The standard is Direction and Distance from center of target in 3 to 5 seconds
Lining up a shooter for a first shot, you have command,
Shooter, Center Hold, (pause) Left 1 Mil, Send it
Bang!
Me: .4 right, send it
Shot out, Impact
All that is done in the time it takes the shooter to run the bolt
Please to meet you. My name is Major Major Major Major. You can just call me Major.Okay, stud. Listen up hero. Now we are on the same playing field and I know why we hit it off so well. My first name is SGT, last name Major. So you know the deal. We both started on half mil reticles dialing up dope in the middle of the night when you had to memorize your clicks. Back when you still had to mil distance and then dial in from there. Now we can start over and move on. Teach away rock!
M856, et tu?Listen fuck stick. Can you not educatie without being a fucking cunt and bringing my wife into this. Go fuck yourself. This is why people don't get into shooting becuase of fucking cunts like you!
Brother, now that I know who you are and your back ground we are solid. Hell, I did 22 years in the army mastering the shit talking trade. Your talking Range 19. That was my home for 17 years. I'm a FAG (formal action guy) I only did maybe two years in recce though, the rest of the time of was in an assault troop. I never liked the idea of laying flat belly watching other guys kick in doors. I was happy to get back on an assault team. But now getting older and I can't see the front sight on my pistols as well anymore I would like to get into the long range game.Yes,
That would be the correction, so for you with no reticle to get up to speed fast, take the time to create a cheat sheet, we use them all the time. I would have a width reference in mils based on your target package, then you can work exactly as posted,
I did a ton back in the day with Hk416, did a secret squirrel gig they just swapped uppers to push out farther. I love the platform, all good stuff. I think we used Range 29? I forget, my brain is broke.
With a red dot, you want to call as explained above, based on the target. They have no reference so they are holding off the target. Unless they can swap out to a 1-8x or something.
I am a dick at times, especially when I am home bored, and definitely on here because I answer to nobody, but we're all good. We always give real information we just tend to mix in a few treats to entertain.
I teach all over, Colorado, Alaska, Minnesota, Iowa, Tennesse, all are on the books this year but stuff is getting moved around a lot. My class next week was canceled with the state in lockdown
So I am an old civvy, but spotter and shooter have to communicate in units available to both. So if you have nothing but binoculars, and the shooter has nothing but a plain reticle, then the only thing you can both see is the target. So giving corrections in fractions of the target may be the best you can do when speed matters (i.e., you are 1/2 a target left, hold 1/2 a target right). Crude, but all you have in common.Brother I get it, but the fact of the matter is there are still folks out there that don't have that. Hell the Leopold that comes on the SASS 110 the Airfare ordered does not have a zero stop. So middle of the night you have know idea where the bottom is. There are places where you can't pull out a flashlight and check your turret.
I appreciate the input.So I am an old civvy, but spotter and shooter have to communicate in units available to both. So if you have nothing but binoculars, and the shooter has nothing but a plain reticle, then the only thing you can both see is the target. So giving corrections in fractions of the target may be the best you can do when speed matters (i.e., you are 1/2 a target left, hold 1/2 a target right). Crude, but all you have in common.
That said, @lowlight is right. You need time on glass (OJT) to start seeing the field of view in angular units of measurement (mils or moa). But that will not help a shooter with a naked reticle.
I am likely making things worse here, but trying to hear what you’re saying and put it in context. Angular units are best... after that you are winging it at best. Ok, amateur hour is over... someone with more rank take over.
Not that pissing matches aren’t fun?
You would be correctOk, question:
I have a 12" wide target at 450 yards.
how many mils is that?
if I take 3.6" x 4.5 = 16.2" so 1 mil at 450 yards = 16.2"
the target is 12" wide so 12" devided by 16.2" = .74 mils.
So the target is .74 mils in width at 450 yards.
Would this be correct?
Or you could just measure it in mils...ya know... With the reticle if you have a mil scope and just skip the mathOk, question:
I have a 12" wide target at 450 yards.
how many mils is that?
if I take 3.6" x 4.5 = 16.2" so 1 mil at 450 yards = 16.2"
the target is 12" wide so 12" devided by 16.2" = .74 mils.
So the target is .74 mils in width at 450 yards.
Would this be correct?
You could also have the shooter tell you how large the target is in Mils/moa, save a bit of time on that mental math.2) If you know your range and target size and you are the spotter, do the math to convert your target size into Mils at the beginning of the shooting session. 1 mil = 3.6" for every 100 yards, or 3.94" for every 100 meter or whatever units you want. Figure out how wide your target is (example 0.6 mils) then give corrections on the fly using the target width for estimation. You see shooter miss off left edge, you would call "come right 0.3 mils" and so on.
Or you can do it I like I do, tell the shooter to spot their own damn misses.You could also have the shooter tell you how large the target is in Mils/moa, save a bit of time on that mental math.
Only if you can see the button to pushHere's a question for you. Do laser range finders work in the dark?
Two questions really. I know a mil at 100 yards is 3.436 inches. Question 1, why do most people round to 3.6 and not 3.5? Question 2, how many inches at 100m? (3.9?) Thanks
It’s ten centimeters at 100 meters. Why in tarnation would you want to know inches at 100 meters?
I think ur mixing up ur factors. There are ~ 3.43774 mils per MOA. That factor is CONSTANT regardless of range. 1 MOA @ 100 yds = ~ 1.047” , so 3.4377x1.047=3.6”. At 100m, 1 mil is exactly 10cm =~ 3.937” . If at all possible, given ur gear: just work mils when ur ranging in meters and MOA when ur ranging in yards. I just thinks it’s easier that way. But then again, I’m an old guy and I like things simple. YMMV. If u can’t do that then I guess u gotta do the math.Two questions really. I know a mil at 100 yards is 3.436 inches. Question 1, why do most people round to 3.6 and not 3.5? Question 2, how many inches at 100m? (3.9?) Thanks
Love the subtle humor. ? Hard to get a rational answer when one is dealing with irrational numbers.If you get a rational answer to this question, please let me know?
I think you’ll find that the origin of “mil” comes from abbreviation of milliradians, or 1/1000 of a radian which is ~ 57.2957 degrees.really, what is Merican?
Or are you really saying, you speak Ignorance?
man this Isolation thing is turning out fun, necro posts about shooting straight up, Mil posts about linear equivalents, all sorts of silly things to bring out the best comedy precision rifle shooting has to offer.
A mil is a mil, an MOA is an MOA and a Mils work in yards, so why does it matter?
1 yard at 1000 yards,
1 Mile at 1000 miles
Both examples of Mils
Correction: make that 3.43774 MOA per mil (oops).I think ur mixing up ur factors. There are ~ 3.43774 mils per MOA. That factor is CONSTANT regardless of range. 1 MOA @ 100 yds = ~ 1.047” , so 3.4377x1.047=3.6”. At 100m, 1 mil is exactly 10cm =~ 3.937” . If at all possible, given ur gear: just work mils when ur ranging in meters and MOA when ur ranging in yards. I just thinks it’s easier that way. But then again, I’m an old guy and I like things simple. YMMV. If u can’t do that then I guess u gotta do the math.
And this is why, as an American, LOVE the metric system more than the Imperial systemAll good brother. But try this for ease of calculation: measurevin meters and then move the decimal one place to the right. That’s your answer in centimeters. Divide cm by 2.54 to get inches. It’s easier, and after a while you will just use centimeters.
Resistance is futile?
To be fair, not all reticles are in mils, some are in minutes. But, and here's the value add: don't use a reticle that's in inches and think "well the duplex part is about 3" wide at 100 yards. and I missed by about one reticles thickness so I need to adjust by 3" on the turrel" Think instead, "that's about 3 MOA", then dial in 3 MOA on the MOA turrets. Which works regardless of whether you have 1/4" or 1/2" clicks on the turretJust try not to be overly defensive and have some thick skin. You did say you KNOW 1 mil was 3.4 inches at 100y. It’s a little funny.
What I do want to say is, try getting away from eye balling how many inches you think a miss is. Just use the reticle. If you notice a miss at .8 mils in the reticle, adjust .8 mils. No inches, no conversion. Easy day.
This is the first I've heard of 0.499" I'm not saying I don't believe you, I'm just saying it never came up in math, algebra, or calculus. After thinking about it a moment it makes sense to me mathematically. However in the real world it's sufficiently accurate to say "round up if it's greater than or equal to 0.5, round down otherwise." At least for small arms cartridges."Most" people rounding off at mathematically WRONG figures are idiots. The standard is less than .5 for rounding under, and more than .49999 for rounding over. You don't. Anyone that says different can't add 1 and 1 and come up with 2.
To be fair 3.438 will solve that dilemma if the reticle is in moa and the turrets are in mils or vise versa (multiply or divide). Shooting without a matching reticle is still possible even with the extra step. A piece of paper and calculator go a long way. If the reticle is in moa and turrets are in moa, welp, it’s the same as my example. If you miss by 3.4 moa, adjust 3.5 moa. Whatever.To be fair, not all reticles are in mils, some are in minutes. But, and here's the value add: don't use a reticle that's in inches and think "well the duplex part is about 3" wide at 100 yards. and I missed by about one reticles thickness so I need to adjust by 3" on the turrel" Think instead, "that's about 3 MOA", then dial in 3 MOA on the MOA turrets. Which works regardless of whether you have 1/4" or 1/2" clicks on the turret
Of course, few people are going to be dialing anything in at 100 yards, unless you're just competing in paper punching. And it's at the long distances that the small errors add up. ...and this is all just book learning on my part, sadly. The odds of me ever shooting much at even medium range at my age are low.
I suspect that unlearning the "hold over by X inches" thing is a particular problem that we older shooters have to unlearn, because that's how it was learned back in the 1970's. I still have a laminated drawing I made of the duplex reticle on a fixed 4x scope, with the dimensions of the reticle in inches @100 yds, and the holds for the particular cartridge, on a rifle I bought when I was a teenager. That's the kind of information that came with scopes back then, and in the US it carried on like that for at least 2 decades. Fortunately we now have great books and videos available to help us relearn things.
I'm all for the KISS answers in life...Im not the one shooting. I am trying to get better at calling...
I’ve found that as stated above, using verbiage like “half target” and “one full target” work well.I will say this. I do like your videos now that I know who you are based on your no nonsense approach. I often wondered what your background was. That small gun of mine served me well. HK416. Hell I even subscribed. But we, like my first marriage, can't getter all right.
So help me out here. Us guys that just know our 5.56 holds with a red dot aren't good at this stuff. Let's say I mil a target that is 508 meters away, (target is E Type) and I know he's at 508 cause he measures 2 mils tall and 1 mil wide, if the shooter misses by a full target width to the left edge (and I know I have to bring him back to center), I would give him a correction of "Right 1.5 mils"
He’s giving the linear equivalent of mils.....I think you’ll find that the origin of “mil” comes from abbreviation of milliradians, or 1/1000 of a radian which is ~ 57.2957 degrees.