| Error creating thumbnail: File missing Join our Discord! |
| If you have been locked out of your account you can request a password reset here. |
File talk:M3 carbine.jpg: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
:Just going to bring this up again; does anyone know if this is a real M3 configuration? I've never seen a real image of one with two IR lamps. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:22, 4 May 2012 (CDT) | :Just going to bring this up again; does anyone know if this is a real M3 configuration? I've never seen a real image of one with two IR lamps. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:22, 4 May 2012 (CDT) | ||
::I did some reading up on it. The underbarrel lamp was fitted with the original M1 Sniperscope. Since that was a bit flawed, the M3 Sniperscope moved the lamp to the top of the scope, to allow for prone firing. So I don't think it's likely these two would be fitted together. Wouldn't that necessitate carrying two batteries? --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 08:44, 4 May 2012 (CDT) | ::I did some reading up on it. The underbarrel lamp was fitted with the original M1 Sniperscope. Since that was a bit flawed, the M3 Sniperscope moved the lamp to the top of the scope, to allow for prone firing. So I don't think it's likely these two would be fitted together. Wouldn't that necessitate carrying two batteries? --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 08:44, 4 May 2012 (CDT) | ||
:::yeah, I'd have thought so. I think this image was someone just putting both lamps on it to make it look more ridiculous than it was, or some WW2 tacticool. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 08:45, 4 May 2012 (CDT) | |||
::::Apparently the M3 scope had twice the range as the M1 scope, so there'd be no point in using both, even if you were okay with carrying batteries for both. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 10:34, 4 May 2012 (CDT) | |||
Latest revision as of 15:34, 4 May 2012
Just cropped all of the excessive white space and fixed the contrast. Other than that the image is unchanged. MoviePropMaster2008 05:25, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
- This looks like it's been assembled with two IR lamps instead of one. Is that an actual configuration? Every other shot I've seen of the M3 shows one lamp in one or other position. Evil Tim 19:11, 19 July 2011 (CDT)
- Just going to bring this up again; does anyone know if this is a real M3 configuration? I've never seen a real image of one with two IR lamps. Evil Tim 08:22, 4 May 2012 (CDT)
- I did some reading up on it. The underbarrel lamp was fitted with the original M1 Sniperscope. Since that was a bit flawed, the M3 Sniperscope moved the lamp to the top of the scope, to allow for prone firing. So I don't think it's likely these two would be fitted together. Wouldn't that necessitate carrying two batteries? --Funkychinaman 08:44, 4 May 2012 (CDT)
- yeah, I'd have thought so. I think this image was someone just putting both lamps on it to make it look more ridiculous than it was, or some WW2 tacticool. Evil Tim 08:45, 4 May 2012 (CDT)
- Apparently the M3 scope had twice the range as the M1 scope, so there'd be no point in using both, even if you were okay with carrying batteries for both. --Funkychinaman 10:34, 4 May 2012 (CDT)
- yeah, I'd have thought so. I think this image was someone just putting both lamps on it to make it look more ridiculous than it was, or some WW2 tacticool. Evil Tim 08:45, 4 May 2012 (CDT)
- I did some reading up on it. The underbarrel lamp was fitted with the original M1 Sniperscope. Since that was a bit flawed, the M3 Sniperscope moved the lamp to the top of the scope, to allow for prone firing. So I don't think it's likely these two would be fitted together. Wouldn't that necessitate carrying two batteries? --Funkychinaman 08:44, 4 May 2012 (CDT)
