Talk:Aimpoint CompM2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Firearms; If you would like to join us, please visit the project page where you can find a list of open tasks. If you have any questions, please consult the FAQ.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked

	This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated task forces: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Associated task forces (general topics): Military technology and engineering task force Weaponry task force Associated task forces (nations and regions): United States military history task force

Contents 1 critism for the CCO 2 why was this moved to M68 CCO? 3 ECOS-N 4 Parallax-Free Minimum Distance

[edit] critism for the CCO

I'll tell you from my experience as a soldier that the CCO is not that good, its just the choice the army has made. Calling it a favorite is BS. I prefer the Iron Sight. One problem is the difficulty to zero the red laser, and another the short lasting battery power of the CCO. Sixshooter500

[edit] why was this moved to M68 CCO?

why was this moved to M68 CCO? I feel that the old title (Aimpoint CompM2) appropriately followed the <manufacturer> <manufacturer's product name> format used so frequently on wikipedia, whereas this new one sports a unique designation used only by the US Army, and also fails to explain what CCO stands for (collimated combat optic, I'm guessing). if no explanation is given, I'm going to move this back to the old title. Tronno 01:00, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

It stands for 'Close Combat Optic'. Ve3 17:33, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ECOS-N

Is ECOS-N a different model in any form or simply another designation for the SOPMOD Block II? --Squalla 18:02, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

I don't know if there are any real differences, but the M68 CCO and ECOS-N are assigned different NSN.

• M68 CCO: 1240-01-411-1265
• ECOS-N: 1240-01-495-1385 --D.E. Watters 00:08, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Watters. (I forgot to sign the previous post, by the way.) --Squalla 18:02, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Parallax-Free Minimum Distance

I was wondering where the source of the numbers is for the following statement in the article: "The M68 is parallax-free outside of 50m, meaning that while the red dot moves around the inside of sight based on eye position, it always represents the point of aim. Inside of 50m the red dot has to be kept in the center of the reticle." The reason I am curious is because I would like to see if I can find this information for Aimpoint CompM4 article I am writing. I saw references to 25m as the minimum distance elsewhere on the internet so I really want to clear this up. Igor at work 19:27, 23 August 2007 (UTC)