Advanced Marksmanship Calls and Strikes

[Sterling Shooter]

For the most part, my score book is a record of calls and strikes. The call/strike corollary helps me to properly analyze shooter/target error. Last week an occupational shooter showed me his data book, since I was curious about how divergent its format was to my own score book. What I thought interesting was there were no plots of shot calls, just strikes. It made me wonder, would not the plotting of shot calls be useful for an occupational shooter too?

 

[Aqua Mark]

Re: Calls and Strikes

Sir, you are correct. If you don't call your shots and understand calls, then you will spend most days just chasing your zero.

A good book should at the very least contain areas for "Hold," "Call," and "Strike" on the target pages.

Here is a page I did with Frank (lowlight), it has the above, marginal info, and come-ups to 1350 all on the same page, with notes page on the back side.

 

[Lowlight]

Re: Calls and Strikes

Technically no... it is not useful if you shoot straight behind the rifle observing your impact, why...

Because, plotting the shot requires you to come off the gun to record the shot, breaking your position... an professional shooter should not take their eyes off the target.

Two, the rifle is supported, it moves only about 1/4", so you should "see' the shot and "know" where the reticle is during the shot. We call it not losing time.

Too many people disengage from the rifle, and teaching call and plot reinforces this bad habit of disengagement. The trigger is the "go" button it is not the end of the action but the beginning. If you are not 100% focused on the target through the scope, you risk many things, including pulling the reticle off the target subconsciously because you are focused on other tasks. In this case too many "cover up" mentally and either close their eyes, or really look away, you have to push through the shot, driving the recoil through and watch it not only before the trigger breaks, but during the break, staying on target. The Zen moment for many, they can see the hole appear in the paper at 100 yards... a service rifle shooter, slung up can never do because recoil moves them too far off target.

In a sense, it is sacrificing the shot you are currently taking for one that may or may not be necessary in the future.

I know where my reticle "is' not were it was... so the call it not necessary when done correctly, we are not shooting a string for score. Sure you can learn where things go wrong but in the context of that sport. A professional shooter has no time to remove their eyes from the target. That is the threat, reaching over to a write in a databook while you are fighting is bad.

train like you fight, stay engaged with the target 100% of the time.

 

[sandwarrior]

Re: Calls and Strikes

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Technically no... it is not useful if you shoot straight behind the rifle observing your impact, why...

Because, plotting the shot requires you to come off the gun to record the shot, breaking your position... an professional shooter should not take their eyes off the target.

Two, the rifle is supported, it moves only about 1/4", so you should "see' the shot and "know" where the reticle is during the shot. We call it not losing time.

Too many people disengage from the rifle, and teaching call and plot reinforces this bad habit of disengagement. The trigger is the "go" button it is not the end of the action but the beginning. If you are not 100% focused on the target through the scope, you risk many things, including pulling the reticle off the target subconsciously because you are focused on other tasks. In this case too many "cover up" mentally and either close their eyes, or really look away, you have to push through the shot, driving the recoil through and watch it not only before the trigger breaks, but during the break, staying on target. The Zen moment for many, they can see the hole appear in the paper at 100 yards... a service rifle shooter, slung up can never do because recoil moves them too far off target.

In a sense, it is sacrificing the shot you are currently taking for one that may or may not be necessary in the future.

I know where my reticle "is' not were it was... so the call it not necessary when done correctly, we are not shooting a string for score. Sure you can learn where things go wrong but in the context of that sport. A professional shooter has no time to remove their eyes from the target. That is the threat, reaching over to a write in a databook while you are fighting is bad.

train like you fight, stay engaged with the target 100% of the time. </div></div>

Frank,

For training only then, would you want to have the conversation of plot, call, and strike with your spotter or coach? And he records it in your data book (time available). Providing of course the shooter does like you say and remains focused on the target through the shot/series of shots planned on that target.

It seems like what the op's saying gets valuable feedback for the shooting aspect. But, I see what you're saying in that staying engaged through the process is inherently more critical to the overall concept of combat precision shooting.

 

[Sniper1*]

Re: Calls and Strikes

I completely agree with LL on training like you fight! We teach that to all of our students/officers.

However, when trying to diagnose a shooting problem we will shoot, call, plot the hit.

During our dynamic or combat courses, be it handgun, patrol rifle, or long gun, it's run and gun til it's done. No alibis, no excuses, finish the task and analyze after.

 

[sinister]

Re: Calls and Strikes

On experienced TEAMS the individual shooter calls each shot.

The coach on the spotting scope is seated between a pair of shooters. The shooter on the right (the "A" shooter) will fire, alternating shots with the B shooter on the left.

Each shooter calls the break of his shot so the coach can determine if the impact jibes with the call. The coach plots the shot on his team board. Shooters are responsible for holding elevation, while the coach is responsible for the wind call. In commonwealth countries the coach may actually manipulate the shooters' windage knobs to keep the rifles in-synch.

In rapid-fire strings you aren't going to break position to call, yet the coach can plot the group and adjust the next shooter based on his and the shooter's called hold. If the calls are off the rest of the team can or will be off- knocking the team off the rails and out of contention.

The challenge of shooter-coach call and hold reflects on the ability of each of the individual shooters to hold on the coach's wind calls. Team matches are usually two, four, six, eight, and ten-man events. The BIG ten-man matches are the Interservice at Quantico and at Camp Perry.

Before anyone says, "Oh, so that's why the pro service teams always win," the rules call for each team to have a "New Shooter" who has never fired on that team before, keeping teams evergreen.

The origins and beneficial skill bleed-over of techniques from range shooting to field shooting is often lost as the pool of full-time shooters dies off.

 

[Aqua Mark]

Re: Calls and Strikes

I agree w/ LL, there is no time to be scribbling after each shot. I am referring to remembering where your shot broke as a call, and then recording this on hard copy at a later time. Thats why I like the call targets and sometimes dot drills. When we go downrange and eval the targets, the students bring the books and we record it at that time (Important esp in PR1 class). I think it is important to have hold, call, and plot areas in the Data Book to reflect this.

Like was already stated, in advanced training, run and gun, scenarios, etc you just go with it, and write down what you remember later.

 

[notquiteright]

Re: Calls and Strikes

Self training is alot like self sex- fun, relieves the boredom but not near as satisfying compared to having a partner.

One place where a single shooter might profit from repeatedly breaking cheekweld to record his own call/hit would be the LE sniper.

Most LE snipers will not shoot a group at the badguy but rather he gets one round and one round only. (he should train to automatically reload incase he needs that followup shot but point is he will have no sighters beforehand.)

So for him practising gaining his cheekweld for each and every shot makes sense. It is how he shoots, if he has to shoot, on the job.

In the rather laid back world of F-class, I like to give my call to be recorded with my score on each shot during practise along with a notes section for comments on wind, bad breathing, forced a shot, missed a wind shift so at the end of the day I dont have to rely on my poor memory.

Just thinking with my fingers moving.

 

[Lowlight]

Re: Calls and Strikes

Basically what i am saying, is the old way of "calling the shot" as in "where were the sights when the shot broke" is wrong... that is implying the sight are no longer on the target during the shot, or at least the shooter is not aware of the sights during recoil. When shooting slung, completely understandable, the shooter moves with the recoil during follow through and they rock off target then return to target, so the shooter loses their sight picture.

In todays' world, getting straight behind the rifle, driving through recoil, maintaining sight picture, there is no reason to "lose sight picture" eliminating the need to know "where the sights were" you already know where the sights are. This is a small but significant difference in how you address the shot. Most people if they are objective in their shooting know before the shot breaks whether it was good or not, usually they are well aware the shot is bad before the trigger breaks and will, in our terms, "push a bad shot" hoping the precision rifle gods will shine on them and magically guide the bullet to the target.

As well, thinking like this conditions people to disengage from the shot when the trigger breaks, which we see alot. They are told, careful the rifle will recoil, along with asking where were the sights... this gives you free reign to disengage, which leads to pulled, pushed or bad shots, the "fliers" many people experience. They get these "fliers" because they disengage early, also we see people moving to the next shot before finishing the first shot. Many, especially with light triggers will "tap" the trigger and speed to the bolt, sacrificing follow through in order to reload the gun for a shot that may or may not be necessary in the future. Tactical shooting, does not always mean another one... there is no set number of shots to take, so you have to focus on that one target, not a string. I can tell you yesterday we shot the Barrett 107 with incendiary rounds and even at 400 yards, I saw the flash of the impact every single time. I knew where the sights were during the shot and during the impact because I saw it hit the concrete and flash.

Coaches, Spotters, partners don't always exist, as well because I am straight, because I can drive the rifle through recoil, I can see exactly where my shot goes, and no one is better to correct the shot then me, in a case where I might blow a wind call or miss the lead on a mover. Even when my NPA is compromised because I am tracking a moving target across 80 feet, I can see the result of my shot and correct it. Only I know where the sights truly are, and only I know exactly what to correct for. I can be given a correction in the chance I don't see the impact, but then again, I know where they are, not necessary where the sights "were before the break" I know where they are, before during and after because I don't lose time. Ask a person what they saw and most will say they either blacked out, or white out during recoil, we train to stay focused because things like video has shown the rifle barely moves, so why give up your sight picture.

The shooter should be able to correct and send a second round if necessary on target within 3 to 5 seconds of the first shot, that includes running the bolt and following up, plotting, calling, discussions, have no place in that amount of time. I can then record what I used to hit the target, but my "call" might be 3.5 mils of right wind at 1000 yards, where are the sights when the shot broke, 3.5 mils off the target, the next shot might be 3.2 mils off the target to account for an error in wind, but then i am plotting and calling wind and not the break on the shot. I am not holding center, i am not dialing wind, because what is another target appear 45 degrees or greater off my first target, the wind call is different and rather than come off the gun, eyes off the target, I am simply adjusting my hold changing the wind call on the fly. you don't have time to dial your windage and elevations, which is why more are calling for hold over reticles. The call for someone using a Horus might be "line 7.2 with 1.5 mils of wind" which is not quartered or square allowing you to plot the same way as a person with a center hold.

Tactical Shooting is dynamic, absolutely you can diagnose problems on a square range, but as an instructor I can see when a guy blows a shot from his trigger, shoulder, body position just as easily, and honestly he knows before it broke if he screwed it up. Many will shift focus from their sights to thinking about their trigger or breathing and mentally, their attention drifts from the target to their body, which moves the sights, they know it, but dont' register it until after... if you want to plot and call every shot, all it takes is being honest with yourself as a shooter... as in, did you push a bad shot, and most will say yes, if they are honestly, you don;t need a book for that... when we miss the correct answer should be "fix it", within 3 to 5 seconds. And if you blow a shot on a live threat, and you honestly blew it, correct it immediately and tomorrow you can work on the fundamentals, but today, move the sights send another and blow it again the same way so the threat is eliminated.

 

[Rifles Only]

Re: Calls and Strikes

Well said...

 

[Aqua Mark]

Re: Calls and Strikes

Frank, very thoughtful post. This is what makes this forum so good. Mark

 

[AKAce]

Re: Calls and Strikes

Lots of Meat to chew on in this thread ! Thanks Frank.

 

[sandwarrior]

Re: Calls and Strikes

Frank,

More than anything I've read on this site, that solidifies {edit: for me} what you've been saying since I started reading here in '07. Thank you.

 

[Rarebreed93]

Re: Calls and Strikes

Good read, thanks Frank.

 

[Sterling Shooter]

Re: Calls and Strikes

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sinister</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

The origins and beneficial skill bleed-over of techniques from range shooting to field shooting is often lost as the pool of full-time shooters dies off.</div></div>

Dave,

I think your statement is profound; yet, it appears, not appreciated or recognized by most.

 

[notquiteright]

Re: Calls and Strikes

Quite often I think situations are seen from one side only. Few professional snipers have access to as highly experienced a staff as some schools have. If they ever get the training such places give its for one class and then they are on their own for concurrent training.

Few LE or Unit teams have an Instructor present who can tell by body language what the shooter did on any given shot.

Now I know LE types rarely are full time snipers and have a great many other jobs to do for the taxpayer. Their range time is quite limited compared to a school instructor. Seems to me the use of shot call and record helps them.

First it focusses them on each shot counting as it is recorded for their supervisor review. They dont get fouler shots in real life.

It reinforces the mantra of reticle, reticle, reticle.

If they do their own recording then it trains them to turn their cheekweld into muscle memory in a shorter time. Again they dont get to pick the shot in a string that counts in real life, its the first one that counts.

Again an Instructor at a big school doesnt face the same issues or constraints a small dept cop tactical shooter does.

Next the traditional sniper team. It still is in use as the record shot taken by the Canadiens was a two man team. I believe calling the shot helps in a high stress real world two way range situation as fine motor skills can be lost. The sniper calling his shot helps a spotter plot any followup shots. On a steel target oneway range a sniper can be flawless, add some real pucker factor and some things can slip as not every sniper is a blooded vet with enough confirms in his logbook to make it routine.

The DM in the furball is a whole nother cat. Recording the shot under fire doesnt sound practical- however calling your shot, even if you are working as a one man team, still helps focus on the reticle.

Train as you fight is a good slogan but some training techniques have value in real world scenerios. Calling your shot to remind the journeyman sniper to focus on his reticle that isnt a bad thing.

Not every sniper has the same experience as long time Instructors. Not every sniper gets the same amount of training time either on a rifle, on a spotter scopefiring line, or instructor duty.

It will be interesting to see the next evolution of Sniper Instructor as the multiple combat tour working snipers with a string of confirmed skills 'time-out' and move into the full time Instructor ranks.

 

[Sterling Shooter]

Re: Calls and Strikes

My question, in context to general marksmanship development, is cannot the occupational shooter benefit too from shooter/target analysis aided by call/strike evaluation? No doubt, plotting calls, as well as strikes upon execution of the firing task, rather than recording strikes sometime later, promotes a competitive shooters success, why not for the occupational shooter too?

 

[Lowlight]

Re: Calls and Strikes

NQR,

You say a lot, and all of it is Not Quite Right and really says nothing at all...

And Sterling you offer nothing only a question... well target analysis is done constantly and requires no call or plotting. That implies the shooter is not seeing the sights on the target, which if he is honest and objective should be able to say if the shot is good or bad, without plotting it. It can be made that simple for them. Was the reticle on target and was the break good or bad... it's a yes or no answer.

To explain how we look at Target Analysis, I will start by saying that is the first thing we do at Rifles Only. Jacob gives a safety brief and then before anything is said we ask the shooters to bring their equipment and 5 rounds to the 100 yard line. Without anything from us, good, bad or indifferent we ask them to shoot a group. We focus on their body mechanics and let the target speak for it's self. We record notes on each shooter, noting body position, trigger, breathing, among other things. Here is an example of Fundamentals' Analysis Target shot <span style="text-decoration: underline">this week at Rifles Only </span>

We then talk about what is seen here on the target, the vertical elements the horizontal elements as well we go into our way of explaining the fundamentals.

<span style="font-style: italic">Here is the same shooter, 4 days later at 100 yards</span>:

So clearly the methods work and trust me when I say, this one of several similar groups, not a cherry picked example, but one we happen to have.

Sterling, you are welcome to give me your target analysis of this, I know what I look for, but I would welcome your input.

We also do target analysis using the dot drill <span style="font-weight: bold">but more importantly we watch the shooter</span>. <span style="font-style: italic">We don't stand back and just let them shoot,</span> we analysis their body mechanics and can spot the problems most don't even see. I am sure many have seen people <span style="font-style: italic"> "Tap"</span> the trigger, failing to follow through. Well the average shooter rarely knows they are doing this, or considers it normal, but it's easy to spot and 99% of the time they have no clue what is happening.

A great example of this, shooting the moving target, when ambushing the target, people will mentally say, <span style="font-style: italic">"Now"</span> and shoulder the rifle, pushing into the shot. This dumps the round low, in fact we saw a shooter push the strike 63" low at 500 yards, 3.5 mils in my Spotter. He had no idea he did that, but a lot of people do. Shooting a moving target is a skill that requires perfect execution or things happen of which the shooter has no idea, yet we as instructor see it.

With Target analysis we show the shooter how to diagnose problem targets like the first one so they can correct these issues, whether they be trigger control, breathing, anticipation, shouldering, NPA, the gamut. It's explained in detail how to "read" the target... the Call and Plot, well the shot was either or good or bad, as I said earlier most of the time the shooter knows before the shot is fired if it is a good break or bad one. We emphasis not pushing a bad shot, and by focusing on the target and reticle you can actually see if the crosshairs are moving off target.

Speaking in terms of Traditional Sniping, well what is traditional sniping anyway ?

In WWI or WWII snipers were lone gunman not working in teams, there was no sniper / spotter dynamic. That didn't happen until much later in Vietnam, and into the 1980's Even Hathcock was known to work alone much of the time. So who is to say this is right.

A great example of today, Mission: High level taliban is located in a village compounds, your job is to support a raid to extract him. Village is known to be hostile to US forces. Insert via helicopter to adjacent structure to provide overwatch / cover of assaulting forces.

Well do you want your Spotter with his head in the glass or actually on his rifle providing security ? Are you gonna exit the bird, run over to set up, then call time out while you lay your kit out, the spotter gets set up, and everything is perfect or you gonna scramble to position, cover the assault and put down bad guys... Is that not traditional...

You can mention any sniper unit in the world, like the Canadians, I am well aware of how they operate, and have worked with a lot of them. So what is the point, that your perception of sniping is flawed, and we'd like to think things are sniperific with the spotter calling shots, or the reality that shit happens, things move fast, and we find engagements are more dynamic than the 1000 yard low crawl to take an enemy General.

The call is simple, good or bad, focus on the reticle and you know, if you dick it up, fix it, then practice your fundamentals down the road. Calling and plotting need be no more complex than that... and certainly the top targets tells me all I know, they needed to work on their fundamentals from the beginning, trigger, breathing and NPA are all at issue here. I know what is wrong, and don't even have to look at the shooter. No call or plot is necessary.

Now, we can suppose, use interesting keywords, but that doesn't help anyone become a better shooter. Details matter, which is what we provide, not vague generalities.

 

[kraigWY]

Re: Calls and Strikes

Not sure if this is related, I think it is.

Long ago, late 70s we were squaded with the New Mexico team at the Wilson Matches. After the days shoot we were setting around having a few beers talking to their old coach and this topic came up, that of plotting hits. This guy was General (then Col) I cannot remember his name for the life of me. He sent me to gatter my teams score books. He chose the ones where the plots wre recorded and discarded the others.

On each page he drew a line from 12-6 and 3-9 o'clock. Counted the hits in each quarter, using that information, made corrections to each recorded zero. He told us, regardless how you shoot, holding the 10 ring or the 8 ring, you should have an equal number of hits in each quarter. He pointed out you needed "CALLS" and you needed "HITS".

I was new to coaching, and we, the AK NG were new to the Wilson Matches. With his help we changed the starting zero on each of our teams rifles based on the data he gathered from or score books. It pretty much improved the whole teams scores. I learned a lot about coaching from this old soldier. Learned more that same year scoring for New Yorks team (who won the match) taking notes of NYs coaching advise and wind calls. (you can learn a lot scoring for a good team & coach)

It works really well on rapid fire zeros.

I'm not sure I buy the ideal you have to change your postition to make notes in a score (data) book, or to check the scope. You simply glance to the left into the eye piece, you're shooting hands record the notes with out removing the rifle from your shoulder. That's in slow fire of course, but even in rapid fire you can make mental notes calls on wierd releases, then record them after the string.

If I'm off topic let me know.

 

[notquiteright]

Re: Calls and Strikes

Frank-
guess this is why many Upper Tier Instructors advise students to get to as many different schools as possible. There are differing opinions on what works and why.

I learned awhile back there isnt a one size fits all solution to a problem. One can either tailor the student to the solution or tailor a solution for the student.

I've always leaned back from this is the only way, everything else is crap.

I understand a school having a doctrine or methodology as a signature. I however strongly believe there are many ways to success and quite successful they are.

As far as me saying alot without saying anything- I raised a teenager, I am use to that rejoiner.

 

[Lowlight]

Re: Calls and Strikes

I have been to many schools, and continue to frequent as many instructors as possible during my time off... I also constantly work with people from varying backgrounds on a weekly basis. From Special Operations Snipers to Doctors, Lawyers, and Marketing Directors who just want to shoot.

You're Tier One Instructors from where ?


With each response I see it coming back to Service Rifle & High Power Competition Shooters, and not fighting or tactical shooters ? Sure you have plenty of time to record anything you like and I stated early on, I understand the want and the need, however it is not necessary. Selective reading will help you skip over my very first point, how Sling shooting is different from tactical shooting, how today's situations do not fit in any box and require dynamic action.

Other than being put in context that we are different than someone else and in Competition you recommend it, I have seen or heard no alternate view that tells me how plotting your shot helps you, beyond whether it was "good" or it was "bad" where is saying it's bad at 10 O clock work out to be superior to saying it was bad, period ? Someone give me details not anecdotes of by gone eras, I have anecdotes up the ass and can fill pages of success stories, but instead I chose to offer details.

I have yet to meet someone who offers more details and that is key point in the after action reports we receive, and clearly by the lack of details displayed here..> Saying it's old school, traditionals and how we did it back in the 70's don't answer the question as to "why" where is saying the shot was bad at 7 O clock when I broke the trigger is not more powerful to me than saying "why did you break the shot if you knew it was off the target ?

 

[Lowlight]

Re: Calls and Strikes

And just to follow up, because you guys are being a bit stubborn and not understanding we are saying the exact same thing, only to a different degree because I am talking about a scoped precision rifle and not a slung service rifle.

You are asking the shooter to call the shot by saying, "where were the sights when the trigger broke" I have explained this...

We look at it, as "where are the sights" during the entire shot.

It's the same thing, getting the shooter to focus on the sights and target during the execution of the shot. It's bringing that focus downrange and not internalize it by asking them to answer a question.

The difference it how long the focus last and how people understand this... asking where the sights "were" implies losting sight picture and give permission to disengage, which a lot of people do, I have explained this... saying don't disengage asks them to stay focused on the target until the recoil pulse is over. Just different enough to matter in my opinion, but essentially the same thing.

Now plotting it, saying write it down to help you visualize it is fine, but I am saying why did you break the shot if you knew the sights where off target, because clearly they know. So when we say don't push a bad shot we are saying, you can see it, so don't execute a bad shot. If the sights are drifting reset the shot before you break it.

Plotting a bad shot at 7 O Clock is all well and good, but I can do the same thing for the shooter with a "G" or "B" in the same place, because bad is bad, period. And good gives than something they can work with. Bad just means more practice.

 

[sinister]

Re: Calls and Strikes

If the sniper in the field (and not plotting) is shooting a rifle with any degree of recoil where he MAY lose a cross hair -on-target view (whether shooting an unbraked M24, M110, or an M107, or with night vision equipment) and he states "Dead-on" to his spotter and he doesn't see the impact for whatever reason, (i.e., he's just killed three guys and is changing his magazine) his spotter can tell him where it hit and provide input for correction.

It works in combat with people shooting back. Not on a nice flat KD range and not at an administrative training course.

In my limited experience not all snipers/marksmen have the proficiency to call first-round center-hits every day, every engagement, on held call. First round kills usually get the knuckleheads running and scampering and it becomes game-on anyway.

 

[Lowlight]

Re: Calls and Strikes

Absolutely and we explicitly state in class 4 eyes are better than two... part of that dynamic atmosphere I was talking about... not every shot is taken from a rock solid positions, but it still works the same... to the same degree we have a solution if neither sees the impact, if both come back with "not seen" there is an answer for that too.

Where ARE the sights... as opposed to where WERE the sights, even if the sight picture is lost in recoil, it still says the same thing but a degree that goes beyond, the word, were...

 

[He Shoot Me]

Re: Calls and Strikes

Tag

 

[kraigWY]

Re: Calls and Strikes

Check FM 23-10

3.6 Calling the Shot

3.18 Data books

It's not just HP shooters that need to call and record

 

[Lowlight]

Re: Calls and Strikes

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: kraigWY</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Check FM 23-10

3.6 Calling the Shot

3.18 Data books

It's not just HP shooters that need to call and record</div></div>

What was the date FM 23-10 was written again ? 1980 what ? Maybe 1982 if memory serves me, my copy is home.

Institutional incest doesn't make it any more valid... a lot of things are taught wrong, I can quote you things in the manuals that say Humidity means the air is more dense which is wrong, it's in FM 23-10, also that a 20 degree change in temperature means add or subtract 1 MOA but it never says where, is that 1 MOA at 100, 500, or 1000 yards, and with modern powders is that necessarily true anymore.

Was a time when people would say, take in a full breath, let it half way out, hold it then shoot, which we now use the natural respiratory pause to describe the where to break the shot in the breathing cycle.

So, spare me Kraig, been there done that, and actually graduated to get the T Shirt.

Welcome to 2011... almost 30 years have gone by, do you think some things might have changed ? Where is the sniping manual from WWI or WWII you can quote me on sniper- spotter dialog ? Or using a ballistic computer in FM 23-10 ?

 

[kraigWY]

Re: Calls and Strikes

Maybe 23-10 got a few things wrong, No Doubt.

However I don't believe Calling Shots and Using Data Books are out dated. Not by a long shot, regardless wheather one is shooting competition or training for sniper training.

I'm not a maine but I believe it was Carlos Hathcock who said "write down everything, if a fly buzzes your head and farts, write it down".

I haven't seen many data books that didn't have a spot to plot calls.

 

[gebhardt02]

Re: Calls and Strikes

Gentlemen,

Good discussion, lots of good info. I'm not trying to contribute to an argument, just what my perception of calling the shot is and plotting that shot.

For me, calling the shot and plotting gives me confirmation that I have the correct elevation setting and windage on the scope. I'f I'm holding for center sternum and the shot breaks there, but I actually get impact above the belly button, I know my elevation setting is off from where it should be. Same same for if my shot actually broke a little right, but impact is to the left, my windage needs adjusted. So if I call a shot as breaking to the right and bullet impacts right, I'm good to go.

During a 1K shoot south of Nashville several years ago I was new to shooting LR. I was writing down my elevation and windage setting and plotting the call and impacts in the data book. I shot another match a month or two later and wrote everything down. Before going to my third match I was reviewing my book and noticed that at shots 8 or 9 I needed to come down a minute to keep shots in the 10/X rings. Shots 14-15 I needed to come down another minute, so I was 2 MOA less than my initial setting. The third match I automatically made these adjustments prior to those rounds and finished with something like a 198/8X or something. If I hadn't written the info down, I might not have noticed the trend. Just my experience, not anecdotal. But I also see what you are saying Frank with the dynamic situations being encountered.

Oh, my copy of FM 23-10 dated August 94. TC 23-14 dated June 1989. Never been to the schools, just have the manuals.

Geb

 

[kraigWY]

Re: Calls and Strikes

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Before going to my third match I was reviewing my book and noticed that at shots 8 or 9 I needed to come down a minute to keep shots in the 10/X rings. Shots 14-15 I needed to come down another minute, so I was 2 MOA less than my initial setting. The third match I automatically made these adjustments prior to those rounds and finished with something like a 198/8X or something. If I hadn't written the info down, I might not have noticed the trend.</div></div>

And that Sir, is what it is all about.

 

[Lowlight]

Re: Calls and Strikes

We use the Shooter Diary pages:

Oh, we also removed the "Humidity section and added Density Altitude because Humidity is no longer considered a deciding factor like it was back in the day.

I don't see how you couldn't write down the changes in anything from elevation to windage, especially if you notice you have to add MOA to your shots. (What the Notes section is for) If you are holding center and the spotter comes up more than once Low, and you know you have good breaks, it's common sense and not the magic of plotting and calling that tells you to come up. Believe the bullet it has the last word, If you shoot a second match, or a string of fire and you see it is trending low, first I would tell you that you have an issue, your rifle is wrong. Next if you practiced before a match as if it was a match you would have seen it before the 2nd match. I have done a video where I put my Tactical Rifle (AI AW) & Ammo in the sun at Byers CO for hour, it was over 100 degrees then I fired 20 rounds in 2 minutes with another 21st round on Paper... I had no change in impact. As well every shot hit my target at 550 yards on the steel range. (8.75"X14") in those 2 minutes. So to me a change like 2 MOA is a red flag, my rifle would be getting rebarreled. Or at least looked at... I can't have changes like that.

But how can you not record these things, or see them for that matter even without plotting the shots. Good breaks with bad elevation means change the elevation in my mind. especially if it is grouping low.

Again this comes back to strings of fire during a competition format. If a tactical shooter is seeing this problem, his equipment is fouled.

Also Kraig, I met Hathcock, he signed my Sniper School Diploma and I was able to talk to him in that setting... So what is the point... he is no longer alive and things change, I bet Simo Hahya didn't write anything down and he killed 505 confirmed and 542 unconfirmed Russians. Again, ancient history, ask Carlos next time you talk to him about My Kestrel's Bluetooth setting or how the PLRF -10 I have is going to communicate to my Nomad ? Or better yet, how about you explaining how I can set up my Kestrel to relay information to my Loadbase 3.0 program using an HP Ipaq ?

 

[kraigWY]

Re: Calls and Strikes

Well there are as many ideals as there are people teaching sniper craft.

Each his own I guess.

Give the student the choice and let him deside when he moves on.

 

[Chanonry]

Re: Calls and Strikes

Personally I don't see the benefit of the data book format for calls and plots. What do I do once I have got the data? If there is a shift then sure I want to write down the new solution and track that because it is telling me something that I should try to understand, but every call?? For me, the standard format approach is just a long winded way to capture dope.

I am not even a fan of the Shooters Diary page for the same reason. Franks's point is well made that I can capture the dope and make a note next to it so I am spending time capturing the essential data not just wasting time writing it all down. However I think for all the information that is there, it is easier to just use a blank page write down the atmospherics system data and then dope with notes. hell if I want to plot my calls I can do that easy enough. result more useful, flexible data in a smaller space.

Just my personal preference

 

[Lowlight]

Re: Calls and Strikes

The call and plot format is a carry over from hi power, slung unsupported shooting and hasn't changed since it was first introduced. It is designed for a singular sport and was never meant for the working sniper, it was just adapted at the time because there was nothing else.

Sniper's are not shooting a determined number of rounds, doctrine was no more than 3 shots from any one position. It was a shoot and move way of business.

Sniper's are not shooting KD the majority of the time. Ranges are subject to any number of errors so calling beyond "good" and "bad" becomes unproductive. A good shot that impacts low can simply be an error in ranging particularly if the reticle was used for ranging.

There are no wind flags in the field so errors in the horizontail plane can be due to unseen changes in the wind. The call and plot method risk complicating the process to adjust for these unseen changes. If you call the sights on target and the bullet doesn't strike the target do you second guess the impact or fix it? If it was good, wind is a much more likely culprit.

Sling shooting is a different animal, your natural point of aim is more important and any errors are magnified downrange. Calls & plots help refine this as patterns will appear over the string of fire. Consider the tactical shooter engaging a moving target, your NPA can be compromised due to tracking a target. So the call and plot is not helping in this case, good or bad is you have and bad is certainly evident but a good break with a bad lead is still a miss and no call will help if the lead is wrong. In practice the best bet is to fix it and send another, formulas don't work on the fly, by the time you do the math the target is behind cover and shooting back.

The reason the slung shooters here on SH are so adamant about calls & plots is that is how it was done since the very first data book. They also shoot from a position which puts the shooter off to the side of the rifle which is more comfortable when using a sling with iron sights but in the field makes the sniper a bigger target. Straight back manages recoil better but for the competition sling shooter is of little concern.

Very few databooks / pages or books where done with the sniper in mind. They have always included legacy elements because that is what many expect. But honestly even in square range training how many tactical shooters will engage a target with 20 rounds in a string at each range? Especially since the goal is hitting the target with the least number of shots possible. Even in competition the average number of shots used is 2 with a couple that use 5 simple to increase the round count. The Raton Sporting Rifle match is 1 shot per target, ASC is 2 shots max, we use 2 for UkD targets and five only for score on a few stages.

This is why we changed it, the goals are the same, put the shooter in the mindset to see the sights on the target during execution, but the format is markedly different for obvious reasons.

 

[Sterling Shooter]

Re: Calls and Strikes

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: kraigWY</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Well there are as many ideals as there are people teaching sniper craft.

Each his own I guess.

Give the student the choice and let him deside when he moves on.</div></div>

Kraig,

Do you practice your standing position with the blind call and plot exercise. For me, it's 50 minutes of shot calls plotted for alternate live and dry firing, with the scope turned away. Upon completion, the strikes are plotted too and, of course, there should be a corollary between these and the calls, which serves to help refine the standing zero. Overall, this exercise builds shooter stamina and motor memory. I think there may even be a page for this exercise in some USAMU score books.

All,

It's my impression that when the shooter follows through, and has maintained focus on the sight, calling the shot is possible, which is an aid to shooter/target analysis. Plotting the call serves the coach, as well as the shooter for a multitude of reasons, but, mostly, the expectation from the coach for the student to plot calls reinforces the developing marksman's will to follow through on the shot. If he does not follow through he cannot call the shot and obviously cannot plot it. The visual of both calls, as well as strikes recorded in the score book helps the developing shooter literally see the value to good shooting calling shots can be. I'm talking basic marksmanship here. A shooter at the highest level will likely be calling all of his shots right-in-there from a supported prone position so plotting may be moot.

 

[j-huskey]

Re: Calls and Strikes

Frank Says:
"Very few databooks / pages or books where done with the sniper in mind. They have always included legacy elements because that is what many expect."

And notably, the legacy elements are the most taught method at the majority of the schools. Thus the sales of these data books flourish. Along with the arguments for keeping them. Those who embrace the legacy elements have no need for change and will argue with a fence post that theirs is the best way.

In a number of my posts over the past few years, I refer to a call-out where a pus-ball dumped a 30 round magazine from an AK on full auto at two officers. I sat on that call-out eleven hours. Had plenty of time to write and draw anything, but at 47 yards, I was heads up looking for both pus-ball and the AK, not writing anything.
This call-out and a few other experiences reinforce Frank's shoot, SEE the result in real time, and if neccessary, shoot again.

Yes, we use the call and plot method when training new Snipers in beginner and basic schools. When they get to the point they know they blew the shot BEFORE they fired it, but forced it anyway, call and plot doesn't mean shit anymore.

We encourage competitions and learning as many tools for the box as you can get, but, call and plot is not worth a shit at 47 yards when you want to keep you or somebody else from getting hosed with an AK..

Sorry Guys, my vote is with Frank on this one, ALL the way (after the beginner schools)...

But then, what do I know, I'm just a dumb ass OLD country boy still on the rifle.

 

[kraigWY]

Re: Calls and Strikes

Yeah, kind of.

I have a score book used just for dry firing, plotting calls. I haven't seen the AMU Scorebook excersize though.

Even when coaching someone, working the bolt while they dry fire I make them call ever snap.

As I've said, in my old age I've been moving to GSM shooting, calling while dryfiring rapid fire with a bolt is critical as people tend to forget everything else to concnetrat on working the bolt.

 

[sinister]

Re: Calls and Strikes

I have found with a new barrel and very good ammunition my shots will be inside my calls (especially off-hand).

The 20 degrees - 1 MOA rule did in fact come from military highpower rifle shooters. Where people do not understand its application is in those climes (for instance Port Malabar, Florida or the coast of Morocco for example) where a shot in the morning in the 30s with frost on the ground is going to impact in a different place in the afternoon (on the same range with the same weapon and ammunition) where temperatures have risen into the 60s and you've shed your morning fleece or jacket liner.

It will definitely affect X-count.

Why would that kind of data have any meaning at all to a military (let alone cop) sniper?

OK, let's say we're facing a knucklehead with a helmet in body armor with level III or IV plate (these are Russian, but the Taliban have also captured, stolen, or otherwise procured western-style equipment) and our recon and surveillance site / final firing position is 500 Meters away:
//www.gunscity.ru/uploads/posts/2008-10/thumbs/1223769017_6b5_01.jpg

It makes not one darn bit of difference if the shooter is aiming center-of-mass at a great big honking IPSC or E-type silhouette <span style="font-style: italic">in training.</span>

If you can't get precision placement to the soft gooey bits the first round eliminates your element of surprise.

None of this matters if the bad guy is wearing a man-dress or Boy George T-shirt.

Data should give you a generally predictable tool for bullet placement. Gadgets help, but there is no replacement for trigger time and observed hits.

Data book and experience or not, I'd rather have a few hundred rounds on that gun-ammo combination in different temps and light before having to drop one for effect and possibly having to take on a crowd before the QRF arrives. No one's taking a data book into combat, but should know his tool well.

Taliban:

Mujahideen (by the caption):

Chinese:

Not saying you HAVE to use it, or that you even should use it -- it's just another tool like on the wall at Home Depot. If you need it, use it, if you don't then it's just folklore and trivia and you can use your time elsewhere sharpening some other mission-essential skill.

Like in the days of knights in metal armor there's a trend toward magnums for a reason (you can look it up in open-source pubs like the SOCOM PSR solicitation performance requirements).

It's still nice to know if your shot goes where you aimed it, and if it didn't how and why to adjust. It doesn't shoot itself -- YOU point it. And yes, there's a difference between a hit and a kill.

Try this: using a steel IPSC target spray paint off where a helmet would come over the target's grape, and where a SAPI plate would cover his torso. Cut these out with a plasma torch. If over the range you are confident of hitting and killing if you're not getting a consistent "Clang" with every shot you need to hold tighter. If you don't know why you're not getting a clang you should know if you're on call or not.

Then again it may not matter to you as long as you get a hit.

My two cents -- it cost what you paid for it.

 

[kraigWY]

Re: Calls and Strikes

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Why would that kind of data have any meaning at all to a military (let alone cop) sniper?</div></div>

Good point, LE is more critical, meaning the Military can get away with body shots, the LE often can't.

I hasd a take home car, I kept my rifle (Rem 700 in 223) in the trunk constantly. This was Anchorage where it gets nippy at times.

If the car set in the garage over night it might be 60 degrees, if it set outside, it might be 20 below. Its going to make a difference and I had to know that difference.

Now I still do it but it doen't matter, if I shoot its going to be practice or at a match, I might get sighters, but LE don't get sighters.

I pushed that in military sniper schools also, big difference between Fairbanks in the Summer (+90) and Galena in the winter (-60).

 

[Lowlight]

Re: Calls and Strikes

We see it often at RO, the morning temps in the mid 60"s and the afternoons in the 90's, a 30 degree swing between morning and afternoon. Usually results in some change between morning shots to afternoon shots on the same targets beyond 400 yards.

We also shoot sub MOA targets as well all our ranges have 1.5 MOA and 2 MOA targets from 300 to 1000. We shoot on paper usually from 100 to 500, 400 to 100 is 1/2 MOA @ 500 we do 1 MOA targets. We have no standard E Types on site.

The only place we put a Full size IPSC target is 1000 yards, and that has since been removed in place of the targets mentioned. We do shoot full size IPSC targets at night to 600, usually the 500 & 600 yard lines have these, the others, are smaller. Our largest UKD is 10X17, our average UKD is 8.75" X 14.75" or the size of a chest plate for most US body armor.

I am not oblivious to small, Sub MOA target sizes... and we do record the dope used as well we work to fine tune the dope to practical levels. But all rifles are different as well as many different ammo types produce different deviation results downrange so individuals are encouraged to record their own data instead of going off generalizations or rule of thumbs written 40 years ago. Ballistic programs help, but are not a complete substitute for recorded data.

 

[SONIC SAAMI]

Re: Calls and Strikes

tag for later

 

[CoryT]

Re: Calls and Strikes

I'm comming in late on this, Frank has it pretty well covered. I have very little use for a data book at all at this point, beyond the basic intro training level or the working LE sniper.

For the LE sniper, I advise keeping the actual targets used in training exercises in a notebook, rather that a written record of the shots. If required at trial, the actual targets have much better value as evidence of training results that written notes.

During intro training of the prospective sniper, keeping a shot log gets them into the mideset that each individual shot matters, it's part of a pattern. I do not use the call and plot for each shot. You record the conditions, the range and the sight setting, then mark the shot locations in the group on zeroing targets. If you know you broke a shot poorly, you note it so you can discard that shot from a group. This is simply part of the zero process, getting dope for a range is more than firing a single centered group.

After the basic zero process, it's a good idea during training to make some notes after the completion of an exercise, but since a sniper rarely shoots more than two shots at any given target, what's to call and plot? We just don't shoot enough at any given target to discern a trend, which is what call and plot provides, trend analysis. I shoot, the impact is noted and I either correct and send the follow-up or it's a hit, nothing to fix. I like the follow on shot to be on the way within 3 seconds of impact, if not, you really think the target is still there? With a spotter involved, I'd like the shooter to call a bad break, just so the spotter knows what they are working for a correction. Absent a call, I'm presuming a good break and making a correction based on that premise. If the break is good, and the shot is .5 low, fix it and shoot! That hit? OK, now you can figure out why the first shot was low. Most likely a bad range call, in training, re-range and figure out how you got it wrong so you don't make that error again. Real life? Working off a range card? Given time, note on the card that correct range/dope so the next time you are in that hide you get it right the first time. No time/card? Chalk it up to experiance and try to figure out where you went wrong when you get the chance.

Once the basic level of training is complete, I should have a pretty good idea about how the rifle/shooter/ammo combo performs. For 1K and in, a set of DA calibrated comeups pretty well tells you everything you need to know. Beyond that, I like a computer for a primary source and a DA system as backup. If all of a sudden either seems to not be working, you know something is wrong with the system, it's back to the KD range and/or shop to find the problem.

I don't look up what I used in a data book to make data for a location, that's an antique system. Even a barrel shot log has little meaning to me anymore. Either the rifle shoots up to requirements or not. If it's not shooting, the scope, shooter, bedding and so forth check out, it's time for a new barrel, who cares what the round count is?

I have no rifle data books. I've got a PDA, it has a rough count of rounds fired for the rifles but that's all. I've got either a set of DA based data cards or an FDAC setup for each gun/ammo combo. I've got a new .308, just calibrated to the FDAC 175 card. I'm at 4500' here at the ranch, I've never had that rifle down to PHX. I take it to the AZ TRPC and fire the first shot of the match, a cold bore 500 yard shot, center elevation, just left of center holding .75 left for the wind. FDAC works just fine, what's the data book for? In fact, I actually HAVE NO DOPE for that rifle/ammo/elevation, what would I lookup?. It's not actually required, once the curve is known for a given DA, you can plot a new curve simply enough.

SO, not only do I have no use for the 'call and plot', I've got no real use for a data book at all.

 

[sinister]

Re: Calls and Strikes

I'm sure you're using your own personal rifle or one that belongs to the biz.

If someone were to tell you you're keeping the same employer but going to a completely new location across the country for a three-year tour -- and you're leaving the gear you have in hand to take receipt of a set of gear at your new location (and you find it's not new) you might have to develop a whole new set of data.

What works for private, personal gear (including my own) may not apply to a military person doing a permanent change-of-station or drawing a new weapon set from a central arms room or Joint Operational Stocks.

Not meaning to poke or sharp-shoot, but guys using personally-purchased gear work on a slightly different set of rules than guys using their Uncle's stuff.

If you were to teach any of your classes with a gun that a random student were to hand you when he shows up for training it may be a seamless transition -- and then again it might not.

Of course the business is to get the kill -- but also try not to get shot at by return fire. If it's important enough to shoot at it's important enough to try to hit with the first round. Risk = Probability X Consequences. Stateside against targets = no risk.

 

[Lindy]

Re: Calls and Strikes

I'm pretty much with Cory on this issue.

If I were an LE shooter, I'd document every shot I made in training and practice, in a bound book, for possible submission as evidence of training and competency.

I'm not. I have a Density Altitude Dope Card for every combination of rifle, <span style="font-style: italic">scope</span>, and load I shoot. Those DA cards are validated at the longest distance I shoot that combination where the bullet will remain supersonic, and have been adjusted if necessary so the dope corresponds to the field data in which they were validated.

Why the scope as a variable? Because there may be differences in the way the scopes adjust, especially at longer distances, and that is another variable to compensate for.

I carry a notebook in the field to make notes, with a cover which also carries my Mildot Master and my DA card(s). If there are significant deviations between my shooting results and what my calculation indicates it should have been, I need to revalidate the system.

I don't expect a perfect prediction of elevation at distance - the purpose of the system is to get me <span style="font-style: italic">close</span> on the first shot. Some sources of potential inaccuracies are detailed in Sources of Ballistic Program Inaccuracies.

I do sometimes carry a ballistic computer in the field, for really unusual situtations. I mostly use it for providing dope to people with no idea what to use.

 

[sinister]

Re: Calls and Strikes

I concur that the Mil Dot Master and FDAC cards (or some equivalent card, whiz wheel, tables, or charts and nomographs) and a Kestrel are handy -- but not absolutely required.

No data, no problem. You are master of your hardware. You know when it goes out and the wheels fall off.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> I should have a pretty good idea about how the rifle/shooter/ammo combo performs. For 1K and in, a set of DA calibrated comeups pretty well tells you everything you need to know. Beyond that, I like a computer for a primary source and a DA system as backup. If all of a sudden either seems to not be working, you know something is wrong with the system, it's back to the KD range and/or shop to find the problem</div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If there are significant deviations between my shooting results and what my calculation indicates it should have been</div></div>

Concur with both if you are using YOUR personal rifle and loads (factory or custom). You know because it's your gear. But if your training engagements are only one or two rounds a piece, when do you see and prove (to your own satisfaction) degradation of performance?

A good shooter will blame himself before he blames his gear, which may just delay a re-barrel or analysis of scope or other hardware. I went a season and a half before giving a rifle with a shot-out barrel back to the armorers because of rounds off-call and growing or multiple groups within a string -- with a take-home rifle I was supposedly intimately bonded to and with under 3,500 documented nrounds. The individual shooter may even keep a round count book but not be sure why shots are off-call.

But now we're delving into minutia. How many readers even on this board will wear out their first barrel?

The average uniformed military Joe (both active and Guard/Reserve) falls in on a weapon handed off-the-rack with no data on it. It may not inspire the kind of confidence that his own personal or take-home weapon will. Issue Army guns and ammo should average at least a minute-and-a-half.

Building data and calling shots (at least for routine training and housekeeping) exploits the too-little time, hours, and rounds on the range opportunites he might get. Better to know if the gun needs to go to the shop in pre-deployment or during re-set and re-cock than to have it fail in-country.

If you're a gun queer and passionate you KNOW. If it's an additional duty or hobby or you don't have a squad or team leader up your butt you might not care.

There is NOTHING like the confidence knowing that where you point it is where it's going to hit.

 

[CoryT]

Re: Calls and Strikes

Sinister, correct, it's my rifle. Point being I had no need to develop dope, nor any need to refer to a data book to deploy to a new location.

If I had gone down there to shoot someone else's rifle, I still don't need their data book. I need to zero, then get in a few test shots to confirm the FDAC or a DA card for the load is accurate, a group at 300, 600 and 800 works fine, and I can skip 800 if unavailable. I now know everything I need to know.

Other than what the prior owner was doing, what does that old data book tell me? The round count? Is that of value? Does what dope HE used for a particular shot have anything to do with MY next shot? Doubtfull. I suppose if I find the barrel has 8000 rounds through it I can expect to see accuracy start to taper off, so I guess it won't be a suprise. Unless that helps me get a new gun delivered sooner, it still is not worth much.

I shoot client guns all the time in class. I do need the dope from their data card, but that's all the info I need. What else would the book tell me that I could use? Cold bore shots shift? Maybe that's just the shooter, my initial test will show that anyway.

Can you take a gun you've never seen and just deploy for a shot using the data book? I don't see that as a very good idea.

 

[sinister]

Re: Calls and Strikes

Cory,

Your argument is absolutely spot-on.

Yes, I have deployed to war with rifles right out of the wrap or from someone else's stocks, with no accompanying paperwork -- it's just a tool. For me (and you, and most anyone with a technical level of competence) all you need to do is zero it, history of the gun be damned. I've generally got 7.62 drops memorized.

But you and I still point it, and without anything written down or battery operated we generally have a feel for how the system should work, how much dope, shade, or favor to hold, and how it should break. If we hold it, we know if it should be a hit or not (a self-call). If it's not we should know why, and corrections should be on.

Draw a rifle you don't know for a trip down-range (and you don't know if the tube is new or with 8,000 rounds down it) both of us can probably tell if the gun is up to mission requirements.

That experience comes from quality trigger time. To get to that point is a road that can be long or short, depending on talent and quality practice.

That should be the goal for all of us who have ever trained a new or striving long-gunner with no time on a glass-sighted weapon.

I'm sure your customers come from all over (not just Arizona) and some of them may be going somewhere else besides home station. That leaves room for wide variations.

You can't move up until you've trained your replacement. Most NCOs try to make sure their shooters and units are as capable as possible with the resources alloted. Some techniques help, some don't. If logging or calling don't work, use the time for some other mission-ESSENTIAL tasks and skills.

Commanders and leaders can buy damn near anything except time.

 

[ggmanning]

Re: Calls and Strikes

I shoot alone most of the time. As a result I stay on scope and have to drive the gun so that I can be my own spotter/observer. I shoot...note impact...cycle bolt...adjust POA and shoot. So for me Frank's thoughts on all this make good sense. The only thing I record is my field dope vs my density altitude dope and that is done after a session of shooting. I shoot 12"x12" steel practicing and a hit is a hit for my needs. I am very particular working up a load and distance testing for accuracy.....but after that I shoot for 12"x12" hits vs caring about 8,9 or 10 ring hits. I agree there is some definite carry over from range competiton shooters be it BR, Palma, high power, etc. to the field But there are enough differences that I dont even quantify them together in terms of practice and training. Lots of times I am just going out to shoot....I have some free time so I do some UKD ranging and shooting (it helps living rural). It is that kind of informal practice that I enjoy most and makes me better. I would think that along with the different needs of the various disciplines that there are differences among individual shooters as to what works best for them also. I don't think you can hammer everything into one box.

 

[Tactical]

Re: Calls and Strikes

In the middle on this. When I get new rifle or barrel, I plot and use a book until I get a good idea of what the rifle will do with certain ammo and under several conditions. Then I take that and make into data sheets, with needed changes for different temps/altitude etc. I make my own card and tape a quick sheet to side of the rifle.

On LE Snipers and data. I recommend guys tape up two targets ( One over the other) They shoot/train then take the targets down. One target goes into admin file and the other the sniper keeps for his records. That way when the admin file goes missing the sniper still has his record. Lastly have someone sign both copies who witnessed the session.

 

[Lowlight]

Re: Calls and Strikes

I too shoot a variety of rifles, ammunition and glass types and I have a lots of the dope necessary memorized as even clients may not know their dope beyond 200 - 300 yards. I think the average range in America is less than 300 yards so you have to know these things.

Also because we are at sea level, and with big variations like Sinister spoke about we have taken to chronographing the client's rifles during the fundamental eval so we have a base line to work off of... I was amazed on this last class how many were actually under 2550fps even into the 2400fps range I thought my Chronograph wasn't working but the dope match up to the numbers, only when it got warmer at the end of the week did we see it go up a bit. Many people including units don't own chronographs so we give them access to that.

I have all the ballistic programs but only use them for personal reference, however clients including the military are using them with a higher frequency rate so we need to know how to explain how they work. It's a key component. So chronographing is part of that. Also it's not uncommon to see rifles have their barrel go down in class. In fact I have seen Canadian armorers rebarrel and bed the rifles on the fly under the RO patio. Variations are part of the game as is understanding them and explaining their effects.

As far as round counts, I don't record it for my personal rifles but don't discourage it for the military and L/E, heck anyone for that matter. We get Feds all the time they write everything down, even on drills I have to give them the seconds off the stop watch, never discourage the practice. But really the dope is all they need, as it is shot. Sinister is absolutely right about the variations we see it a lot and it's important to record those variations as the Programs don't always catch it 100%. They still might give you the hit on steel but it may not be centered up, so we remind people when numbers from a 90 degree afternoon are about to be used on a 60 degree morning.

The easiest practice and one most common we see is people simply tape their dope to the side of the rifle... that stays with the gun and we encourage that practice to include having both the dope in Mils and MOA on the side. Two columns so they can use their turrets or reticle with equal effectiveness. We don't put wind on there, just dope. I received a brand new Werewolf from GAP in December, I zeroed it, doped it to 1000 and wrote the dope on the side of the rifle. Last weekend NF sent me a new F1 with MLR2 reticle, I mounted the scope, zeroed it and went straight back to 500 yards with a 1 MOA Target on Paper. Dialed up the dope on the side of the rifle and hit center mass on the target, then put the rifle up... mission accomplished for the time I had.

As far as calling I think we all do it just in different ways, we see the target and adjust immediately, we don't plot because of the reasons outlined. But we need to see the results of our shots and know what that means. It's a first day lesson for us to explain how that works. One of the biggest problems we see is shooters don't follow through, Jacob made a joke on the line that Follow Through is not just a Fad, we always make sure the shoot stays on target until the recoil pulse is over... that accomplishes much of the same as to why you call and plot. See the reticle on target, watch it during the break of the trigger, and stay on it until the recoil pulse is over... let's the shooter see the impact.