USMC Vietnam Zeros and shooting techniques

[harlikwin]

Seeing as there is an interest in the historical rifles I thought I would share what I know of the "historical" shooting techniques. I'm sure alot of this will be very familiar and very basic to the older shooters, but some younger guys might be interested how it was done back in the day.

Range estimation during the Vietnam period was a bit different than modern techniques, often a variety of manual range finding techniques were employed (the football field, the thumb technique and so forth). However a technological solution was sought with the adoption of the M40 rifle and the Redfield telescope system. The technique is straight forward enough, there are 2 ranging lines in the upper portion of the telescope and a "range tape" to range a target place the ranging lines and zoom the scope until the the two lines subtend the target from the top of the shoulders to the belt buckle.

Once the range is determined the sniper would apply the correct "hold" based on a 500 yard zero. He would also apply the correct hold for windage as well, based on chest width of roughly 18" as a guide.

Using this technique the sniper could rapidly and accurately (relatively, ranging is rather slow) engage targets from 100-600 yards.

 

[blcouch]

Cool post. Thanks. I have some books containing that stuff like One Round War and couple others but they seem to be getting more inaccessible. The Death from Afar books have some great stuff but I had to sell off mine during hard times. The Complete Book of US Sniping had some good info too. It's always cool to look back on how issues were dealt with that we don't really think about now. Every scope above $100( okay maybe $200) just about have mildots, solid mounts and repeatable adjustments where that was probably a pipe dream at the start of Nam, at any price. I can't imagine how tedious a process and how much trial and error got us from 1960's scope tech to now, especially for the lower echelon guys to get the brass to okay or even not crack down on improvements that started at the end user level. Late night post ends.

 

[harlikwin]

Yeah, the Senich books are a good resource but as you said harder to find and more expensive. I figured since there are alot of people here building M40 clones this might be of interest. Also one thing Senich doesn't talk about is how hard the Accurange system is to use accurately, its a moderate PITA to zoom the scope while trying to hold the ranging hairs on a target. I need to do a practical test with a LRF and see how accurate it actually is, I'm guessing within 10% if I'm lucky.

Also ironically, at the start of the Vietnam war there were solid, repeatable scope systems out there, the British No32mk3 scope was mechanically better than the US scopes IMO though it lacked any sort of provisions for range finding. And in general the Soviet PSO-1 scope was superior in all ways except magnification compared to US scopes with a good integral range finding reticle as well as hold points/mil marks.

 

[kraigWY]

I had one of those Redfield for a while, (finely traded it and a Remington 788 for a saddle). I used a bit on different rifles, even mounted in on a M14 and M1D. As mentioned it was a PITA, to range and adjust.

I always had better luck with the ART Leatherwood, you ranged, you automatically adjusted. The ART had 30 inch stadium lines but it was quite easy to divide that, giving you 15 inch.

I still have a ART MPC, it has 18 inch stadium lines, I mounted it on a Model 70, it makes a good deer hunting scope, as the size of the average deer is 18 inches from top to bottom. I took it out a few times ranging deer and confirming the range with a Laser Range Finder, its quite accurate.

As to ranging before the ART, Accue Range, or Mildots, we use to do it all the time using the front post of the M1 or M14. The front sight of the average M1 or M14 is .076. Using the average width of the average soldier of 19 inches, (same as the e-silhouette). If the front sight is equal to the e-silhouette target, you are 250 yards away. If the front sight is twice the size of the target you are 500 yards, and if the sight is 1/2 the size, you're 125 yards away. With practice you can get pretty good.

Not a whole lot different then mil dots.

Maps make pretty good range finders also.

I still say, sniping is about the shooter, not the equipment.

 

[MescaBug]

You are correct but..

Historically, the Redfield Accu-Range reticle purpose was for hunting. The 2 top lines represent 18", the approximate size of a deer.

The military heard about it, and thought I might apply to sniping since the human chest is also, approx 18".

Here is a picture of the manual that came with my original Accu-Range scope.

 

[diderr]

very cool info.

 

[Guest]

As to ranging before the ART, Accue Range, or Mildots, we use to do it all the time using the front post of the M1 or M14. The front sight of the average M1 or M14 is .076. Using the average width of the average soldier of 19 inches, (same as the e-silhouette). If the front sight is equal to the e-silhouette target, you are 250 yards away. If the front sight is twice the size of the target you are 500 yards, and if the sight is 1/2 the size, you're 125 yards away. With practice you can get pretty good.



Maps make pretty good range finders also.

I still say, sniping is about the shooter, not the equipment.

Man you are killing the gear queers, with truth.

Loved the ART after, we had the armor drill and tap the base for set screws. Even guys that only had a 15 minute block, could use it correctly for range, after getting them zeroed. Some places it was hard to get a good bead on the belt line and top of head, but even at that it was like they say, "Close enough for government work".

 

[mrbungle]

thanks for the info.

redfield sells still sales those accu-range scopes. called the redfield revenge. i bought one before i really knew anything about scopes and use it until i save up enough for a good scope.
Redfield Revenge 4-12x42mm Rifle Scope with Accu-Ranger Hunter Reticle Video at Macks Prairie Wings

 

[mrbungle]

thanks for the info.

redfield sells still sales those accu-range scopes. called the redfield revenge. i bought one before i really knew anything about scopes and use it until i save up enough for a good scope.
Redfield Revenge 4-12x42mm Rifle Scope with Accu-Ranger Hunter Reticle Video at Macks Prairie Wings

 

[Viper1]

The video leaves me with a couple of questions. At the end it appears that there are two rather spectacular misses on hogs, followed by the GOB's comment "somebody better take this Redfield Revenge offa this gun." He then says "Redfield Revenge" while giving the throat cut sign. Wtfsup with that?

Interesting ranging system brought from the Nam to the 21st century eh?

Viper1

 

[harlikwin]

The video leaves me with a couple of questions. At the end it appears that there are two rather spectacular misses on hogs, followed by the GOB's comment "somebody better take this Redfield Revenge offa this gun." He then says "Redfield Revenge" while giving the throat cut sign. Wtfsup with that?

Interesting ranging system brought from the Nam to the 21st century eh?

Viper1

I doubt it works very well, its all nice on the video, but dicking with the zoom while holding on target itsn't the most ergonomic thing to do. Plus the ranging error has to be at least 10% or more at longer ranges.

 

[mrbungle]

i use that scope and just ignore the floating "range finder" line. but it does tell me if i am zoomed out or in when i am wondering where i am at as far as zoom. i will be replacing the scope soon as i have enough saved for a decent scope.