• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

Fieldcraft question for REAL snipers

Buzzbee

Go Cowboys
Full Member
Minuteman
Aug 15, 2018
173
43
Snipers from All branches of our great military and SWAT , are you trained on MOA or MIL?
 
some people on other forums think you're an idiot if you use MOA. just wondered which systems real operators use. I find there are very few real operators which frequent these forums
 
  • Like
Reactions: drwood96
some people on other forums think you're an idiot if you use MOA. just wondered which systems real operators use. I find there are very few real operators which frequent these forums

Huge difference between a line sniper and an "operator" not even in the same league in regards to training and gear/optempo
 
7054247
 
sorry Gunny, I used the term too lightly, i watch too much TV ..
 
Snipers from All branches of our great military and SWAT , are you trained on MOA or MIL?

Short answer. Both and depends. Explainantion:
mil/mil is probably most common between the Army and USMC in general. These days.

As was said. Outside of the line, tier 1 and some or most tier 2 is a different story.
 
I trained Mil as a B4 continued that through SOTIC. With the feds now so I’m not using range estimation as often as I did with the Army. As long as your reticle and your turrets match (I.e. Mil-Mil or MOA-MOA) it really wont matter. It’s personal preference. I can get behind a friends rifle with MOA-MOA and have no problems adjusting.
 
LE and our team uses MOA. Went through school about 10 years ago and it seemed to be the standard practice then. Since then, I've done quite a bit of traveling and training with other states and agencies. Honestly it's a tossup.

I've tried to talk myself into buying and learning a mil/mil scope for personal use, just to see the difference up close, but I chicken out every time because I dont want to devote shooting time to a practice that I can't use professionally.
 
Does it really matter which system you use they both do the same thing put a bullet on a target. Even if a operator didn't know how to use either system I still wouldn't stand down range from him.
 
LE and our team uses MOA. Went through school about 10 years ago and it seemed to be the standard practice then. Since then, I've done quite a bit of traveling and training with other states and agencies. Honestly it's a tossup.

I've tried to talk myself into buying and learning a mil/mil scope for personal use, just to see the difference up close, but I chicken out every time because I dont want to devote shooting time to a practice that I can't use professionally.

METT-T is worth considering when it comes to changes like that. I’m not restricted in my agency so I’ve just stuck with what has been my unit of measurement since 1999. If I were in more of an HRT role then it would be very important that all shooter and equipment were coordinated and timed. If I’m trying to synchronize shots with other shooters from different vantage points in order to rescue civilians....? Well, let’s just say everyone’s day went to shit. I have always preferred to run and gun over static interdiction.
 
All of it, at the same time with the same scope, cuz if you can’t combine MILS, MOA, BDC, and IPHY’s all into 1 scope and put 1st round hits on a sprinting Hajji at 1k without a calculator, rangefinder, decent glass and no magnification, with a round that has the ballistics of an indirect fire weapon system, then you’re not “Operator as Fuck”.........
 
Last edited:
^^^ sounds about right.

Real answer: using a fixed carry handle 1st production run bushmaster topped with a simmonds 22 mag 3-9x32, unmarked turrets and a duplex reticle thats split
 
So I googled it, and “milsim” is a thing. It’s an air soft thing, but there’s whole “milsim galleries” of OAF and “snipers”. The fat ones are the funniest!:p
 
A lot of issue scopes are/were Leupold Mk4's and they have a mil reticle and MOA turrets. It adds and extra step in the math.

I taught SDM's using ACOGs and we taught 'em MOA. Mostly because the ACOG has MOA adj.

MOA and mil are the same thing, from a mathematical perspective, they're just different ways of taking angular measurement.

This is turret/adj. dependent, but in general MOA is more accurate than mil because more precise adj. can be achieved. For instance, a 1/4 MOA is a smaller adj. than a 1/4 mil. Maybe why Leupold did what they did with the Mk4, I don't know.

But yeah, it's a persona preference and I prefer having the optic one way or the other, most are mil/mil now but I do have a couple Mk4's. They're nice scopes for the price (used) but I'd rather have a better quality mil/mil FFP. That's my preference.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DeftSystems