3 ms·
I'd quibble. While I agree it wouldn't be vulnerable in practice, I don't think the longest sniper kill is relevant at all. A battle rifle caliber can definitel
by Cushman 13y ago
I'd quibble. While I agree it wouldn't be vulnerable in practice, I don't think the longest sniper kill is relevant at all. A battle rifle caliber can definitely break 10,000 feet fired straight up. The issue would be whether it has enough energy left to penetrate the skin of the blimp, and whether it winds up anywhere near where you aimed at.
They're definitely not at risk to the odd potshot, but massed small arms/crew-served rifle fire could potentially be effective in the lower altitudes.
- saraid216 13y ago> That is outside the range of small arms: the furthest confirmed sniper kill to date was at a range of 1,250 m. Also keep in mind that snipers are shooting at humans. That's a much, much harder target than a blimp.
- Cushman 13y agoWell it'd be ten times as large in your scope, but I don't think I'd call it an "easier target"-- you have to deal with a much more dramatic arc and unknowable atmospheric wind conditions.
- Chronic24 13y agoThen you keep firing until you hit it.
- Cushman 13y agoYup, that's exactly the idea with massed fire. If you can't hit a point target, just designate it an area target and get enough rounds together to be effective on the entire area. When it comes to taking down a blimp with a round that barely has the energy to get there, though, I imagine that number of rounds is measured in thousands at least. Less of "keep firing" and more of "we're gonna need a lot of guys". And also don't forget the numbers I'm using suggest this is only plausible if you're firing more or less straight up, meaning the area you're ultimately targeting is where you are.