Author: Matthew Hull
Date: 19:38:32 08/04/03
Go up one level in this thread
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". We have an M1869/71 Vetterli rifle that my grandfather picked up in WWI from a german sniper nest (41 cal. rim-fire). The adjustable sight has settings 1 through 10 which indicate hundreds of "paces", 10 being 1000 paces. Matt http://www.militaryrifles.com/Switzerland/SwissVet.htm >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. > > > >> >>>> >>>>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.