<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"
	xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Armasight&#8217;s New Jockey 320 and 640 Clip-On Thermal Sights	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://staging.shootingnewsweekly.com/gear-news/armasights-new-jockey-320-and-640-clip-on-thermal-sights/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://staging.shootingnewsweekly.com/gear-news/armasights-new-jockey-320-and-640-clip-on-thermal-sights/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 13 Jun 2024 11:17:57 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.8.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: SAFEupstateFML		</title>
		<link>https://staging.shootingnewsweekly.com/gear-news/armasights-new-jockey-320-and-640-clip-on-thermal-sights/comment-page-1/#comment-3828</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[SAFEupstateFML]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Jun 2024 11:17:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.shootingnewsweekly.com/?p=8221#comment-3828</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://staging.shootingnewsweekly.com/gear-news/armasights-new-jockey-320-and-640-clip-on-thermal-sights/comment-page-1/#comment-3810&quot;&gt;Geoff &quot;I&#039;m getting too old for this shit&quot; PR&lt;/a&gt;.

For that price range and the company involved without checking the specs more the second with actually useful sensors. Also would have been 8-12k 10-15 years ago and unavailable or over 30k around the time of the Iraq invasion. Fragile night vision and thermal optics are largely dying out past toys as they are not worth putting in past gen 1 for night vision and not worth building with the dropping prices involved in thermal imaging for any serious use. The down side is with inflation we will likely never see great versions of either for under 2k (quickly becoming what 1k was 10 years ago)]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://staging.shootingnewsweekly.com/gear-news/armasights-new-jockey-320-and-640-clip-on-thermal-sights/comment-page-1/#comment-3810">Geoff &#8220;I&#8217;m getting too old for this shit&#8221; PR</a>.</p>
<p>For that price range and the company involved without checking the specs more the second with actually useful sensors. Also would have been 8-12k 10-15 years ago and unavailable or over 30k around the time of the Iraq invasion. Fragile night vision and thermal optics are largely dying out past toys as they are not worth putting in past gen 1 for night vision and not worth building with the dropping prices involved in thermal imaging for any serious use. The down side is with inflation we will likely never see great versions of either for under 2k (quickly becoming what 1k was 10 years ago)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR		</title>
		<link>https://staging.shootingnewsweekly.com/gear-news/armasights-new-jockey-320-and-640-clip-on-thermal-sights/comment-page-1/#comment-3810</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Jun 2024 22:20:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.shootingnewsweekly.com/?p=8221#comment-3810</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Is this a modern solid-state sensor, or is it a fragile glass tube?

Get the price down to around $1,500, and I will be a buyer...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Is this a modern solid-state sensor, or is it a fragile glass tube?</p>
<p>Get the price down to around $1,500, and I will be a buyer&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
