Full video

https://t.me/Rarog_24OMBr/304

In the face of death, the occupiers show their true essence. They throw their helmets hysterically, fight back with automatic weapons, try to escape, but get what they deserve. A forest of EW antennas on the back of one of the occupiers did not help to escape from the “penal sanctions” of the soldiers of the “Rarog” Battalion of the 24th OMBr.

  • Da Bald Eagul@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    20 hours ago

    I mean honestly, I would not consider it because drones are tiny and quick. I don’t think I’d be able to shoot one.

    • bluGill@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 hours ago

      Depends on what you are shooting with. A standard military rifle would be a difficult shot. A standard hunting shotgun has a good chance - though a shotgun doesn’t have much range.

      • Cethin@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        53 minutes ago

        I hate the “shotguns don’t have range” thing. Sure, they’re usually less than a rifle, but they’re pretty accurate at long ranges, even when not using slugs. When you use slugs then they’re competitive with a rifle with a lot more force.

        Shotguns don’t work like video games. They’re not only useful for 2m or less. This article says about 70m for buckshot should be accurate, and 180m for some slugs, and most engagements are within 100m and a large majority within 200m.

        For shotguns, it’s all about selecting the right shell for the target. I wouldn’t be that surprised if some militaries start equipping one person per element at least with a shotgun, and giving them a mix of something like birdshot for drones and slugs or buckshot for enemy combatants. It’d add some small amount of extra strain on logistics since they can’t use the same ammo, but I could see it being incredibly useful.

      • bluGill@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 hours ago

        But depending on direction your fired ammo can fall on someone else on your side and now not only are you dead but you killed someone else via friendly fire.

        • Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          5 hours ago

          You have to be extraordinarily unlucky to be hit by a wild shot at range. Unless there’s someone right behind the drone it’s not going to matter.

        • M0oP0o@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          7 hours ago

          Well if I was forced to fight like these poor bastards likely where then I doubt that would be a concern.

          Also you are very much underestimating the ballistic properties of those rifles. At such an angle those rounds are not landing within a km of this fight.

      • Da Bald Eagul@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        11 hours ago

        That is true, but I feel my chances would be smaller if I were fucking around with grabbing my gun from my back first

        • Dashi@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 hours ago

          If you are in an active combat zone, your gun shouldn’t be on your back :) unless you are on base but none of these looked like they were. Unless you are talking about switching to a shotgun like some people were mentioning.

          Either way this is definitely a new dynamic to modern warfare.

          • Da Bald Eagul@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            8 hours ago

            Yeah that’s fair. Good thing I’m not in the army I guess haha. I wouldn’t be a good fit anyways >.<