Advanced Marksmanship Calls and Strikes

[sinister]

Re: Calls and Strikes

Frank, the chronographing is worth its weight in gold for sure. I don't think anyone else out there offers it for visiting students and courses.

Most folks will have absolutely no idea whether or not their barrel is fast (i.e., a tight, new .298-bore Krieger), OK, or slow (a worn or tired M24, 700V, or PSS) -- just that their favorite drop chart has to be tweaked (again, initial data building).

While I have generic 175 Match King data memorized I tweak between barrel lengths even with the same load (28-inch Paramount; 26-inch 700VS; 22-inch AR-10T and SRS; and 16-inch AR-10 carbine and SRS). Velocity differences may or may not be a big deal affecting holds.

You and I and others who travel often between the Rockies and the lowlands or Iraq/Afghanistan/North Africa or the Horn or other places will see density altitude zero changes where the same rounds from 6,000 to 12,000 feet ASL may be subsonic 300 yards earlier in the thick air below 1,000 feet.

Someone busting woodchucks or prairie dogs within 100 miles of home, or a big-city cop who doesn't have to go mobile might never need nor see the differences.

Banking on return fire or losing out on a trophy on an expensive antelope, elk, moose, or caribou hunt might make a sad face.

 

[Graham]

Re: Calls and Strikes

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lindy</div><div class="ubbcode-body">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. </div></div>In my opinion both of you guys know your stuff. But sometimes more documentation is not better documentation. In my experience LE departments run the gammut between keeping very detailed log books and having nonexistant or vague and improperly kept books with inconsistent information inside. I know of some departments that don't even log round counts on their rifles. Keep in mind that whatever documentation exists will be subpoena'd. So, I suppose the bottom line is that they don't really <span style="font-style: italic">have</span> to personally document any of it provided that the individual officer can explain what he did and why he properly did what he did. With regard to unsubstantiated failure to train claims, though, provided that the departmental training logs (as opposed to personal logbooks) are complete it probably doesn't matter much what the practice targets look like (assuming good hits, of course). And from there I begin to throw-in with Sinsiter and Frank, as above.

 

[Sterling Shooter]

Re: Calls and Strikes

I remember when I was a kid, I'd spend time with other kids in the neighborhood playing games like cowboys and Indians, doctor, and others. Kids emulated what they had seen on TV. We knew nothing, obviously about real doctoring. What I see with some shooting enthusiasts today reminds me of those kids playing. The shooting enthusiast has a data book, and scribbles in it; yet, without any comprehension for what or how such notations could be meaningful, the shooter learns nothing.

When the data or score book is nothing more than a record of shot placement, where shot relationships to the environment are not pondered, marksmanship development through data analysis is not possible. It's just a kid playing "sniper" with "grown-up" tools he does not know how to use. Interestingly there's some irony here as indeed there are plenty of M.D.'s out there who play "sniper" as a recreational activity.

 

[Lowlight]

Re: Calls and Strikes

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sterling Shooter</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I remember when I was a kid, I'd spend time with other kids in the neighborhood playing games like cowboys and Indians, doctor, and others. Kids emulated what they had seen on TV. We knew nothing, obviously about real doctoring. What I see with some shooting enthusiasts today reminds me of those kids playing. The shooting enthusiast has a data book, and scribbles in it; yet, without any comprehension for what or how such notations could be meaningful, the shooter learns nothing.

When the data or score book is nothing more than a record of shot placement, where shot relationships to the environment are not pondered, marksmanship development through data analysis is not possible. It's just a kid playing "sniper" with "grown-up" tools he does not know how to use. Interestingly there's some irony here as indeed there are plenty of M.D.'s out there who play "sniper" as a recreational activity. </div></div>

Nice,

That is awesome, because we don't follow the HP / Service Diagram we are playing Doctor, or in this case, "sniper"... pretending in other words. I suppose the 14 weeks I spent in Sniper School was pretending too because the USMC didn't prioritize it either. Nor do I recall it from my grass week in boot camp where dry fired for a full week before stepping on the range. Though, 5th award expert in 4 yrs, I guess isn't too bad... that 243 I scored with a M203 attached must have been pure luck.

I guess that tops it, we gave you an honest answer with reason to back it up, and you give us, that we are playing "sniper" with no idea how to use tools provided like the "competition" databook format.

When you have nothing more than "because that how we do it" I suppose the attack is the next best thing. You keep following 20+ shot trends, Charles, because obviously you're the man in all things rifles. Maybe we can petition congress for more sighters in sniping.

 

[CoryT]

Re: Calls and Strikes

Hey Frank, the USMC sniper shit is nice and all, but what was your last Service Rifle score at Camp Perry? Unless your Palma score is 1440 99x on average, I doubt Charles will believe you know a damn thing about shooting.

Charles, you clearly live in a totally different world than the majority here, this is Sniper's Hide, not NRA News. You can't do trend analysis on 20 shots fired at 20 different targets at 20 different ranges from 20 different positions under 20 different conditions. Our shooting model cannot be jammed into your mold. When you shoot the same targets at the same precise ranges, using predefined postions and generous time limits, with range flags for wind and a precise spot placed for you to read the results, that book is a critical part of the system. For me it has virtually no value at all.

How are you at a standing start, port arms, 30 seconds from GO hit a random target 10x12" between 500 and 800 with the first shot, or second shot within 4 seconds of the first?

 

[Tactical]

Re: Calls and Strikes

Why is it different opinions cause such reactions? The "Playing Sniper" was out of line. I think all of us want the best trained snipers in world working for our common goal. "Good men can disagree and still be friends" James Jarrett. I know I quote it way too often but its useful here.

Here are facts:
Everyone has an opinion
Everyone finds something that works for them.
The right way is what works for the individual.

Students should try many different ways to find what they like best.

Having shot tactical and NRA I have found what now works best for me. I teach guys to start using data book until they understand what data they need. Once a guy knows his rifle and ammo well, I believe a note book or range cards are all thats needed. Then its a note book if/when they feel comfortable. On extreme range stuff I prefer the PDA if I have time. If not its pre made charts I make based on either data from shooting or PDA.

I will probably freak a few out here when I say I dont use Wind Charts as long as I am shooting that 155 Scenar, to 1000 yards. I have shot it enough to know based on needed come ups how much it should float in wind I am seeing. This will probably freak out even more as once I have a base zero for a known yardage I use hold offs for changing winds, not dialing the knobs back and forth attempting to keep up with changes.

 

[Rifles Only]

Re: Calls and Strikes

Nice try, Mike. However SS is better than the rest of us.

SS I am begging you, PLEASE come to Rifles Only for the Hide Cup.

We are full, but I will risk my standing with those on the waiting list to let you in and school us that do not know how to use this equipment. Please come school us that are just pretending.

Rifles Only and Sniper's Hide will pay airfare, hotel, rental car and meals for you to make this trip.

Please consider this offer very seriously, because that is how I consider it.

Please come and show us what we are doing wrong.

Until January, I thought that you might actually know what you were talking about. At that time, there was an incident at RO that changed that. It convinced me that you are exactly as you appear- a person that hides behind what you have written below your name.

Don't take that as an insult, your records are impressive. I know you earned them, and I am happy for your accomplishments. However, this is not the site for you. What you do is a completely different discipline that has nothing to do with field shooting.

You continue to think it does, you are wrong.

However, maybe I am wrong- thus the invitation for an all expense paid trip to South Texas.

I want to know.

No that is wrong- I already know. I want you to know

Please come here, on me, and prove your methodology, thinking, techniques, and applications are superior

 

[Xcount]

Re: Calls and Strikes

I find it hard to believe you could get a repeatable cheek weld with that big a$$ chip on your shoulder. I guess keeping an eye on the big picture and not getting emotional is out the window, the question now is how far gone are you?

Lowlight maybe some decaf is in order.

 

[Guest]

Re: Calls and Strikes

Will video's be for sale?

 

[sinister]

Re: Calls and Strikes

The Marine Corps' vaunted heroes Carlos Hathcock and Jim Land spent an ass-load of hours on KD ranges. Both were Distinguished Riflemen and Camp Perry competitors. I think both of them are considered fair field shooters. Surely that kind of skill development must have helped train snipers somehow.

The AMU's pioneering Vietnam sniper courses were also taught by guys who live on rifle ranges.

By definition we're supposed to survey tactics, techniques, and procedures from everywhere; modify, cull, and keep what is applicable; note what might be usable; and shit-can what doesn't apply or help.

It never ceases to amaze me what I learn whenever I get around shooters. It also never ceases to amaze me what jack-assery exists out there passed as gospel.

Going lock-step into "This is the only way to do it" is a sure way to get your butt handed to you. Worse, it can get your customers shot and killed. Seen it.

If it works for you, it works. If it doesn't, disregard. Offering a free flight, school, bunk, and vittles is a great way to expand horizons.

Competition is a barometer of how one performs, that day, at that time, against a set field of competitors. Scores and performance fall where they might against the whole field. Some days the winner, some days the goat. Besides combat, sometimes competition is the only measure of your consistency and proficiency against a like field.

Pooh-poohing competition and competition techniques as instruments to improve performance is a bad thing. If you don't know where your performance falls in comparison to others with like skills, arms, and experience you're not advancing your knowledge nor your craft (whatever the endeavor).

Where competition fails is we're not shooting at each other with live ammo on our stalks. Winner take all.

Guys armed with simple wood-stocked M40s, M40A1s, M21s, and M24s killed a lot of knuckleheads. Could they have been even better with more training and trigger time under their belts? Undoubtedly.

The minute you think you are the Holy Grail and sun shines out your butt is the day you've locked your mind to expansion and improvement.

Electronic gadgetry would not be where it is today if folks didn't have confidence in it. I've also been on the other side where that's what we were issued and it failed, and we defaulted back to analog training.

Back to the original post, if calling a shot and logging data has no value then we can kill it as a technique in all shooting and sniping schools right now.

 

[Lowlight]

Re: Calls and Strikes

Sinister, Rounds down range will always hold value, and in leu of combat, competitions is a very viable way to hone one's skills, however, that doesn't mean everything done in competition will be as valuable as in combat.

Recording "data" isn't the same as using the Call & Plot Method... You can argue that Calling & Plotting is value, which in the context of strings of fire I agree, but it tracks "trends" across the uninterrupted string. We have clearly stated we are "Calling' the shot, however we are not "plotting" the shot in a competition format... so in my mind, Yes, Sniper School can stop teaching Call & Plot in favor of Calling the shot simply good or bad, and teaching the shooter to "not push a bad shot' because Calling & Plotting does not discourage this practice of shooting of when you know the shot is bad. Absolutely if you see a issue with dope you record the new information.

Seems to me too, in the new Sniper Magazine someone is saying Databooks for Snipers are dead because ballistic calculators hold the trends for you. And that with a ballistic computer the bullet doesn't get a vote. I don't agree, but there you have it.

We have acknowledged that competition has it is own set of variables that are important to the competition shooter, it seems to me the Competition shooter is the one stating the fact we Call and don't Plot is absolutely wrong... we never said Calling & Plotting was wrong, just a focus of little use for a guy looking to get that first round hit.

Service rifle shooters do several things Tactical Shooters don't do, like the Off Hand Shots for Score... if you are shooting your M24 in the Off Hand things have gone horribly wrong for you and chances are it is a muzzle contact snap shot and not a high power / olympic shooter relaxed standing position. So why adjust the dope for a standing shot in an M24 ? Where is the Shooting Jacket, Glove, in a tactical competition ? Do you call Time Out so the enemy can let you sling up ?

Good Competitive shooters is and has always been one metric for this, but it is not the only metric... Even David T has realized this and has adapted some technics to tactical training that he would not employ in high power, like being straight behind the rifle.

 

[sinister]

Re: Calls and Strikes

The advantage of cross-discipline shooting training is exposure to other ways and means of ultimately slaying targets (for competitors that might be silhouettes, for hunters it might mean game, for Soldiers it would be hostiles).

No shooting coat and glove in combat -- but the MICH dome of obedience, the ALICE Green Wart, MOLLE and SPEAR body armor have no application in the civilian "Sniping" competition and games circuit, either.

If it doesn't apply to occupational skills it's just a hobby. Consequences are different for different customers and audiences.

Getting to a point of excellence and a mastery of skills where aids and gadgets are not required is a long trek. Different techniques to get to that point can fill many books. For students getting to that proficiency requires teachers and mentors who can relay the difference, by student, and can recommend those techniques (or not) to their charges.

You're not going to be able to teach that in a five to seven day course or clinic. Each student or trainee is only going to get that with trigger time. You can't buy proficiency just because one can afford a $7,000 rig, a $700 Kestrel, and a PDA loaded with charts and software.

 

[Lowlight]

Re: Calls and Strikes

I blame the movie "sniper" when the powers that be sent Billy Zane down to work the jungles with Tom Berenger it was clear from that point forward there will always be a rift between the service rifle competition shooter and the tactical shooter.

Call it a mindset thing, call it a simple rivalry, but anyway you slice it just doesn't work, or won't work.

Xcount, I don't know who you are talking too, but i'm not the one calling people names, clearly reading is fundamental here and Sterling straight up insulted those who don't do things "his" way. I've acknowledged the similiarities and the differences opting to provide details and insight into the methods we employ. When you have people like a well respected member of an institution like Gunsite agreeing with me, you have to ask, what is Charles problem.

 

[sobrbiker883]

Re: Calls and Strikes

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: CoryT</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Charles, you clearly live in a totally different world than the majority here, this is Sniper's Hide, not NRA News. You can't do trend analysis on 20 shots fired at 20 different targets at 20 different ranges from 20 different positions under 20 different conditions. Our shooting model cannot be jammed into your mold. When you shoot the same targets at the same precise ranges, using predefined postions and generous time limits, with range flags for wind and a precise spot placed for you to read the results, that book is a critical part of the system. For me it has virtually no value at all.

How are you at a standing start, port arms, 30 seconds from GO hit a random target 10x12" between 500 and 800 with the first shot, or second shot within 4 seconds of the first? </div></div>

Amen.

 

[Sterling Shooter]

Re: Calls and Strikes

My opinions and impressions are based only on the observation of shooters in my neighborhood, who have appeared to me, by their statements, actions, and peculiar use of their equipment, such as data books, or backward slings, to indeed be role playing. My opinions are neither unique or original. I wonder about these folks, like what sort of marketing could inspire them to get some training. I think it's interesting.

 

[ggmanning]

Re: Calls and Strikes

I have a friend who is a master class skeet and all American sporting clays shooter. Guess what happens when I take him quail hunting? Lots of misses. Give him a slow methodical situation and let him see where the clay will fly a few times and he is money. Put him in the field in unknown situations and he is average at best. He is a great shooter in his element and can consistently run 25's on the skeet field but can't show me anything about shooting a covey flush. The corelation is obvious. It doesn't make him any less of a shooter because he is very, very good in his type of shooting. I am no expert with the shotgun or rifle but I shoot a lot and I know the way he practices does not correlate completely to a field situation no matter how good he is at shooting the known repeated elements of a skeet field. He is a master but standing beside me in a dove field my pile is bigger.

 

[ssgp2]

Re: Calls and Strikes

I`m going to start arguing with Frank and Jacob from now on.
I`ll be sending you my address and wait for the plane tickets and hotel accomodations

 

[sobrbiker883]

Re: Calls and Strikes

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ssgp2</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I`m going to start arguing with Frank and Jacob from now on.
I`ll be sending you my address and wait for the plane tickets and hotel accomodations

</div></div>

Now there's an angle I like! Only problem is that if you fail to put up the all expense paid trip suddenly vanishes......

 

[Lowlight]

Re: Calls and Strikes

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sobrbiker883</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ssgp2</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I`m going to start arguing with Frank and Jacob from now on.
I`ll be sending you my address and wait for the plane tickets and hotel accomodations

</div></div>

Now there's an angle I like! Only problem is that if you fail to put up the all expense paid trip suddenly vanishes......</div></div>

Those Canadian's, they're tricky.. this guy is a shooter, I think he nailed 5 - 2MOA Steel Plates @ 605 yards in 9 seconds during the match he attended, if I have my names right. In fact I couldn't speak as fast as he shot.

Sterling, sounds like you're spinning your own post, and I take it that is a no to the competition invite with all expenses paid ? Many would think the goal of the competitor is to compete, apparently not.

 

[SFC Carpentier jr]

Re: Calls and Strikes

This a good post. A lot of good information going back and forth. Remember that times have change. What we have done back then many people do not do today. Frank also mention the SNIPER magaizine and one of the articles about the PDA and the ballistic programs. The person that wrote the article pretty much said that is all we need. So why would we need calls and plots? I will say that many of you that are posting here know that batteries go dead, some PDAS do not work when they have been dropped in water or work in a very high heat condition.

Again a lot of good information and again someone passes up a free trip to RiflesOnly to shoot a SnipersHide match. I am sure that the LONG waiting list of people that would like to shoot the match wish that they were able to get the free trip.

 

[tigerhawk]

Re: Calls and Strikes

+1 to Cory T and SFC Carpentier, Jr.

Sometimes, also, PDAs simply freeze and sometimes, when they do, a reset in the field will not work. Sometimes what is required, for some reason, is that the PDA be plugged into an AC source (even if the battery is fully charged), and then it will sometimes reset when nothing else has worked. It also fascinates me that so many people seem to want their rifles coated with a rust-proof coating, but do not realize that a PDA, especially if it is turned on at the time, will suffer far more if dropped in water than a rifle will. There are ruggedized PDAs and ruggedized phones, but the HP iPAQs, and most smart phones, are not among them.

I have posted things about ballistic programs on this site, so obviously, I use PDAs myself, but I refuse to depend on them, because I refuse to depend on anything that requires electric power in order to run. On a long hunting trip in the back country, not everyone carries a generator. It would also seem that the number of people who discuss SHTF and TEOTWAWKI preparations on this site would realize that, within a few days after such an event, most people's PDAs would have stopped working until they could be charged. Spare batteries will be used up fairly quickly. I wonder how many such people have made range cards on laminated paper or plastic, or memorized the come-ups for the rifle they plan to use in such an event.

 

[LawnMM]

Re: Calls and Strikes

I'm gonna weigh in on this and give everyone the impression I have of myself on the front end, I'm a novice.

However, part of what drew my novice ass to this site is that the people running it and the lessons they offer and doctrine they preach makes sense. Doesn't make sense to me as an expert shooter or a master tactician, I try it, and it makes sense to me as a logical human being.

Take the calling and plotting shots and strikes. I tried this out recently because I really wasn't doing it before. I made a conscious effort on one outing to plot my calls and then the strikes. I then, like a good boy, looked at the information gathered later to see what use it was to me and I see multiple issues with the whole idea, many of which have already been covered by the guys running this place. That tells me they know what they're talking about.

Plotting the shots. I found it cumbersome, annoying, and time consuming to constantly be breaking my cheek weld every 2-3 shots to plot my calls. I found it difficult to remember what my windage holds were more than 2 or 3 shots prior on the plains of Colorado at 800 yards. This forced me to stop what I was doing to record my holds every two shots. Every time I do this, I'm losing my sight picture, and I'm losing track of the changing wind conditions.

More problems arise reviewing the information. Since my goal is to have good dope for future trips I look at my data in that light. Well looking at my holds in changing winds, even if properly recorded, doesn't tell me anything other than I changed them. Since I don't check the wind speed, fire immediately, and record the hold, what good does it do me looking back? I think what Frank says about plotting it, or writing down anything other than a good shot or a bad shot doesn't accomplish much.

Having the elevation makes sense, and its easy to record for future use. Gravity doesn't change, thats why its called a constant. Next problem, understanding which shots were which downrange. I go to mark my target plot area and then try to discern which plotted calls go with which holes in the paper. I can guess, but its only a guess. It also doesn't tell me anything other than that I had the wrong hold on the wind, or I pushed a shot and drove the point of impact down, or I wasn't paying attention to my breathing and the point of impact raised.

I went back a few weeks later working on some load development and had a great day shooting. I focused on the fundamentals and hardly had any scope movement across my strings of fire. I never lost my sight picture, I was spotting my own hits and watching them appear on paper at 300 yards. I got a lot more out of that session than I did plotting anything a few weeks earlier. I noticed when I focused on making the shot count, a good clean press, loaded bipod, natural point of aim, I could tell whether the bullet would land on or near where I wanted to.

This morning went even better, out of 9 shots zeroing my scope, I had a good clean shot 3 times. I saw the holes appear, and they landed exactly where I wanted them to. I'm not bragging about my success, or lack thereof, with regard to attempts versus completed good shots. What I think is significant, and mirrors Frank's position, is that you know when you squeeze the trigger if its going to hit where you want it to. I found myself saying 'dead center' to myself just as the trigger broke and before the round punched the red circle out of the middle of my target.

Add me to the list of competition heretics, but I don't see the point in recording where you think the bullet landed. You either fudged the wind call or you screwed your own shot. If you screwed your own shot no change in dope based on any amount of data analysis is going to fix it. If you botched the wind, that is to say, your elevation was spot on but you were left or right of target...then believe the bullet and get the next round on target before conditions change.

Thats my noob take on the matter, though I haven enjoyed the read on the thread.

Rich

 

[ssgp2]

Re: Calls and Strikes

Good memory Frank!

But it did not count...
I was shooting a semi in 260Rem with a 24" barrel!!!!!!!

 

[Sterling Shooter]

Re: Calls and Strikes

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

Add me to the list of competition heretics, but I don't see the point in recording where you think the bullet landed. You either fudged the wind call or you screwed your own shot. If you screwed your own shot no change in dope based on any amount of data analysis is going to fix it. If you botched the wind, that is to say, your elevation was spot on but you were left or right of target...then believe the bullet and get the next round on target before conditions change.

Thats my noob take on the matter, though I haven enjoyed the read on the thread.

Rich</div></div>

The bullet will go where aimed, or someplace else. Calling the shot relieves you of the either/or question, where ever the bullet goes. A shot on call but not right-in-there suggests shooter error, i.e. trigger control, NPA, or an inconsistent shooter relationship between gun and ground. A shot off call would of course suggest not properly countering for wind, or perhaps, sights not adjusted correctly. Certainly you need not record this information, only use the call to better understand where to trouble-shoot. But, if indeed you are using a data book to record multiple shot strings, and you are rebuilding the position for each shot, recording both the call and strike can show you a corollary between shots called right-in-there to strikes somewhere else. This information can help you refine a no-wind zero based on an entire shot string rather than just a round or two. This is very effective BTW for establishing an awesome no wind zero for the standing position in HP. For dry firing practice, recording calls will show effectiveness of practice procedure over a period of time. Also, for a shooter just starting out, being able to call the shot suggests that the shooter is following through on the shot and maintaining focus on the sight. When the plotting of calls is expected, it can reinforce a consciousness for the need to follow through. This is important since follow through is a mental concept which does not correlate to motor memory development as rapidly as do other aspects of position building. As has been alluded to by Sinister and a few others here, do what works for you, but, at some point, you may want to also ask, is what I'm doing really working out.

 

[CoryT]

Re: Calls and Strikes

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> This is very effective BTW for establishing an awesome no wind zero for the standing position in HP</div></div>

Pray tell, why might one attempt establish zero windage on a rifle from the offhand/standing position?

Using a sandbagged rest fixes a windage zero. If you are not hitting center windage from another position, that's you, not the sights.

 

[CoryT]

Re: Calls and Strikes

ANd it might be thread drift, but the bullet does NOT go where the barrel is pointed. It may go where the SIGHTS are pointed, assuming it is zeroed for the given range.

 

[Sterling Shooter]

Re: Calls and Strikes

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: CoryT</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> This is very effective BTW for establishing an awesome no wind zero for the standing position in HP</div></div>

Pray tell, why might one attempt establish zero windage on a rifle from the offhand/standing position?

Using a sandbagged rest fixes a windage zero. If you are not hitting center windage from another position, that's you, not the sights.</div></div>

I use the term no-wind to describe a zero which does not account for anything other than distance. A zero created prone from a sandbag is a good start, but, unless it's refined, as may be necessary when the position changes, points will be lost. The call/strike analysis identifies the amount of refinement necessary, since shooting zero displacement in the standing position is not a reality for anyone, and triangulation of the relatively big group on the target does not conclusively determine the theoretical zero.

 

[Sterling Shooter]

Re: Calls and Strikes

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: CoryT</div><div class="ubbcode-body">ANd it might be thread drift, but the bullet does NOT go where the barrel is pointed. It may go where the SIGHTS are pointed, assuming it is zeroed for the given range.</div></div>

Fact: The bullet always goes where the barrel is pointed. It may go where the rifle is aimed, if the rifle is properly aimed using consistent sight alignment and the trigger is pulled with trigger control which does not disturb aim.

Another fact, shooter/target analysis reveals only one thing for sure-where the barrel was pointed for each shot.

 

[Goldbeachman]

Re: Calls and Strikes

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sterling Shooter</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: CoryT</div><div class="ubbcode-body">ANd it might be thread drift, but the bullet does NOT go where the barrel is pointed. It may go where the SIGHTS are pointed, assuming it is zeroed for the given range.</div></div>

Fact: The bullet always goes where the barrel is pointed. It may go where the rifle is aimed, if the rifle is properly aimed using consistent sight alignment and trigger control which does not disturb aim. </div></div>

This is a pedantic word game. The bullet "starts toward" where the barrel is pointed.

Sterling Shooter: Why don't you have the courtesy of providing a response to Jacob? Perhaps you have privately and not publicly?

 

[Sterling Shooter]

Re: Calls and Strikes

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: KIMO</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sterling Shooter</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: CoryT</div><div class="ubbcode-body">ANd it might be thread drift, but the bullet does NOT go where the barrel is pointed. It may go where the SIGHTS are pointed, assuming it is zeroed for the given range.</div></div>

Fact: The bullet always goes where the barrel is pointed. It may go where the rifle is aimed, if the rifle is properly aimed using consistent sight alignment and trigger control which does not disturb aim. </div></div>

This is a pedantic word game. The bullet "starts toward" where the barrel is pointed.

Sterling Shooter: Why don't you have the courtesy of providing a response to Jacob? Perhaps you have privately and not publicly?</div></div>

No, it's not a word game. It's a shooter accepting that errors are all about the shooter not knowing where the rifle was pointed and/or the shooter not being able to maintain the rifle until recoil has subsided. Only with acceptance of this fact can a shooter begin to understand the possibilities from marksmanship perfection, and his waste of time when the objective is anything less than perfection of marksmanship.

 

[Lowlight]

Re: Calls and Strikes

I think the main difference is, and something Sterling fails to note, iron sights are indeed attached to the barrel, but scopes are not. And the fact scoped shooters tend to hold off and not dial to refine the windage zero at distance like high power shooters on a KD range, it is considered a different thought process. Yes the bullet exits the barrel, but the barrel may not be pointed at the target by a good margin.

As well we have demonstrated, documented, detailed, that properly executed with a scope with the parallax adjusted for range, the rifle does not change zero with position. It is a key component. How the shooter manages recoil is taught to prevent any position induced deviation. As with the shot group posted, from each position there is not a change. Anyone teaching successful deployment of the M24 from an unsupported, or sling standing position is wasting the shooters time. The rifle is not meant to be shot standing, so calls & plots are lost with the system as described.

Also most are currently using a parallax free sight like the aim point or EoTech which accounts for changes in position allowing off hand shots to indeed hit their mark. cheek weld is no longer the all encompassing issue it is with iron sights, and why exactly like Sterling noted, and knows nothing else, is why they used to call and plot and scoped rifle shooters have moved away from.

 

[Sterling Shooter]

Re: Calls and Strikes

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

Also most are currently using a parallax free sight like the aim point or EoTech which accounts for changes in position allowing off hand shots to indeed hit their mark. cheek weld is no longer the all encompassing issue it is with iron sights, and why exactly like Sterling noted, and knows nothing else, is why they used to call and plot and scoped rifle shooters have moved away from. </div></div>

Well, Frank, maybe there's something you too don't know, or just omitted, the ACOG requires a consistent stockweld, as without it, to minimize parallax error, the reticle/target relationship may not have anything to do with where the barrel is actually pointed. Leaning about the effect of parallex error with both calls and strikes plotted, can indeed help a shooter recognize the effect. So, why not?

 

[Lowlight]

Re: Calls and Strikes

Sterling,

I am well aware of the ACOG, and usually Parallax is not much of an issue in a 3.5x optic and I highly doubt you are seeing the issues beyond the accuracy capability of the rifle system. What you are saying is, a 1.5MOA or worse rifle is seeing a parallax issue from 3.5x optic at distance.

You can call & plot parallax effects but why not fix it... you know how to fix parallax in high power scope -- correct. So why call and plot when you can fix it and move on.

 

[ssgp2]

Re: Calls and Strikes

I never point the barrel to the ground when I pull the trigger, but the bullet always it hit....

 

[sinister]

Re: Calls and Strikes

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">As with the shot group posted, from each position there is not a change. </div></div>

Shooters can see a difference even between benched/seated and prone positions. Shoot from a knee over a hood, roof, or wall and your head and eye positions are going to be different. There will be position changes between slick and turtled up with vest, plate carrier, and load gear.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">...the M24...The rifle is not meant to be shot standing...</div></div>

Where is this written? I don't think ANY service has specified ANY prone-only gun?

Disregard WHO is writing and discussing, but rather the substance of the thread.

If there is no need for data recording from calls, scrap it. Someone in a for-profit position is not going to teach something that is not going to help in an abbreviated single weekend or week of training.

The objective yardstick would be to test that shooter against another who does in exactly one year (or whatever period) and comparing their skill sustainment and development.

 

[Lowlight]

Re: Calls and Strikes

Sinister,

Maybe you need to watch the video we did on positional shooting and the lack of shift and how a simple change in the shooter's position causes the shift, as in poor performance or training, however with proper training this can be overcome. Whether you are wearing armor, helmet or not... the gun doesn't change its zero, the shooter does, which is a "TRAINING ISSUE" once you know how to change that, it's easy.

Video was posted on the subject.

I am not saying you can't and in fact said above if you had too, things have gone horribly wrong for the shooter. By design a Tactical Rifle is a jack of all trades which is why it is built to bullet proof standards that would choke most other competition rifles.

Snap shots with the M24 are doable, as well I know lots of people try to shoot sling standing with a Tactical Rifle to "MIMIC" Olympic and Hi Power Shooter. However this goes beyond logic and intent... an effective Tactical Marksman would be better served given "time & opportunity" our caveat, to support the rifle. Just because we can, doesn't mean we should or it is effective. In my OPINION you are wasting rounds.

On the Wall at RO is a letter written by Bill Davison from Tac Pro, where Jacob was challenged to a 1000 yard unsupported seated shot on a target at 1000 yards with his AW rifle. He made the shot, in a double or nothing bet, Bill challenged him to the same shot standing... He made it, and won, to which prompted Bill to acknowledge the feat. He took it using a Snap shot and did not "sling up" 1000 yards, 1 shot hit on steel...

So now our fault is we are FOR PROFIT promoting an agenda... Gotcha, I'll remember that... I would like to know what people think of that statement in regards, to my posts on this topic.

 

[sinister]

Re: Calls and Strikes

Have watched a few guys take un-slung standing position hits with the M24 at 1100 yards against the E-silhouette -- guys who have tens of thousands of rounds of experience in all positions. Doesn't make it a routine shot for all. At 1,000 an E-type's still nearly two minutes across.

I am ASSUMING that folks who come to your training are either qualified already or are neophytes looking for solid foundation.

As you and I know, there is NO school, military or commercial, whose basic grad is at "Run" proficiency level -- whether that's the Marine Scout-Sniper, Leg Army, or SOTIC grad.

What you and I (and Cory and Jake, etc., the folks who have anywhere between five and ten thousand rounds down-range between individual varying systems -- i.e., "I've got 5,000 rounds through THAT rifle. Maybe 5,000 through that one over there") have is trigger experience over the newly-minted junior woodchuck. Most everyone's experience has been on a rifle range (a Westerner has wide-open spaces while an Easterner may have to be a competitor to have access to facilities).

Someone whose entire or routine training regimen is 300 Meters isn't going to have the same background as a western steel shooter or long-range hunter.

Teaching a newb as fast as possible what is and is not possible with a scoped rifle is not the same as excellence gained over time through the life of even a single barrel (can we agree somewhere around 3,500 rounds)?

Soldier, cop, woodchuck/prairie dog shooter, a guy with trigger time knows his drops, can estimate his own wind, and if talented can call his own winds to within a half-minute -- let's say out to between 600 and 800 Meters, no gadgets involved, just Mark 1 eyeball. That skill doesn't come in a week or even six weeks.

Guys who tour with the Army Team over a summer usually return to their units with a single season of quality trigger time. This is a program the Army Team has sponsored for a number of years (all TAD and travel paid for by the Army Team). These are usually shooters from the Ranger Regiment and the individual Special Forces Groups who have no intent of shooting on the circuit.

Even guys whose units can support TAD/TDY and ammo for two weeks every three or four months (and there are very few of these) still have to keep up their practice. <span style="font-weight: bold"> I have no idea (and it's none of my business) how many civilian (non-government) clients do so with their own money (commercially).</span>

I'm NOT trying to raise hackles, poke eyes, or start argument. I know what the formal Army training system puts out, and while it's good not every trigger-puller is immediately going to "Top Gun." He's an entry-level stud working towards journeyman. Even they don't get better unless they measure themselves against peers (combat, Benning, Bragg, perhaps Perry and overseas competition and schools).

A guy handed a 700 PSS in .308 or 22-250 with a week or two of training at 100 yards may be titled a sniper, and this entire thread may not apply to him.

There are bunches of different techniques out there and I am not championing any -- use what works for you. I have had the distinct honor of frequenting different schools and working with different folks, taking what works from others and blending it to improve.

I strongly recommend everyone venture outside their comfort zone once in a while to try to learn something new. An Interservice and Camp Perry method is team matches -- grouping four or more guys together for a combined team score, where every team requires a newby. Haven't ever seen that in sniper matches because they're set up for pairs (and even then it may be pairs matched as they show up that day).

But again I'm rambling. Comes with this Alzheimer's. I am a product of my own experience, good and bad.

The only one who can decide is the user/consumer.

 

[AtOne]

Re: Calls and Strikes

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

So now our fault is we are FOR PROFIT promoting an agenda... Gotcha, I'll remember that... I would like to know what people think of that statement in regards, to my posts on this topic. </div></div>

It only re-affirms my opinion that I'll sign up for your online training and wish like hell that you we're closer to Washington so that I could take some classes too.

I understand that online classes or even one's in person won't make me a top tier shooter not will it make me the well rounded shooter that many of you commenting are. Its just another small stepping stone at the bottom of a large mountain of learning in front of me.
I'm sure that after a couple days of classes your students have shown proven results and I also know that even though they've got one hole targets to take home with them it still doesn't mean that their anywhere near the level many of you are. That knowledge only comes with experience and practice but what they do take home with them is the confidence to know what's possible when they do everything right and new ideas to practice and help them along when they're at the range on their own. That confidence and experience goes a long way to help someone down the road of learning.

I've learned a lot from this thread. Hearing from guys that are talented in their respected styles of shooting discussing the merits of calls and strikes has taught me that for the way Sterling shoots it's a fantastic tool and for the way Lowlight teaches and shoots it's not practical...two completely different styles of shooting but both get results.

Sinister I'm a Newb in shooting and have no issues with that at all, we've all been Newbs in life at one time or another.
In construction after 22 years I'm at a high level of talent and teach new people all the time either at work or helping neighbors get going in the right direction with their projects. I enjoy teaching them and know that what I tell them isn't going to make them a master craftsman but with a willingness to learn, read and try, anything is possible !

 

[CoryT]

Re: Calls and Strikes

At 1000 yards, a .308 barrel is pointed some 400 inches above and 11 or so inches left (right nand twist) of the target. I submit the barrel is NOT pointed at the target

If the sights are proper regulated, the bullet will go where the SIGHTS are pointed, absent shooter influence. I makes no differance what position, nor what shooter, zero is zero unless the SHOOTER moves the gun. If you need a different zero for a different position, I suggest you fix the position, not the sights.

If I zero windage off bags or other rest, it's zeroed. If you shoot somehwere else, it's you, not the sights. You may certainly make a fairly consistent error, and therefore wish to move the sights, but it's still an error, and therfore correctable.

On Tuesday of a 250 basic pistol class, I usually get a few Glock shooters come up for a sight adjustment. It's always gotta come right for a right hander and left for a lefty. How much off are you I ask. About 3 inches at 7 yards. Sure you are. I shoot the 6" plate at 25 out the back door and it's dead on. I make them rest the pistol and I'll press the trigger with them, dead on. Hmmm. Probably not a sight adjustment issue, ya think?

 

[Tactical]

Re: Calls and Strikes

As a former cop sniper ( By the way my initial training was from 100-600 yards with 1 moa ability requirred to 300 yards, then monthly training often went to 1000 yards), trainer, Service Rifle, Palma Rifle and now F TR Rifle Competitor, I am sorry to see so hard of stances on this subject. What works best is what works best for individual shooter. Teach them both and let shooter decide what he needs to make the shot. If you only have time to teach one method teach them the one you like best and let them learn other way later on. The learning should never stop anyway.

This is not rocket science.

 

[Tactical]

Re: Calls and Strikes

Cory, if you run a rifle with real tight prone slung position and then basically free recoil the rifle froma bipod, do you see a difference in point of impact at 1000 yards? I sure do. I see difference if I dig bipod legs in versus letting bipod rest on ground. Now granted this is not huge difference but it exists. This is not just me this is something seen by all the guys on National F TR Team I have talked with it about. Position does effect impact when it comes to fine shooting. On steel at man hunter distances not a big deal but on .50 moa x ring at 1000 yards we see it

 

[Sterling Shooter]

Re: Calls and Strikes

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: CoryT</div><div class="ubbcode-body">At 1000 yards, a .308 barrel is pointed some 400 inches above and 11 or so inches left (right nand twist) of the target. I submit the barrel is NOT pointed at the target

If the sights are proper regulated, the bullet will go where the SIGHTS are pointed, absent shooter influence. I makes no differance what position, nor what shooter, zero is zero unless the SHOOTER moves the gun. If you need a different zero for a different position, I suggest you fix the position, not the sights.

If I zero windage off bags or other rest, it's zeroed. If you shoot somehwere else, it's you, not the sights. You may certainly make a fairly consistent error, and therefore wish to move the sights, but it's still an error, and therfore correctable.

On Tuesday of a 250 basic pistol class, I usually get a few Glock shooters come up for a sight adjustment. It's always gotta come right for a right hander and left for a lefty. How much off are you I ask. About 3 inches at 7 yards. Sure you are. I shoot the 6" plate at 25 out the back door and it's dead on. I make them rest the pistol and I'll press the trigger with them, dead on. Hmmm. Probably not a sight adjustment issue, ya think?</div></div>

Understanding where the barrel is pointed, unless shooting at an intuitive target, requires an understanding of trajectory, and the effect of wind, temp, drag, and gravity. From this understanding the sights are then adjusted. This is all mind-set.

 

[Rifles Only]

Re: Calls and Strikes

I think the gun is either zeroed or it's not.

 

[Lowlight]

Re: Calls and Strikes

Saying, "the bullet goes in the direction the barrel is pointed" is hardly prolific, in fact it is vague and speaks to a general understanding, especially if you have to caveat it with; as long as you understand, trajectory, weather, sight height, adjustments, etc. Maybe if you were teaching some one handgun marksmanship you'd be on to something someone can learn from. Imparting this on a new shooter tells them next to nothing as they have no concept of the barrel in relation to the target only the sights. Like the standard definition for trigger control, it is about manipulation without disturbing the lay of the sights not the barrel. It might move the barrel, but you cannot move one without moving the other, at least during the execution of the shot.

At the end of the day, the gun doesn't care, it's up to the shooter to manage the fundamentals to include keeping the sights on target. It's the sights that are important as they tell the tale, which is why you are advocating to call & plot. You don't call the barrel placement but the sight picture. You call the shot as to where the sights are because that is what you are focusing on, not the barrel.

Mike, I think Cory answered your point. Sure you can change your hold and produce a varying result downrange, but that is because the shooter changed something not because the Rifle did. The rifle is a dumb machine how we operate it determines the outcome. So if the shooter is inconsistent in application you can expect varying results.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This is important since follow through is a mental concept which does not correlate to motor memory development as rapidly as do other aspects of position building.</div></div>

Also, as a side note, Sterling you mentioned Follow Through as being mental, well it is also mechanical. It's holding the trigger to the rear until the recoil pulse has ended. Coming off the trigger in a lack of follow through is a physical act, not a mental one. Releasing the trigger can effect the shot by introducing movement to the system while the bullet is still in the bore. Particularly in a semi-auto platform with slower lock time and the amount of movement already taking place. Not losing time in a scoped precision rifle is also part of Follow Through, there are 3 distinct periods of time, before, during, and after, the less time you lose between these the better you can focus on the shot and the results, part of the call.

 

[Sterling Shooter]

Re: Calls and Strikes

Follow-though begins with the thought to do it, as does trigger control, therefore, these things are mental. Screwing up follow through or trigger control means to have not thought about it, while executing the firing tasks. My mental management program has five subjects in this order: sight alignment, adjustment of NPA, focus on sight, trigger control and follow through.

 

[Lowlight]

Re: Calls and Strikes

So does getting out of bed, brushing your teeth, opening the door to your car, inserting the key, putting it in drive as opposed to reverse, etc.

However that is not what you said or implied. That is spinning your answer to suit a spoken error.

What part of shooting doesn't require thought except for breathing, unless you think about holding it.

 

[Sterling Shooter]

Re: Calls and Strikes

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So does getting out of bed, brushing your teeth, opening the door to your car, inserting the key, putting it in drive as opposed to reverse, etc.

However that is not what you said or implied. That is spinning your answer to suit a spoken error.

What part of shooting doesn't require thought except for breathing, unless you think about holding it. </div></div>

Motor memory eliminates most need for thinking with the exception for follow through and trigger control.

 

[Lowlight]

Re: Calls and Strikes

Isn't the act of dry fire, the repetitions, are building muscle memory, while it has a mental component it most certainly is a physical act.

One could say that your finger knows what to do, especially if you put your time in dry firing to build the proper neural pathways. So it actually reduces the mental burden, so once the sight picture is correct, the only thought is yes or no to break the trigger, follow through should but an automatic part of it without needing to over think it.

Your personal mental mantra doesn't necessarily apply to everyone. Every fundamental is a mental process so reminding yourself is simply part of your personal management of them. Some people might say something completely different in their head, doesn't make it wrong.

Not to mention you just said your mental process is 5 steps not 2.

 

[Tactical]

Re: Calls and Strikes

Frank and Jacob, I see your point. No real arguement here. The rifle is zero'd we change point of impact by how we allow it to go through follow through. Actually makes sense the only problem is we can not always be perfect behind the rifle.

I used to dig my bipod feet into ground for very precise shooting but found the ground at many NRA ranges was too inconsistent to consistently hold bipod legs. Never had that problem in field, except when I had to get in weird shooting positions to get a position, while staying behind cover.

 

[Sterling Shooter]

Re: Calls and Strikes

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Isn't the act of dry fire, the repetitions, are building muscle memory, while it has a mental component it most certainly is a physical act.

One could say that your finger knows what to do, especially if you put your time in dry firing to build the proper neural pathways. So it actually reduces the mental burden, so once the sight picture is correct, the only thought is yes or no to break the trigger, follow through should but an automatic part of it without needing to over think it.

Your personal mental mantra doesn't necessarily apply to everyone. Every fundamental is a mental process so reminding yourself is simply part of your personal management of them. Some people might say something completely different in their head, doesn't make it wrong.

Not to mention you just said your mental process is 5 steps not 2. </div></div>

My mental management allows me to establish the position without my mind running rampant, that's to say, it provides me with an orderly process. But, while most of my steps can be relieved of contemplation after effectively being applied, mental consciousness of trigger control and follow through cannot be set aside if I'm seeking the the best results.