Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 18:56:45 08/04/03
Go up one level in this thread
On August 04, 2003 at 14:24:35, Aaron Gordon wrote: >On August 04, 2003 at 11:20:56, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On August 04, 2003 at 01:11:07, Aaron Gordon 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. >>> >>>Groups of less than 3" have been achieved at 1000 yards. Look here: >>> >>>"Bill Crawford fires a new IBS 1000 yard Light Gun record with a perfect score >>>of 50 and a new record 5 shot group for this class of 2.766"! Wow! Nice shooting >>>Bill! Bill used a Lilja .30 caliber 10" twist barrel to set this new record. " >>>http://www.riflebarrels.com/winners/1000yards.htm >>> >>>3" is an easy headshot, and as you may have guessed a bullet to the head = >>>fatal. So that = sure kill. >> >> >>Hint: >> >>1. How many times has that been done? >> >>2. What were the conditions (weather)? >> >>3. How many shooters repeat that? >> >>As I said, 1000 yards is a "reasonable kill range". Anything beyond that is >>not. To understand just look at the trajectory. The bullet will follow an >>arc that peaks about 5 _feet_ above the final point of impact. The flight >>time is ridiculous as well, giving mother nature (and the shooter's eyes >>in judging wind and dealing with mirage) plenty of time to shift the point >>of impact by _feet_. >> >>Note that the test you are talking about is _not_ done by a sniper. Those >>guys get to fire test rounds to see what wind and mirage are doing. _then_ >>they fire for effect. A sniper gets to fire one round. >> >>_BIG_ difference. >> >>I've done bench-rest shooting myself. And yes, you can do some amazing things. >>But _not_ on the first round you fire. And if that is the _only_ round you >>fire, look out. > >Todays United States snipers can do this as far as I'm aware (seen many things >on them, never met one in person though). I've read the military sniping manual >and that alone helps a lot with long range shooting. Combine that with their >hand-loaded ammo, ridiculously accurate rifles and training and you've got >something you wouldn't want to mess with. Without a doubt. But attend a 1000 yard bench-rest match and watch. First thing you notice is that all shooters have a "spotter" so that the first few rounds can be "located" when they hit the dirt. Estimating wind and mirage at 1000 yards is _tough_. From experience. Taking that to extreme ranges (double or triple) and it becomes _daunting_. Or, if you only get one shot on target, nearly _impossible_. I've broken _many_ a plate at 1000 yards. And I'd bet money on most any shot at that range. _except_ for the first two or three. Wind at 1000 yards is "interesting". "mirage" really can't be judged accurately, for the reason that it can't always be "seen". Fire a round, however, and notice that you hit 2 feet high/low, and you know it is "there" however. Learning the trajectory of the round you are firing is just the beginning. And that is the easy part. You are shooting along a big "arc". Where the bullet rises to a ridiculous height (4-5 feet above the impact point) and then drops back down to hit the right point. However, air density, temperature, humidity, wind, mirage, all change the basic trajectory data and that's where experience and judgement comes in. And beyond 1K yards, judgement is too frail on a one-shot "reach out and touch someone" mission. I don't know of a single sniper that would take a shot at that range unless there was absolutely no way to get closer. And if they were forced to take such a shot, they'd peg their chances for success at "fair to middlin'" at best... > >> >>> >>>>> >>>>>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. >>> >>>If fired from the rear of the tank some of the 20mm sniper rifle (and barret .50 >>>caliber rifles) have been able to take down tanks using API ammo. Also, I have >>>some tungsten cored 7.62x54R ammo. I personally have put it through 2" of steel >>>(with a Mosin-Nagant M44) and it does it with ease and is reported to be able to >>>go through 3" of titanium. I don't have tons of money to blow on titanium so I >>>won't be able to test that first hand. >>> >>>About tank armor thickness. There is no tank today with 1 meter (or more) of >>>armor. It would be much too heavy. They've got a rating system however called, >>>"Rolled Homogeneous Armor Equivalent" or RHAe. It is between 500mm and 1,300mm >>>depending on projectile. This is not actual thickness, only the equivalent. Look >>>up information on the Abrams "Burlington" armor. >>> >>>You can read more about this at: http://www.fprado.com/armorsite/abrams.htm >>> >>>Also, if you want to see a tank disappear.. check this out :) >>>http://www.strategypage.com/gallery/images/JavelinLiveFireVsT72.mpg >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>>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.