Low
Power
Variable
Optic
Scope that has 1x (or close to it) to whatever upper range magnification. Idk if they're bad but from what I've read they're pretty expensive since a true 1x is difficult to do. I guess people don't like it because it's a compromise between a dot and a scope?
people ask too much of them. and when they can't deliver they think this makes them bad instead of just limited in scope >i want a good 1x magnification >and super bright illumination so I can use it like a red dot >and a really high upper end, 8x or 10x >and good glass and gimmicks like first focal plane and ranging tools >no I won't spend more than $1100 on this
Above 6x ffp isn’t a gimmick but then again I think most 5.56 shooters don’t need above 6x or ffp. If I didn’t dislike vortex a gen 2 pst 1-6 would probably be a decent option for most
they're good but not great
brent 0331 made an important point sometimes in a real firefight with a near pear enemy, you may have to engage enemies at 25m then quickly switch to targets at 300m and adjusting your knob quickly might not be feasible .
Because there's a lot of bad LPVOs and the bad LPVO experiences skew people's opinions on them, so they think they're all bad. Because optics are incapable of ever improving. Contrarianism. Post-purchase rationalization. Nor are militaries entirely infallible, they make dumb purchasing decisions all the time.
probably one work phone and one private phone, officer porksis is just standing around somewhere, might as well send a message signed with xxxx to her bestie
Lpvos seem like a one size fits all solution. They are not. I own an atacr, it it’s eyebox and fov suck compared to an elcan. Most other lpvos lack in the durability department as well. What optic is issued should depend on the area of operation. I understand moving away from dots and holographics for tid and enhancing marksmanship and range/ low probability shots but that comes at the cost of tunnel visioning under magnification. I think the durability of a prism + dot is ideal for grunts with maybe the nco having an lpvo and a marksman having a rifle equipped with a mpvo. That would bring a lot of balance and capability to a squad.
Military. Suck.
who told you lpvos were bad?
It was me. I told him yesterday.
Why are they bad
Also what are lpvos
Low
Power
Variable
Optic
Scope that has 1x (or close to it) to whatever upper range magnification. Idk if they're bad but from what I've read they're pretty expensive since a true 1x is difficult to do. I guess people don't like it because it's a compromise between a dot and a scope?
people ask too much of them. and when they can't deliver they think this makes them bad instead of just limited in scope
>i want a good 1x magnification
>and super bright illumination so I can use it like a red dot
>and a really high upper end, 8x or 10x
>and good glass and gimmicks like first focal plane and ranging tools
>no I won't spend more than $1100 on this
Above 6x ffp isn’t a gimmick but then again I think most 5.56 shooters don’t need above 6x or ffp. If I didn’t dislike vortex a gen 2 pst 1-6 would probably be a decent option for most
they're good but not great
brent 0331 made an important point sometimes in a real firefight with a near pear enemy, you may have to engage enemies at 25m then quickly switch to targets at 300m and adjusting your knob quickly might not be feasible .
Elcan reigns
Because there's a lot of bad LPVOs and the bad LPVO experiences skew people's opinions on them, so they think they're all bad. Because optics are incapable of ever improving. Contrarianism. Post-purchase rationalization. Nor are militaries entirely infallible, they make dumb purchasing decisions all the time.
If professionals use it, it must be the best.
are those two phones tucked into the top pouch?
They're snickers bars, you're blind
Naw ones a poptart
probably one work phone and one private phone, officer porksis is just standing around somewhere, might as well send a message signed with xxxx to her bestie
>block I
>gnome patch
Pure kino.
Because the military is expecting to fight at 100-500 meters
Lpvos seem like a one size fits all solution. They are not. I own an atacr, it it’s eyebox and fov suck compared to an elcan. Most other lpvos lack in the durability department as well. What optic is issued should depend on the area of operation. I understand moving away from dots and holographics for tid and enhancing marksmanship and range/ low probability shots but that comes at the cost of tunnel visioning under magnification. I think the durability of a prism + dot is ideal for grunts with maybe the nco having an lpvo and a marksman having a rifle equipped with a mpvo. That would bring a lot of balance and capability to a squad.
Here are 2 of my rifles (1/2). I have more time behind prisms so I will admit some bias
(2/2)