"3 mags, 80 rounds..."

[ScottWashburn]

Can't recall the scene exactly, but maybe he meant 3 magazines with 80 rounds in each magazine? That seems like an awful lot in one magazine, but it makes more sense than the other way and it does give each man 240 rounds.

[Raptor]

Originally Posted by ScottWashburn

Can't recall the scene exactly, but maybe he meant 3 magazines with 80 rounds in each magazine? That seems like an awful lot in one magazine, but it makes more sense than the other way and it does give each man 240 rounds.

The way the person said it doesn't seem to convey 80 rounds per magazines. I maybe wrong, but judge for yourself.

"3 mags, 80 rounds. Make them last, make them count."

If it really is 80 rounds, then another realization is that these magazines would hold a pathetically small amount number of cartridges by today's standards. However, the nature of the ammunition maybe different, so this may be a moot point.

But even 240 rounds doesn't seem enough to sustain the fully automatic fire that we're seeing in the battle. If anyone here has served as infantry, maybe he/she can give us some insights on load-outs, but my common sense is saying that the amount of ammo isn't enough.