F-35 are probably incompetent in delivering a plane on time and on budget(either that or they are milking it). But the plane once finished, will be a winner.


The other thing is, the F-35's will always be part of a force of other planes in a large scale conflict. If for some reason it does come down to dog fighting - e.g. if there are just tons of cheaper planes going against it (with suicidal pilots) that they simply cannot carry enough missiles, then the rest of the enemies would be mopped up by F-15, F-16s , F/A-18s etc.

The Most Costly Joke in History

Mordhaus says...

That is all well and good, but the F35 is not just a sniper. It's a multi-role aircraft that needs to be an interceptor, a bomber, and a close ground support plane. You can be a 'sniper' and hide long range in interceptor mode, but bombing and close ground support are not going to be as kind to a plane that relies completely on stealth to overcome it's shortcomings in maneuverability, etc.

Additionally, the sheer cost of the vehicle is going to make it prohibitive for our allies to purchase it, meaning that in NATO combat groups, we will have it and our allies won't. It also means that we can't offset the trillion dollar development cost in ally purchases. Of course, it is likely that we won't even try to export it for the risk of having the stealth breached. We didn't export the F22 for similar reasons and it is dead now.

The simple fact is that we have sunk a ton of money into a pit and for little return. There are still huge long term delays in Russian and Chinese stealth programs, so just like the F22, this plane is going to come into production with no real enemies to fight against. Are we going to risk sending these vs last gen or earlier systems when our older planes are still more advanced than those and cost far less?

We aren't going to stop making this plane, we've gone too far. But it is going to be just as much of a waste as the F22 and probably more of a debacle when the enemy does come up with hardware capable of defeating it's stealth capabilities. Once that happens, we have a plane that is worse than the previous generation facing enemies more than capable of taking it out of the sky.

transmorpher said:

The F-35 can't maneuver as well as an F-16. But F-16 can't maneuver as well as P-51 from World War 2.

There hasn't been a dog fight since the first world war. Even in WW2 it was about strategy, positioning and team work. It had very little to do with plane performance, expect for when there was a huge gap like the invention of the jet plane.

Air combat for the last 60 years has been about situational awareness first and foremost. And the F-35 has this nailed.

It's like saying that modern soldiers don't have any sword fighting skills. It's completely irrelevant. You wouldn't use a sword against a camouflaged sniper. The F-35 is a camouflaged sniper, hiding in the trees. Who would silly enough to run through an open field with a sword? Or even a pistol? The sniper will have killed you before you even know you are being targeted.


Now the people making the F-35 are probably incompetent in delivering a plane on time and on budget(either that or they are milking it). But the plane once finished, will be a winner.


The other thing is, the F-35's will always be part of a force of other planes in a large scale conflict. If for some reason it does come down to dog fighting - e.g. if there are just tons of cheaper planes going against it (with suicidal pilots) that they simply cannot carry enough missiles, then the rest of the enemies would be mopped up by F-15, F-16s , F/A-18s etc.

The Most Costly Joke in History

transmorpher says...

The F-35 can't maneuver as well as an F-16. But F-16 can't maneuver as well as P-51 from World War 2.

There hasn't been a dog fight since the first world war. Even in WW2 it was about strategy, positioning and team work. It had very little to do with plane performance, expect for when there was a huge gap like the invention of the jet plane.

Air combat for the last 60 years has been about situational awareness first and foremost. And the F-35 has this nailed.

It's like saying that modern soldiers don't have any sword fighting skills. It's completely irrelevant. You wouldn't use a sword against a camouflaged sniper. The F-35 is a camouflaged sniper, hiding in the trees. Who would silly enough to run through an open field with a sword? Or even a pistol? The sniper will have killed you before you even know you are being targeted.


Now the people making the F-35 are probably incompetent in delivering a plane on time and on budget(either that or they are milking it). But the plane once finished, will be a winner.


The other thing is, the F-35's will always be part of a force of other planes in a large scale conflict. If for some reason it does come down to dog fighting - e.g. if there are just tons of cheaper planes going against it (with suicidal pilots) that they simply cannot carry enough missiles, then the rest of the enemies would be mopped up by F-15, F-16s , F/A-18s etc.

Police Murder Sleeping Couple On A Date

poolcleaner says...

NWA "Fuck Tha Police":

Right about now, N.W.A. court is in full effect
Judge Dre presiding
In the case of N.W.A. vs. the Police Department;
prosecuting attorney's are: MC Ren, Ice Cube,
and Eazy-motherfucking-E

Order, order, order
Ice Cube, take the motherfucking stand
Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth
and nothing but the truth so help your black ass?

You god damn right!

Well won't you tell everybody what the fuck you gotta say?

Fuck the police coming straight from the underground
A young nigga got it bad cause I'm brown
And not the other color so police think
they have the authority to kill a minority
Fuck that shit, cause I ain't the one
for a punk motherfucker with a badge and a gun
to be beating on, and thrown in jail
We can go toe to toe in the middle of a cell
Fucking with me cause I'm a teenager
with a little bit of gold and a pager
Searching my car, looking for the product
Thinking every nigga is selling narcotics
You'd rather see, me in the pen
than me and Lorenzo rolling in a Benz-o
Beat a police out of shape
and when I'm finished, bring the yellow tape
To tape off the scene of the slaughter
Still getting swoll off bread and water
I don't know if they fags or what
Search a nigga down, and grabbing his nuts
And on the other hand, without a gun they can't get none
But don't let it be a black and a white one
Cause they'll slam ya down to the street top
Black police showing out for the white cop
Ice Cube will swarm
on ANY motherfucker in a blue uniform
Just cause I'm from, the CPT
Punk police are afraid of me!
HUH, a young nigga on the warpath
And when I'm finished, it's gonna be a bloodbath
of cops, dying in L.A.
Yo Dre, I got something to say

Fuck the police
Fuck the police
Fuck the police
Fuck the police

Example of scene one

Pull your god damn ass over right now
Aww shit, now what the fuck you pulling me over for?
Cause I feel like it!
Just sit your ass on the curb and shut the fuck up
Man, fuck this shit
Aight smartass, I'm taking your black ass to jail!

MC Ren, will you please give your testimony
to the jury about this fucked up incident?

Fuck the police and Ren said it with authority
because the niggas on the street is a majority
A gang, is with whoever I'm stepping
and the motherfucking weapon is kept in
a stash box, for the so-called law
Wishing Ren was a nigga that they never saw
Lights start flashing behind me
But they're scared of a nigga so they mace me to blind me
But that shit don't work, I just laugh
because it gives em a hint, not to step in my path
For police, I'm saying, "Fuck you punk!"
Reading my rights and shit, it's all junk
Pulling out a silly club, so you stand
with a fake-assed badge and a gun in your hand
But take off the gun so you can see what's up
And we'll go at it punk, and I'ma fuck you up!
Make you think I'ma kick your ass
but drop your gat, and Ren's gonna blast
I'm sneaky as fuck when it comes to crime
But I'ma smoke 'em now and not next time
Smoke any motherfucker that sweats me
or any asshole, that threatens me
I'm a sniper with a hell of a scope
Taking out a cop or two, they can't cope with me
The motherfucking villain that's mad
With potential, to get bad as fuck
So I'ma turn it around
Put in my clip, yo, and this is the sound
[BOOM, BOOM] Yeah, something like that
but it all depends on the size of the gat
Taking out a police, would make my day
But a nigga like Ren don't give a fuck to say

Fuck the police
Fuck the police
Fuck the police
Fuck the police

Yeah man, what you need?
Police, open now
Aww shit
We have a warrant for Eazy-E's arrest
Get down and put your hands up where I can see 'em
(Move motherfucker, move now!)
What the fuck did I do, man what did I do?
Just shut the fuck up
and get your motherfucking ass on the floor
(You heard the man, shut the fuck up!)
But I didn't do shit
Man just shut the fuck up!

Eazy-E, won't you step up to the stand
and tell the jury how you feel about this bullshit?

I'm tired of the motherfucking jacking
Sweating my gang, while I'm chilling in the shack, and
shining the light in my face, and for what?
Maybe it's because I kick so much butt
I kick ass - or maybe cause I blast
on a stupid-assed nigga when I'm playing with the trigger
of any Uzi or an AK
Cause the police always got something stupid to say
They put out my picture with silence
Cause my identity by itself causes violence
The E with the criminal behavior
Yeah, I'm a gangsta, but still I got flavor
Without a gun and a badge, what do ya got?
A sucker in a uniform waiting to get shot
by me, or another nigga
And with a gat it don't matter if he's smaller or bigger

Size ain't shit, he's from the old school fool)
And as you all know, E's here to rule
Whenever I'm rolling, keep looking in the mirror
And ears on cue, yo, so I can hear a
dumb motherfucker with a gun
And if I'm rolling off the 8, he'll be the one
that I take out, and then get away
While I'm driving off laughing this is what I'll say

Fuck the police
Fuck the police
Fuck the police
Fuck the police

The verdict

The jury has found you guilty of being a redneck,
white bread, chickenshit motherfucker
But wait, that's a lie! That's a god damn lie!
Get him out of here!
I want justice!
Get him the fuck out my face!
I want justice!
Out, RIGHT NOW!
FUCK YOU, YOU BLACK MOTHER-FUCKERS!

Fuck the police!
Fuck the police!
Fuck the police!

Every Frame A Painting - Coen Brothers - Shot | Reverse Shot

ulysses1904 says...

Thanks for all of the replies. That makes sense, that it could be genuine if the "surprised" actor was the first to be filmed, while the offscreen actor throws in an ad-lib when saying his lines. Then the director likes the improvised line, adds it to the script, then films the 2nd actor later.

Sometimes the IMDB trivia section can be a graffiti wall of pretty stupid stuff, take this gem from "Dirty Harry" for example:

The sniper calls himself "Scorpio" which is the Zodiac sign for people born between October 24th and November 22nd. November 22nd 1963 is the date that President John F. Kennedy was assassinated by a sniper in Dallas, Texas, a killing that the Clint Eastwood character in In the Line of Fire (1993) would be directly involved in.

I'm glad this thread had a Hollywood ending. ;-)

Payback said:

...In the Die Hard example, Rickman was obviously filmed first, and Bochner's ad-lib made a "happy mistake" they got on film.

If Bochner had been filmed first, you would never have seen Rickman's perfect reaction...

Disturbing Muslim 'Refugee' Video of Europe

JustSaying says...

I'm always astounded to see people who are unable to understand that this refugee crisis can't be solved by sending the refugees away. Have you people never seen a zombie movie? There are definitely similarities. They are coming and there's no way other than starting to shoot them in the head to stop this.
So, you wanna stand on any european border and kill random people (yes, random as in 'women and children too') to make sure the borders aren't crossed? Have you people never heard about East Germany? The had the most secure border on the entire planet. They had sniper towers and minefields. People died trying to cross it, they were murdered because of it. Still, some made it anyways. No border is impenetrable. Ever.

The refugees are coming. They'd rather die trying than not trying at all. They don't see any other choice.

Our only smart play is to exploit the advantages. We have people fleeing from ISIS that we can put in our mosques to stop recruiting and radicalisation. We have skilled laborers we need to identify and put to work accordingly. We have people willing to have and raise their kids here that can help us to solve our problems with a rapidly aging society.

It'll be difficult and it'll require us to change and redefine our cultural identity but if we do this right, we'll end up stronger in the future.

We can't afford the cowardice of racism much longer.

San Antonio football players target ref after a bad call.

Babymech says...

The video is too low-quality to see it clearly, but I'm pretty sure that in an HD version you'd be able to see the red dot of the sniper's laser sight on the ref, just seconds before those brave players saved his life.

A.M. SNiPER feat. Anamate and Oxide & Neutrino - "Bye"

Airsoft Sniper

Chairman_woo says...

I've played airsoft like this for a few years now off an on so feel well enough qualified to comment.

It's largely a matter of range. Most sites allow up to 500fps on snipers (and some american ones go up to 800 or so I believe), but they have a minimum engagement range (usually about 25 meters, presumably more for the silly american ones).

Basically, non automatic sniper rifles are allowed to be significantly more powerful than the 330fps (400 in some countries) other weapons are limited to, but as a result can't be used at short range (that's what pistols and compact SMG's are for!).

If you are close to the minimum range limit and it hits unprotected skin, they sting really badly, enough to draw a little blood sometimes. It's not entirely dissimilar to being whipped by a wet towel, excruciating for about half a second then it tails off to just stinging and swearing.

If it hits your vest, glasses, hat etc. then it wont really hurt at all (but you still felt it you cheating bastards! ), likewise if you are out beyond 50meters or so as the power drops off with range as you'd expect. (My brother can sometimes make shots out to 70-80meters with a VSR but you can barely feel it)

Shoot at point blank and your target can be forgiven for walking over and punching you in the face....right after they stop swearing and get up off the ground. (entirely possible to penetrate exposed skin at that range)

In practice though, trying to storm a building/room vs automatic rifles etc. tends to be far more painful an experience than being sniped. Unless that is someone snipes the inside of your nose sideways on (it hurt as much as you imagine it did).

We also once had a guy knocked clean out by a grenade launcher to the face at point blank . But it was a Co2 powered thing and I believe they aren't allowed inside buildings any more (can't think why).

Re: paintballs, in my much more limited experience, they are waaaaay worse than BB's if they are full power and reasonably close range. Concussions, broken bones and broken skin are all entirely possible (though not likely), but bruises and welts are basically standard issue.

I believe some sites run compressed air guns (rather than Co2) at much lower power levels, so I imagine they are a lot more tolerable.
Paintballers tend to be more on the extreme sports side of things (wheras airsoft tends to be more biased towards military geeks/gamers), and so many sites have a bit of a "pain is weakness leaving the body" attitude to power levels.

In the UK at least the velocity limit for paintballs at competition level is 300fps, for most airsoft sites the limit is 330fps. You only have to look at a BB vs a paintball to see what a discrepancy in energy that equates to!!!

RFlagg said:

I'd have to think being shot by an airsoft would hurt far worse than a paint ball gun... but heck, in this video http://videosift.com/video/Funny-Airsoft-Hostage there's a kid playing, and some of these people get hit what looks like in the head by the sniper.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon