By now most of you have probably read about the "alleged" (I guess) 3,079 yard kill by an Oz sniper:
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/...*****=Feed:+TheFirearmBlog+(The+Firearm+Blog)
It got me thinking as a new long range shooter that struggles at 1000 yards. I know that sometimes "less" is "more" when it comes to magnification at distance due to mirage. However, hitting a chest-size target at nearly three miles requires some magnification...
I do know that on even a non-sizzling FL day the mirage off the range sands nearly makes me drunk at 1000 yards, even dialed down.
Now, I've never had an opportunity to look through a scope at three times that distance.
Feedback from any of you that have, what's the minimum magnification that will give a clear sight picture at that range...
And any guess on the optic these guys might have had on their M82A1's given they're not US?
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/...*****=Feed:+TheFirearmBlog+(The+Firearm+Blog)
It got me thinking as a new long range shooter that struggles at 1000 yards. I know that sometimes "less" is "more" when it comes to magnification at distance due to mirage. However, hitting a chest-size target at nearly three miles requires some magnification...
I do know that on even a non-sizzling FL day the mirage off the range sands nearly makes me drunk at 1000 yards, even dialed down.
Now, I've never had an opportunity to look through a scope at three times that distance.
Feedback from any of you that have, what's the minimum magnification that will give a clear sight picture at that range...
And any guess on the optic these guys might have had on their M82A1's given they're not US?