I trained was an 13 B Artilleryman, but for two years of my National Guard years I was an 11C Mortar-man. I fired the now obsolete 4.2 inch mortar and the 60 mm mortar. I did not train on the 81mm mortar. The old Soviet Union did not use a 60 mm mortar, they smallest mortar was the 82mm. When Germany invaded Russia in 1941, one of the many surprises the German ran across was that in opinions of the Germans only the Russians knew how to use Mortars (and the Germans by 1942 had adopted Russian Mortar Tactics and even the 82 mm Mortars of the Russians, junking anything smaller then the 81 mm).
Now, the 60 mm mortar I used was the now replaced M1, it had only four charges and thus limited range and adjustment capacity. It is the mortar that gives mortars they bad name in accuracy, but as I wrote above the Soviet Union never used them, and that appears to be the case of everyone East of Germany since WWII. I have never fired or seen live the modern M224 60mm mortar that replaced the 60 mm M1 I used, but from the reports I have read it is as accurate as anything else in the US Army arsenal of Artillery and mortars, unlike the old M1 60 mm Mortar.
The US 81 mm mortar (and even the present US 60 mm mortars) have multiple charges to adjust range. The 81, 82, 4.2 and 120 mm mortars also have adjustments of the tube to adjust range. The Tube can also be adjusted left or right. All of them are capable of adjustments that can be measured in feet (and sometimes inches). Given the blast area of all of them (except the 60 mm) is about 20 feet, that is more then accurate for most purposes. The 4.2 mortar was considered the most accurate, it was the only rifle mortar that I know of used since WWII. It had the accuracy of the 105 mm howitzer (the accrual round was the same, the 105 came with a brass shell that contain its powder Charges, the 4.2 had a tail added to to where it charges were stacked around like sliced american cheese).
Now the most accurate artillery piece on the battlefield was the 8 inch howitzer, it could hit a pill box from nine miles away. That is how accurate it was. The other artillery pieces were not as accurate, they would have to take 2-3 rounds to hit that pill box, the same with mortars (Except for the M1 60 mm).
Now, in the past, when I was in the Military, exact distance were hard to determine. Forward observers took educated guesses as to range and then we adjusted fire based on where the round hits as reported by forward observers.
In the last 30 years, the biggest improvement has been in GPS and laser measuring systems. Today we can know within inches of where a target is located. We can know within inches where the Mortar is located. Computers can take those two positions and within less then a second recommend a charge elevation, and direction of the mortar for a direct hit on the target. All of this can be provided from someone in a plane (or even an ultralight) with a laser range finder and radio communication with the mortar crew. Both the plane and the mortar crew would have access to GPS for location and a computer to calculate the location of the target. The pilot shoots a laser at the target, sends that data to the mortar crew and then ask the Mortar Crew to open fire. The mortar crew computer takes the data calculates the location of the target and gives the mortar crew elevation, charge, time (if a timed fuse) and azimuth. Once the mortar is adjusted for that data the round is away. A good crew could do all of that within 1/2 minute (That is from call for fire to actual firing the round to the target).
Side note: 1/2 minute is my estimate if the crew takes its time, the crew may be able to get it down to 10-15 seconds. The longest time is reading the computer calculations and adjusting the round and mortar.
Now as to the issue of it being murder. Now, the mortar crew will NOT know who they are shooting at, they are obeying orders to provide fire support for someone. The charge of murder is on the person who called in the mortar fire. If the call was against a legitimate military target, then it is NOT murder, but if it was against civilians then it is a war crime AND murder. The issue is what was hit and why. If the pilot ordered the mortar crew to drop mortar rounds on civilians then that is a war crime. If the pilot saw the Russian New Crew and saw that it was a News Crew and did not want them to broadcast the civilians refugees and thus the Pilot ordered the mortar fire, that is a war crime. If the Pilot saw the new crew and mistook it for a military vehicle (including radio transmitters) then it was a legitimate military target.
I am sorry, but I suspect the Russians intercepted what the Pilot had transmitted and it contains data that intricate the pilot KNEW it was NOT a military target. Worse the Pilot may have said it was a Russian News Crew and she wanted them destroyed for it was a Russian News Crew. If the Russians have such a message, that would explain why they wanted the Pilot, she is political dynamite for it is a clear case of war crimes on news reporters. It is such a clear and dry case that it would inflame the people of Russia against the present Government of the Ukraine. Worse, if the West protests the trial, all the Russian have to do is release the intercepted message and asks the White House if that happened to an American New Crew what would he do? I am sorry, Putin has not done anything dumb so far, and the kidnapping of this reporter (if true, Russia is denying it, saying she voluntary crossed into Russia) would provide him show trial opportunity Russia has not seen since Gary Power was shot down in 1960. The Russians will give her all the help she wants to mount a defense, but if they have the recording and the pilot said she wanted to take out a new crews, she is guilty of a war crime.
The above two paragraphs are all speculation on my part, but it would explain why the Russian wanted this pilot.
= new reply since forum marked as read
