Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 14:55:56 08/03/03
Go up one level in this thread
On August 03, 2003 at 17:27:07, Ricardo Gibert wrote: >On August 03, 2003 at 16:33:41, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On August 03, 2003 at 15:05:23, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >> >>>On August 03, 2003 at 00:33:22, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>On August 01, 2003 at 22:53:17, Dave Gomboc wrote: >>>> >>>>>On August 01, 2003 at 22:51:00, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On August 01, 2003 at 19:07:21, Dave Gomboc wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On July 29, 2003 at 00:31:17, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Distances they shot at in world war 1 and 2 with sniper rifles must have been a >>>>>>>>>few hundreds of meters. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>In WW1 my grandfather was a sniper. He shot at ranges up to 1000 yards. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>In WW2 my father was a sniper. He shot at ranges up to 1000 yards. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Today, a neighbor down the street is a sniper. He shoots at ranges up to 1000 >>>>>>>>yards. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>_nobody_ shoots a sniper rifle at ranges of "kilometers" today. "kilometer" >>>>>>>>perhaps. With an occasional attempt at up to 2km with a big 50 cal "rifle". >>>>>>> >>>>>>>I have to disagree here. I read in the news back at the time that in the war in >>>>>>>Afghanistan a Canadian military sniper got the world record for a sniper >>>>>>>distance kill. He picked off some al-Qaeda guy from over 2.5 kilometers (over >>>>>>>2700 yards) away. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Dave >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>What are you disagreeing with. I said "with an occasional attempt at up to 2km >>>>>>with a 50 cal." >>>>>> >>>>>>You just said that. :) It _is_ rare. And no sniper would say "I can produce >>>>>>a 50% kill rate at 2KM+." >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>I guess I'm disagreeing with "up to 2km". :-) But then, I don't know what a 50 >>>>>cal. is, and it's not a big deal to me. >>>>> >>>>>Dave >>>> >>>>It's a gun that fires the 50-cal BMG (Browning Machine Gun) round, something >>>>not much smaller than a coke bottle. Next best long-distance round is the >>>>.338 Lapua round, but it is a _long_ way from the BMG round. >>> >>>i'm not sure when you did your tour of duty. >> >>I didn't. But I _do_ shoot with former military types at our local range. And >>as I said, my Grandfather was a sniper in WW1. And my dad in WW2. And I have >>an active military neighbor that is a marine sniper, right down the street. It >>was his .50 barrett that I shot and talked about. And they do _not_ practice >>sniping at "many kilometers." There are _no_ optics to support that, for >>example. >> >>> >>>But here 10 kilometers from here where the tanks and air mobile regiment is >>>training they used to train with sniper rifles up to a few kilometers. >> >>To 1000 yards, I'll agree with you. That is about a Km. Even to 2Km, I'll >>agree although they _never_ shoot that far in real situations as it is simply >>impossible to guarantee a hit. MOA accuracy is very tough to produce, that >>means 1" at 100 yards, 10" at 1000 yards. 10" is not a "sure kill" target >>size. >> >>> >>>in cold war, assuming sovjet invasion, assumed killing ranges of 2 kilometers >>>here from snipers. >> >>One shot out of 5-10, maybe. Snipers want "sure kills". And beyond 1000 >>yards, there is no "sure kill" unless you drop a bomb with a bit larger kill >>radius than a single projectile from a rifle/machine-gun. >> >>> >>>Note that in world war II, they fought bigtime around here. the bullets didn't >>>even get that far back then from snipers. This with exception of course from the >>>heavy machine guns which already in WW1 could spread bullets to a kilometer or 2 >>>when put on a hill. For WWII and actual fightings taking place here see for >>>example 'operation market garden' which happened not too far from here and the >>>movies belonging to it like: "a bridge too far". Majority of victims fell here >>>however when the germans conquered netherlands. I'm 5 kilometers away from >>>'Grebbeberg'. The only hill in Netherlands close to the Rhine river... >> >>That's all well and good. .50's have been around forever. And they have a >>staggering range. But not for single-shot look-through-a-scope sniper >>operations. >> >>> >>>My uncle who just died a few months ago, fought heavy at the Grebbeberg and his >>>troops killed germans back there from distances up to a few inches. They used >>>rifles made in 1895 for that with fixed bajonets, because accurate fire with >>>rifles from those days wasn't very well possible. The german SS, but also the >>>regular german army forces, who drove dutch civilians and prisoners in front of >>>them when trying to conquer the Grebbeberg, only managed to conquer a few of the >>>many kilometer deep positions because the defending forces had to shoot their >>>own people first, before being able to shoot at the germans, which in that way >>>they could get closer to the positions. >>> >>>I don't need to mention that every so many meters there was machine guns in the >>>'grebbeberg' >>> >>>The distances at which was fought in those first days of the second world war >>>are in big contrast with nowadays. >> >>No idea what you are talking about. Wars aren't fought by snipers today, >>either. >> >>> >>>Not that the germans never conquered it. >>> >>>Only by threatening to bomb the cities they forced a surrender of Netherlands. >>> >>>When they would develop bullets for sniper rifles which can penetrate tank >>>armour, then a few snipers would in 2003 be able to keep that Grebbeberg out of >>>hands of the enemy. >> >> >>There is _no_ sniper round that will penetrate a tank. a 50 will barely >>pockmark a modern tank using depleted uranium armor plating that is the >>equivalent of over a _meter_ of steel. _no_ shoulder-fired weapon will >>touch that. Very few projectiles will touch that. Moving up to rockets >>or bombs is the best hope. > > >I know that a large caliber rifle was developed during wWI as an anti-tank >weapon. I couldn't tell you when this approach was obsoleted. When armor plating passed 1-2 inches. :) Today we talk of _meters_ of armor. ie 1.5 meters (equivalent) for steel (DU is significantly denser and doesn't need to be as thick.) To launch something from a shoulder-fired rifle (not rocket propelled) would be something no human could stand. Newton's law and all that still applies. :) > > >BTW #1: during the coldwar, the US developed a tactical nuclear weapon that was >shoulder fired. A bazooka type of weapon that was operated by 2 men. Before it >was fired, they might have to dig a ditch to take cover in so that they could >survive the blast should an equivalent type of protection not be available. I >doubt if it was ever deployed. It sounds like dumb idea to me. In any case, I >would imagine such a shoulder fired weapon could dispatch a score of tanks with >one shot. > That's a different animal. RPG's are shoulder-fired. But they are not a sniper's weapon.. But as far as tactical nukes go, we even had an "atomic cannon" that shot a nuclear projectile. About as fatal to the gun crew as to the target, however. > >BTW #2: I wonder what would happen if a sniper fired a large caliber DU >(DU=Depleted Uranium) round at the tank barrel. Would this effectively prevent >the tank from being able to fire? Or perhaps firing a DU round *into* the muzzle >of the tank would do it. I rare opportunity, but perhaps it would work? Hmmm. > > It would cause problems, for sure. But that had better be a 300 yard shot or less to hit that "hole". :) >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >>>In 1940 it took thousands of deaths, despite having machine guns and hundreds of >>>fixed bunker positions which no airplane bomb could take out in 1940. >>> >>>Most tend to forget simply the advances in hardware not to mention computing >>>power and software nowadays. >>> >>>Back in the old days it wasn't the same as it is today. >>> >>>The accurate range of the german hand held machine gun in world war II was for >>>example 150 meters. After that it was firing too inaccurate. Note that the >>>majority of the german soldiers just like the dutch soldiers, came by foot there >>>and carried their own rifle which could fire 1 bullet at a time. Not 5 in a row >>>or something. >>> >>>It is the end of world war II where things were changed really a lot. >>> >>>But that was of course after several tens of millions of deaths. >>> >>>Hardware guys learn quickly then. >> >> >>Yes, but there are _physical_ limits to firing a projectile. MOA is very >>good accuracy. at 2000 yards that is 20". Not including wind, mirage, and >>the shooter/target movement. 20" is not a sure kill zone. In fact, that >>will result in many complete misses at a human target.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.