Re: Vietnam Snipers
Wow, Barry, does looking at that map ever bring back some memories !!!!!!
I take it that that's "I" Corps?
Wow, Barry, does looking at that map ever bring back some memories !!!!!!
I take it that that's "I" Corps?
- Thread starter fish2keel
- Start date
Re: Vietnam Snipers
my generation got cheated with iraq... we shoulda been in nam.
Sucks hahaha.
my generation got cheated with iraq... we shoulda been in nam.
Sucks hahaha.
Re: Vietnam Snipers
Yes, it's "I" corps. If you look on a map of Da Nang, you will notice that it's located on a bay. At the upper end of that bay the Cade river empties into the Bay de Tourane. Hathcock's battlefield with the NVA company occurred somewhere in the area where the river makes its "S" curve. If you look closely at the map, you can see the names of the villages mentioned in Marine Sniper. Dong Den is just to the SW of the wide open rice fields shown in the upper elbow of the river. Hathcock mentioned that he had up to a 1000 yd field of fire. Maybe this will put a little added touch to Hathcock's story of Elephant Valley.
Sincerely,
Barry C Jolly
Yes, it's "I" corps. If you look on a map of Da Nang, you will notice that it's located on a bay. At the upper end of that bay the Cade river empties into the Bay de Tourane. Hathcock's battlefield with the NVA company occurred somewhere in the area where the river makes its "S" curve. If you look closely at the map, you can see the names of the villages mentioned in Marine Sniper. Dong Den is just to the SW of the wide open rice fields shown in the upper elbow of the river. Hathcock mentioned that he had up to a 1000 yd field of fire. Maybe this will put a little added touch to Hathcock's story of Elephant Valley.
Sincerely,
Barry C Jolly
Re: Vietnam Snipers
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">my generation got cheated with iraq... we shoulda been in nam</div></div>
You're right, we had better music for our war.
As to maps & protractors, I had a non-military protractor that you match up the scale, and it would measure the contur lines and give you the angle for angle fire.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">my generation got cheated with iraq... we shoulda been in nam</div></div>
You're right, we had better music for our war.
As to maps & protractors, I had a non-military protractor that you match up the scale, and it would measure the contur lines and give you the angle for angle fire.
Re: Vietnam Snipers
Hey, you young guys, try to imagine a battle or firefight without GPS coords . . .
Hey, you young guys, try to imagine a battle or firefight without GPS coords . . .
Re: Vietnam Snipers
A lot of "GRUNTS" died in Viet Nam because they couldn't read a map. Trust me on this one.
A lot of "GRUNTS" died in Viet Nam because they couldn't read a map. Trust me on this one.
Re: Vietnam Snipers
I have the highest admiration, respect and honor for that term.
"GRUNT" there is no one better.
I have the highest admiration, respect and honor for that term.
"GRUNT" there is no one better.
Re: Vietnam Snipers
Im with everyone else KraigWy, you should at least write down some of your stories no matter if you were a sniper or anything else! So much history has been lost without writing down even a little of it.
Barry,
Thanks for the map! Thats awesome and really does help to understand and put into perspective of Hathcock's book.
keep it coming guys! Im enjoying reading everything from back then....its very interesting since its not talked about much
Im with everyone else KraigWy, you should at least write down some of your stories no matter if you were a sniper or anything else! So much history has been lost without writing down even a little of it.
Barry,
Thanks for the map! Thats awesome and really does help to understand and put into perspective of Hathcock's book.
keep it coming guys! Im enjoying reading everything from back then....its very interesting since its not talked about much
Re: Vietnam Snipers
Here is some of the calculation that was and still used in training today for lead. Time of FlightX Target Speed = LEAD
To convert lead in feet into meters is Lead in Feet X 0.3048=meters
To covert leads in meters to mils is
LEAD IN METERS X 1000 = Mil LEAD divided by Range to Target
Now if you are talking about Drop then it depends on what your rifle is ZEROED for as that changes the inches in drop from one to the next and the velocity and bullet weights all has play in the effect in the way you will aim in. But to simple answer your question because the military maps out the rounds sniper use they know the Volocity and drop all the way out to 1000 yards +. This information is what you will use to adjust your scope in the field. Remember if your zero is 100 yards the drop in inches is different then if your scope was zeroed at 400 yards. Knowing this information is inportant because now you have that information and if you range estimation is correct you should be able to make the correct dope change on your scope to make the hit at what ever range.
Like I stated is an above post once you start shooting in the field and makeing correct range estimations and understand in inch what your bullet is doing you will be able to make the dope change faster and faster. Hope this helped
Cheers
505Gibbs
Here is some of the calculation that was and still used in training today for lead. Time of FlightX Target Speed = LEAD
To convert lead in feet into meters is Lead in Feet X 0.3048=meters
To covert leads in meters to mils is
LEAD IN METERS X 1000 = Mil LEAD divided by Range to Target
Now if you are talking about Drop then it depends on what your rifle is ZEROED for as that changes the inches in drop from one to the next and the velocity and bullet weights all has play in the effect in the way you will aim in. But to simple answer your question because the military maps out the rounds sniper use they know the Volocity and drop all the way out to 1000 yards +. This information is what you will use to adjust your scope in the field. Remember if your zero is 100 yards the drop in inches is different then if your scope was zeroed at 400 yards. Knowing this information is inportant because now you have that information and if you range estimation is correct you should be able to make the correct dope change on your scope to make the hit at what ever range.
Like I stated is an above post once you start shooting in the field and makeing correct range estimations and understand in inch what your bullet is doing you will be able to make the dope change faster and faster. Hope this helped
Cheers
505Gibbs
Re: Vietnam Snipers
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 11B-B4</div><div class="ubbcode-body">my generation got cheated with iraq... we shoulda been in nam.
</div></div>
Hmmm, without opening a can of worms...maybe we should have told France/deGaulle to go F it since they turned out to be such a great NATO buddy and never came to blows in Vietnam in the first place. Then we ally with Ho again like the 1940s and since we 'lost China' we could have kept a much better eye on Mao and Khrushchev from a very strategic location. Anyone who can beat the Nipponese/French/Americans/Chinese one after the other just may be the tough SOB's to have on your side...
Anyway, Kraig-what ammo did you use in your A1's?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 11B-B4</div><div class="ubbcode-body">my generation got cheated with iraq... we shoulda been in nam.
</div></div>
Hmmm, without opening a can of worms...maybe we should have told France/deGaulle to go F it since they turned out to be such a great NATO buddy and never came to blows in Vietnam in the first place. Then we ally with Ho again like the 1940s and since we 'lost China' we could have kept a much better eye on Mao and Khrushchev from a very strategic location. Anyone who can beat the Nipponese/French/Americans/Chinese one after the other just may be the tough SOB's to have on your side...
Anyway, Kraig-what ammo did you use in your A1's?
Re: Vietnam Snipers
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Kraig-what ammo did you use in your A1's?</div></div>
M193 55 gn ball.
Off topic, that was the same ammo I used in my Remington 700 223 LE Counter Sniper Rifle.
The stuff is accurate. Granted, its not what I use in high power ARs but for what I used in for in Vietnam, and in LE, it worked.
If I was to build, what in my opinion, would be the perfect combat rifle, it would be the 'A1 with a 1:7 twist, and the A2's rear sight, but the same light weight of the 'A1.
But with M193 you don't need those two changes.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Kraig-what ammo did you use in your A1's?</div></div>
M193 55 gn ball.
Off topic, that was the same ammo I used in my Remington 700 223 LE Counter Sniper Rifle.
The stuff is accurate. Granted, its not what I use in high power ARs but for what I used in for in Vietnam, and in LE, it worked.
If I was to build, what in my opinion, would be the perfect combat rifle, it would be the 'A1 with a 1:7 twist, and the A2's rear sight, but the same light weight of the 'A1.
But with M193 you don't need those two changes.
Re: Vietnam Snipers
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: kraigWY</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Kraig-what ammo did you use in your A1's?</div></div>
M193 55 gn ball.
Off topic, that was the same ammo I used in my Remington 700 223 LE Counter Sniper Rifle.
The stuff is accurate. Granted, its not what I use in high power ARs but for what I used in for in Vietnam, and in LE, it worked.
If I was to build, what in my opinion, would be the perfect combat rifle, it would be the 'A1 with a 1:7 twist, and the A2's rear sight, but the same light weight of the 'A1.
But with M193 you don't need those two changes.
</div></div>
Just out of curiosity have you seen the ballistic effects of either the 62 gr. or 75/77 gr. bullets?
Personally, I would go with the 6.5 Grendel and load it with a 100-110 gr. high BC hybrid ogive FMJ bullet. Except I would change the throat in it to do like the 5.56 to allow it to be loaded hot-hot. One round, one LMG round, no mmg (M240/M60) plenty of punch through for mud walls and a long enough bullet to wiggle all over the place when it hits flesh...while not expanding.
I have to say though, once I learned how to shoot the M16A1, <span style="color: #3333FF">{using M193}</span> I found it to be incredibly accurate. I had to un-learn my bad home shooter habits.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: kraigWY</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Kraig-what ammo did you use in your A1's?</div></div>
M193 55 gn ball.
Off topic, that was the same ammo I used in my Remington 700 223 LE Counter Sniper Rifle.
The stuff is accurate. Granted, its not what I use in high power ARs but for what I used in for in Vietnam, and in LE, it worked.
If I was to build, what in my opinion, would be the perfect combat rifle, it would be the 'A1 with a 1:7 twist, and the A2's rear sight, but the same light weight of the 'A1.
But with M193 you don't need those two changes.
</div></div>
Just out of curiosity have you seen the ballistic effects of either the 62 gr. or 75/77 gr. bullets?
Personally, I would go with the 6.5 Grendel and load it with a 100-110 gr. high BC hybrid ogive FMJ bullet. Except I would change the throat in it to do like the 5.56 to allow it to be loaded hot-hot. One round, one LMG round, no mmg (M240/M60) plenty of punch through for mud walls and a long enough bullet to wiggle all over the place when it hits flesh...while not expanding.
I have to say though, once I learned how to shoot the M16A1, <span style="color: #3333FF">{using M193}</span> I found it to be incredibly accurate. I had to un-learn my bad home shooter habits.
Re: Vietnam Snipers
What was the load on a m118 .308 round? Was it a 175 grain round?
Also Kraigwy, did you carry an alice pack? I like the alice pack since I saw it here on the hide in the m40 thread but am not sure if I like the metal back plate.
What was the load on a m118 .308 round? Was it a 175 grain round?
Also Kraigwy, did you carry an alice pack? I like the alice pack since I saw it here on the hide in the m40 thread but am not sure if I like the metal back plate.
Re: Vietnam Snipers
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Just out of curiosity have you seen the ballistic effects of either the 62 gr. or 75/77 gr. bullets?</div></div>
Yes Sir, that's why I mentioned the 1:7 barrels. I shoot 77 & 80s in High Power.
I've been working with the 64 Gn Speers because I've been taske to put on a LE Sniper School and that's what they use.
My feeling is with the 1:7 will shoot just about everything, from M193 to the 80-90 grn target bullets.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Just out of curiosity have you seen the ballistic effects of either the 62 gr. or 75/77 gr. bullets?</div></div>
Yes Sir, that's why I mentioned the 1:7 barrels. I shoot 77 & 80s in High Power.
I've been working with the 64 Gn Speers because I've been taske to put on a LE Sniper School and that's what they use.
My feeling is with the 1:7 will shoot just about everything, from M193 to the 80-90 grn target bullets.
Re: Vietnam Snipers
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What was the load on a m118 .308 round? Was it a 175 grain round?
Also Kraigwy, did you carry an alice pack? I like the alice pack since I saw it here on the hide in the m40 thread but am not sure if I like the metal back plate.</div></div>
The M118 is the military 173/4 match bullet, the 175s are the M118LR.
We used the Jungle Ruck, not the Alice Pack, I didn't see the Alice pack until I got in the NG, I didn't like it, I went back to the Jungle Ruck. To me its easier to arrange stuff to suit your self and needs with the Jungle Ruck.
And its lighter.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What was the load on a m118 .308 round? Was it a 175 grain round?
Also Kraigwy, did you carry an alice pack? I like the alice pack since I saw it here on the hide in the m40 thread but am not sure if I like the metal back plate.</div></div>
The M118 is the military 173/4 match bullet, the 175s are the M118LR.
We used the Jungle Ruck, not the Alice Pack, I didn't see the Alice pack until I got in the NG, I didn't like it, I went back to the Jungle Ruck. To me its easier to arrange stuff to suit your self and needs with the Jungle Ruck.
And its lighter.
Re: Vietnam Snipers
Kraigwy,
You are a ton of help! Im taking down notes as I read this thread for all the help.
I'll be going to the range next week and going to try to work on doing some hold overs from 100-300 yards in the wind. Im still trying to figure out how exactly to hold over the target since im zeroed at 100 yards and with a wind from left to right. I suppose its just practice.
When im writing in my book let at the range, does anyone think it would be ok to draw a diagram of the target and where I held my cross hairs and then where the actual bullet hit?
Also anyone got any tips for hitting a moving target such as a deer?
Kraigwy,
You are a ton of help! Im taking down notes as I read this thread for all the help.
I'll be going to the range next week and going to try to work on doing some hold overs from 100-300 yards in the wind. Im still trying to figure out how exactly to hold over the target since im zeroed at 100 yards and with a wind from left to right. I suppose its just practice.
When im writing in my book let at the range, does anyone think it would be ok to draw a diagram of the target and where I held my cross hairs and then where the actual bullet hit?
Also anyone got any tips for hitting a moving target such as a deer?
Re: Vietnam Snipers
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> going to try to work on doing some hold overs from 100-300 yards in the wind</div></div>
Why sight in at 100 yards. Why not 250 yards. The Army Marksmanship Unit put out a guide for LE Counter/Snipers recommending a Bolt Gun with a 223 style round. The idea is that if you sight it in at 250 yards you can hit a head size target to 300 yards aiming at the nose/mouth area. Beyond 300 yards, say to 400 you aim at the head it will drop down to the body. No reason to hold over/under until you get beyond 400 yards. Practice alone will tell you how much. Same with 308s and '06s out of M14's and Garands
It takes a lot of wind to move off target to 300 yards, more people screw up overcompensating then under compensating. Moving from 9 o'clock in the 9 or 10 ring to the X ring is different, but normal shooting such as hunting, not so much. Again practicing while watching the wind and mirage with get you there.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">does anyone think it would be ok to draw a diagram of the target and where I held my cross hairs and then where the actual bullet hit?</div></div>
That's called plotting calls and shots, Score books for competition have places to record your calls and hits.
But:
There is no such thing as too much info in a date book. If you think it will help you at all, then it needs to be in the book. The data book is to help you, not me, not anyone else.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Also anyone got any tips for hitting a moving target such as a deer?</div></div>
When I went to Sniper School, I excelled at shooting movers. The reason was because at the same time I was heavy into "skeet" shooting. When I stopped shooting skeet, my "movers" went south. As I started up skeet it went north.
Robert Stack (actor) was a big time skeet shooter. During WWII he joined the army and was taske to instructing areal gunnery, because of his skeet shooting.
Daisy use to have a little air gun "running bore" target set up, less then 100 bucks, if you can find one it would be a great training aid.
After having said all that, I'm not a fan of shooting running critters while hunting. Just my personal opinion.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> going to try to work on doing some hold overs from 100-300 yards in the wind</div></div>
Why sight in at 100 yards. Why not 250 yards. The Army Marksmanship Unit put out a guide for LE Counter/Snipers recommending a Bolt Gun with a 223 style round. The idea is that if you sight it in at 250 yards you can hit a head size target to 300 yards aiming at the nose/mouth area. Beyond 300 yards, say to 400 you aim at the head it will drop down to the body. No reason to hold over/under until you get beyond 400 yards. Practice alone will tell you how much. Same with 308s and '06s out of M14's and Garands
It takes a lot of wind to move off target to 300 yards, more people screw up overcompensating then under compensating. Moving from 9 o'clock in the 9 or 10 ring to the X ring is different, but normal shooting such as hunting, not so much. Again practicing while watching the wind and mirage with get you there.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">does anyone think it would be ok to draw a diagram of the target and where I held my cross hairs and then where the actual bullet hit?</div></div>
That's called plotting calls and shots, Score books for competition have places to record your calls and hits.
But:
There is no such thing as too much info in a date book. If you think it will help you at all, then it needs to be in the book. The data book is to help you, not me, not anyone else.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Also anyone got any tips for hitting a moving target such as a deer?</div></div>
When I went to Sniper School, I excelled at shooting movers. The reason was because at the same time I was heavy into "skeet" shooting. When I stopped shooting skeet, my "movers" went south. As I started up skeet it went north.
Robert Stack (actor) was a big time skeet shooter. During WWII he joined the army and was taske to instructing areal gunnery, because of his skeet shooting.
Daisy use to have a little air gun "running bore" target set up, less then 100 bucks, if you can find one it would be a great training aid.
After having said all that, I'm not a fan of shooting running critters while hunting. Just my personal opinion.
Re: Vietnam Snipers
Kraig,
Thanks for the help! I've shot some skeet since I enjoy duck hunting but I haven't shot it in several years so Im a little rusty.
Im not a fan of hitting running targets while hunting either(although I do a good chase from a squirrel) but I sometime's hunt with dogs and they can run the deer pretty far out sometimes.
I usually site in at 100 since that's how I was taught to zero(growing up in mississippi we didn't make to many long shots). Now with my hunting in Alaska I am starting to get more longer shots. So if I were to sight in at 200-250 if I was shooting at 100 then I would just hold low correct?
Kraig,
Thanks for the help! I've shot some skeet since I enjoy duck hunting but I haven't shot it in several years so Im a little rusty.
Im not a fan of hitting running targets while hunting either(although I do a good chase from a squirrel) but I sometime's hunt with dogs and they can run the deer pretty far out sometimes.
I usually site in at 100 since that's how I was taught to zero(growing up in mississippi we didn't make to many long shots). Now with my hunting in Alaska I am starting to get more longer shots. So if I were to sight in at 200-250 if I was shooting at 100 then I would just hold low correct?
Re: Vietnam Snipers
Kraig,
I have a question for you now, When I was in I was issued the small ALICE w/o a frame and when I got to BN I was issued a large ALICE w/frame.
What's the difference between the jungle ruck and ALICE?
Kraig,
I have a question for you now, When I was in I was issued the small ALICE w/o a frame and when I got to BN I was issued a large ALICE w/frame.
What's the difference between the jungle ruck and ALICE?
Re: Vietnam Snipers
The jungle runk is a frame with a small have pack attached. The radio/sleeping bag, ammo cans or what ever is strapped to the other part of the frame, top or bottom, depending on how the individual sets it up.
The Alice packs I've seen had one large bag or pack that covered the whole frame,accully intergated with the frame.
They had another one, bigger then the Alice, we called a mountain ruck.
The main reason I like the jungle ruck more then the alice or mountain is it had a rather small compartment, with pockets on the side. You could pretty much get to anything without emptying the whole pack.
With the jungle rack I had everything pretty much attached to the outside of the main bag, except for c-rats, batterys, claymores and personal items. Ammo, gernades, water, etc was on the out side of the bag. I didn't use web gear, we never left our rucks for any reason.
The jungle runk is a frame with a small have pack attached. The radio/sleeping bag, ammo cans or what ever is strapped to the other part of the frame, top or bottom, depending on how the individual sets it up.
The Alice packs I've seen had one large bag or pack that covered the whole frame,accully intergated with the frame.
They had another one, bigger then the Alice, we called a mountain ruck.
The main reason I like the jungle ruck more then the alice or mountain is it had a rather small compartment, with pockets on the side. You could pretty much get to anything without emptying the whole pack.
With the jungle rack I had everything pretty much attached to the outside of the main bag, except for c-rats, batterys, claymores and personal items. Ammo, gernades, water, etc was on the out side of the bag. I didn't use web gear, we never left our rucks for any reason.
Re: Vietnam Snipers
Interesting, I looked up jungle ruck and it almost looks like the small ALICE pack I carried in Basic. Except we weren't given a frame with it. The frame looks a lot like the one I had with my large ALICE Ruck. but, it wasn't integrated. It slipped a padded pocket over the top with two slots. You fastened your shoulder straps to those and that held it. At the bottom there was two more straps. They had the 3 large pockets around the lower bottom and three little pockets above the center pocket. And, the radio pocket inside top front. Which just happened to fit a PRC-77 just right. We hung a 2qt. canteen on one side of the molle strips sewn on the ruck and the e-tool on the other. Then we ran a GP strap around them. The top cover split and was a map pocket. In the winter we would strap a sleeping bag under it with an H-harness.
They sure were unwieldy. Like they had some unseen pivot point that always pinched your lower back. I could carry a lot more stuff in a high speed pack we were given to try out. More like the internal frame, flexible body fit ones you see today in the civilian world. Problem is exactly what you said and that is you had to reach your full arm into them to get something. Chances are it shifted so then you have to unpack.
Edit:
Went on a tangent I think....
Long story short everybody in our BN carried their gear this way We got checked and rechecked all the time for uniformity of packing. I don't remember what all went were. But, our snipers always had the same packing list as us. With the exception of rifle and magazines. LCE was set up the same way for everyone. And, after Grenada, no personal knives. Bayonets only...except the BC. He could put his Randall on his LCE.
Interesting, I looked up jungle ruck and it almost looks like the small ALICE pack I carried in Basic. Except we weren't given a frame with it. The frame looks a lot like the one I had with my large ALICE Ruck. but, it wasn't integrated. It slipped a padded pocket over the top with two slots. You fastened your shoulder straps to those and that held it. At the bottom there was two more straps. They had the 3 large pockets around the lower bottom and three little pockets above the center pocket. And, the radio pocket inside top front. Which just happened to fit a PRC-77 just right. We hung a 2qt. canteen on one side of the molle strips sewn on the ruck and the e-tool on the other. Then we ran a GP strap around them. The top cover split and was a map pocket. In the winter we would strap a sleeping bag under it with an H-harness.
They sure were unwieldy. Like they had some unseen pivot point that always pinched your lower back. I could carry a lot more stuff in a high speed pack we were given to try out. More like the internal frame, flexible body fit ones you see today in the civilian world. Problem is exactly what you said and that is you had to reach your full arm into them to get something. Chances are it shifted so then you have to unpack.
Edit:
Went on a tangent I think....
Long story short everybody in our BN carried their gear this way We got checked and rechecked all the time for uniformity of packing. I don't remember what all went were. But, our snipers always had the same packing list as us. With the exception of rifle and magazines. LCE was set up the same way for everyone. And, after Grenada, no personal knives. Bayonets only...except the BC. He could put his Randall on his LCE.
Re: Vietnam Snipers
I was issued a medium ALICE when I first joined. I attributed what sandwarrior accurately described as an unseen pivot point, to the lack of an internal frame inside the pack or some other means to keep the pack from turning into a beach ball, and having a mind of it's own. Other problems developed from this, like having a sleeping bag in a waterproof sack. Eventually, with no way for the skin on your back to breath, you would sweat quite a bit, and it would eventually cause friction, irritation, and blisters too, if you weren't careful.
Eventually I picked up an ALICE Large that came with buckles instead of snaps, and a frame too. I say that it was a smart investment on my part. Everyone else still had the mediums, and I was having an easier time with the weight, simply because of the frame. The additional plus was an area in the frame between the lower pad, and frame itself that I could stack two MREs in, so I wouldn't have to put them in my ruck, only to have to take them out again. It also gave me more room in the ruck, and I used the MREs themselves as make-shift kidney pads. It didn't take that much thought to guess that the plastic cover for the MREs would cause me to sweat, but there was wiggle room for the MREs in that space so it never became that much of an issue.
Towards the end of my service the Army started to issue the MOLLE ruck in mass. The plastic frame for it is a joke, and caves in under pressure from the load, and the lack of padding compared to the Alice packs is minimal to non-existent. Sometimes it seriously felt that the entire thing was an anaconda choking the life out of me, and with every step I took, I could feel that cheap, shitty plastic frame bend, and flex from the weight.
It was a horrible pack, and compared to my large ALICE, which I still have, was a step back in the evolution of Army rucksacks in general.
I was issued a medium ALICE when I first joined. I attributed what sandwarrior accurately described as an unseen pivot point, to the lack of an internal frame inside the pack or some other means to keep the pack from turning into a beach ball, and having a mind of it's own. Other problems developed from this, like having a sleeping bag in a waterproof sack. Eventually, with no way for the skin on your back to breath, you would sweat quite a bit, and it would eventually cause friction, irritation, and blisters too, if you weren't careful.
Eventually I picked up an ALICE Large that came with buckles instead of snaps, and a frame too. I say that it was a smart investment on my part. Everyone else still had the mediums, and I was having an easier time with the weight, simply because of the frame. The additional plus was an area in the frame between the lower pad, and frame itself that I could stack two MREs in, so I wouldn't have to put them in my ruck, only to have to take them out again. It also gave me more room in the ruck, and I used the MREs themselves as make-shift kidney pads. It didn't take that much thought to guess that the plastic cover for the MREs would cause me to sweat, but there was wiggle room for the MREs in that space so it never became that much of an issue.
Towards the end of my service the Army started to issue the MOLLE ruck in mass. The plastic frame for it is a joke, and caves in under pressure from the load, and the lack of padding compared to the Alice packs is minimal to non-existent. Sometimes it seriously felt that the entire thing was an anaconda choking the life out of me, and with every step I took, I could feel that cheap, shitty plastic frame bend, and flex from the weight.
It was a horrible pack, and compared to my large ALICE, which I still have, was a step back in the evolution of Army rucksacks in general.
Re: Vietnam Snipers
I so loved C-rats and LRRP's over MRE's....
I so loved C-rats and LRRP's over MRE's....
Re: Vietnam Snipers
Keep the information coming guys, Im enjoying this!
Keep the information coming guys, Im enjoying this!
Re: Vietnam Snipers
Kraig,
To entice you back again, just how many sniper schools were operating in general in the late '70's/early '80's?
I've come to the conclusion that I must've lived in a bubble world in the Rangers in that I've talked to a number of people during that time and a lot of them talk about BN/Rgmt/Div sniper courses.
One woulda thunk the 'all-new' 'high speed' Rangers would have something similar to that instead of sending people off in three different directions (that I know of). Then again, there was no 'internal' schooling at either BN back in the day and when the 3rd came on line with the HQ element, nothing then as well. Just lots and lots of deployment, ruck and live fire time. Individuals went to all kinds of schools outside the BN's.
Kraig,
To entice you back again, just how many sniper schools were operating in general in the late '70's/early '80's?
I've come to the conclusion that I must've lived in a bubble world in the Rangers in that I've talked to a number of people during that time and a lot of them talk about BN/Rgmt/Div sniper courses.
One woulda thunk the 'all-new' 'high speed' Rangers would have something similar to that instead of sending people off in three different directions (that I know of). Then again, there was no 'internal' schooling at either BN back in the day and when the 3rd came on line with the HQ element, nothing then as well. Just lots and lots of deployment, ruck and live fire time. Individuals went to all kinds of schools outside the BN's.
Re: Vietnam Snipers
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> how many sniper schools were operating in general in the late '70's/early '80's?</div></div>
Can't say. The only formal school I knew of was the AMU's. To get in you had to convince the AMU that you would go back to your unit/state/department and start a sniper school.
That was true for the FBI, SS and other federal LE agencies plus Local and State Departments.
That also applied to the military, Most unit schools (including marines) sent their cadre to the AMU.
I took a two tiered approach, starting a sniper program teaching both military (NG and Reg Army from Ft Rich) and LE.
If you can find one, get a copy of the 50 Year aniversity of the Army Marksmanship Unit. It has pretty good information about their sniper programs.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> how many sniper schools were operating in general in the late '70's/early '80's?</div></div>
Can't say. The only formal school I knew of was the AMU's. To get in you had to convince the AMU that you would go back to your unit/state/department and start a sniper school.
That was true for the FBI, SS and other federal LE agencies plus Local and State Departments.
That also applied to the military, Most unit schools (including marines) sent their cadre to the AMU.
I took a two tiered approach, starting a sniper program teaching both military (NG and Reg Army from Ft Rich) and LE.
If you can find one, get a copy of the 50 Year aniversity of the Army Marksmanship Unit. It has pretty good information about their sniper programs.
Re: Vietnam Snipers
Kraig,
In 1982, when I really did learn how to shoot the M16/AR15, we had a high time Captain, who was former enlisted. At that time he was Capt. Baker. S2 for the 1st Rgr. BN. He spent a bunch of time at AMU, then got his commission and either did some time there before coming to BN or did his required 1st command somewhere then came to BN. I know he went back there after he left BN. that was late '82 early '83. Ever hear of him. Big dude, 6'1"-6'2" but bulky. In shape, but heavy. He would have been in AMU somewhere in the 70's. I'm not sure if he was a Viet Nam Vet or not. I know we had a ton of them.
Kraig,
In 1982, when I really did learn how to shoot the M16/AR15, we had a high time Captain, who was former enlisted. At that time he was Capt. Baker. S2 for the 1st Rgr. BN. He spent a bunch of time at AMU, then got his commission and either did some time there before coming to BN or did his required 1st command somewhere then came to BN. I know he went back there after he left BN. that was late '82 early '83. Ever hear of him. Big dude, 6'1"-6'2" but bulky. In shape, but heavy. He would have been in AMU somewhere in the 70's. I'm not sure if he was a Viet Nam Vet or not. I know we had a ton of them.
Re: Vietnam Snipers
Guys, you that keep asking, when Kraig says he was "just a Grunt", send me a PM and I'll tell you how those guys lived and what they did.
It will give you a very different perspective.
Guys, you that keep asking, when Kraig says he was "just a Grunt", send me a PM and I'll tell you how those guys lived and what they did.
It will give you a very different perspective.
Re: Vietnam Snipers
Killer,
Why don't you post it here for everyone to see?
Killer,
Why don't you post it here for everyone to see?
Re: Vietnam Snipers
They lived wet and cold and dry and hot, and hungry.
Ponchos did no good during the monsoons . . . put a poncho on and all ya did was sweat underneath it.
I've seen some of those guys, especially Marines, whith their clothes literally rotting off their bodies.
The mud they had to slog through was unbelieveable.
They lived wet and cold and dry and hot, and hungry.
Ponchos did no good during the monsoons . . . put a poncho on and all ya did was sweat underneath it.
I've seen some of those guys, especially Marines, whith their clothes literally rotting off their bodies.
The mud they had to slog through was unbelieveable.
Re: Vietnam Snipers
I think Cpt. Baker was in my IOBC class in 1976. I believe he was prior service USMC, and had some kind of experience on the USMC MTU. I wonder where he's at now? I was priorservice USMC and got my Inf. commission through ROTC. Fun times, I can't believe it's been over thirty years ago.
Semper Fidelis
I think Cpt. Baker was in my IOBC class in 1976. I believe he was prior service USMC, and had some kind of experience on the USMC MTU. I wonder where he's at now? I was priorservice USMC and got my Inf. commission through ROTC. Fun times, I can't believe it's been over thirty years ago.
Semper Fidelis
Re: Vietnam Snipers
I have really enjoyed reading this thread, thanks to the guys who are imparting their experience here. I am also a guy who isn't real big on all the electronic gizmos used today- I know electronics fail and frankly I am too poor to buy most of that stuff.
I have read Marine Sniper several times over the years, just re-read it again last month. I picked up quite a bit that I hadn't paid much attention to, such as how Hathcock read mirage and vegetation movement for wind calls. Also, when he was prepping for the shot on the General, he talks about where to hold based on the temperature and humidity. I am sure those observations became second nature to those who did it all the time.
I have 2 questions you all may be able to answer for me about this...
1. In Marine Sniper, I recall a few times when a shot was described and Hathcock was said to pull the Unertl scope back into it mounts, or something like that. What is that referring to?
2. Can someone list a good reference source for range and wind estimation WITHOUT the use of modern electronics?
Thanks again for this topic and info guys
Jethro
I have really enjoyed reading this thread, thanks to the guys who are imparting their experience here. I am also a guy who isn't real big on all the electronic gizmos used today- I know electronics fail and frankly I am too poor to buy most of that stuff.
I have read Marine Sniper several times over the years, just re-read it again last month. I picked up quite a bit that I hadn't paid much attention to, such as how Hathcock read mirage and vegetation movement for wind calls. Also, when he was prepping for the shot on the General, he talks about where to hold based on the temperature and humidity. I am sure those observations became second nature to those who did it all the time.
I have 2 questions you all may be able to answer for me about this...
1. In Marine Sniper, I recall a few times when a shot was described and Hathcock was said to pull the Unertl scope back into it mounts, or something like that. What is that referring to?
2. Can someone list a good reference source for range and wind estimation WITHOUT the use of modern electronics?
Thanks again for this topic and info guys
Jethro
Re: Vietnam Snipers
1. With the spring removed, the scope would shift in the rings with recoil and had to be manually re-set.
http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthre...903#Post3171903
2. Have a look in Mike Lau's book, or at any wind clock diagram. Your logbook should have a chart.
1. With the spring removed, the scope would shift in the rings with recoil and had to be manually re-set.
http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthre...903#Post3171903
2. Have a look in Mike Lau's book, or at any wind clock diagram. Your logbook should have a chart.
Re: Vietnam Snipers
This is a great thread. Anyone have anything more to add?
Anyone have pictures from back then?
Jethro, Marine sniper is one of the best reads. I just finished it last week and want to re read it already.
This is a great thread. Anyone have anything more to add?
Anyone have pictures from back then?
Jethro, Marine sniper is one of the best reads. I just finished it last week and want to re read it already.
Re: Vietnam Snipers
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Can someone list a good reference source for range and wind estimation WITHOUT the use of modern electronics?</div></div>
Yes Sir:
FM 23-5 Field Manuel for the M1 Garand, including the M1C/D
FM 21-26 Land Nav and Map Reading.
The first manuel shows various methods of range estimation one such is using your fingers in measuring Mils, and the 100-Meter Unit of Measurement system. Maps & protractors are fairly accurate.
Also the use of the front sight or scope redical can be used for range estimate if one knows the size of the target. For example, the front sight post on an M1 or M14 has an average width of .076 inches. The average with of a soldiers shoulders is 19 inches. (the E-Sil. is 10 X 40, based on a man's average size). Divide 19 by .076 and you get 250, meaning the front sight of an M1 will be the same size or cover 19 inches at 250 yards. So if the target is twice the size of the front sight the target is 125 yards, or if the target is 1/2 the of the front sight, then the target is 500 yards away.
That isn't a whole lot difference then the mil dot system. With a bit of practice you can get pretty accurate.
Wind estimating is fairly common. Range in hundres of yards times velocity (wind / constant gives you the clicks (MOA) needed for correction. You have to find the constant for your ammo but for the M1 using Ball ammo its 15.
I think we are getting too reliant on electrontic gadgets, 22 years in Alaska convinced me batterys and cold weather dont play well together.
The on critical aspect of this sort of shooting (excluding marksmanship fundamentals) is map reading.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Can someone list a good reference source for range and wind estimation WITHOUT the use of modern electronics?</div></div>
Yes Sir:
FM 23-5 Field Manuel for the M1 Garand, including the M1C/D
FM 21-26 Land Nav and Map Reading.
The first manuel shows various methods of range estimation one such is using your fingers in measuring Mils, and the 100-Meter Unit of Measurement system. Maps & protractors are fairly accurate.
Also the use of the front sight or scope redical can be used for range estimate if one knows the size of the target. For example, the front sight post on an M1 or M14 has an average width of .076 inches. The average with of a soldiers shoulders is 19 inches. (the E-Sil. is 10 X 40, based on a man's average size). Divide 19 by .076 and you get 250, meaning the front sight of an M1 will be the same size or cover 19 inches at 250 yards. So if the target is twice the size of the front sight the target is 125 yards, or if the target is 1/2 the of the front sight, then the target is 500 yards away.
That isn't a whole lot difference then the mil dot system. With a bit of practice you can get pretty accurate.
Wind estimating is fairly common. Range in hundres of yards times velocity (wind / constant gives you the clicks (MOA) needed for correction. You have to find the constant for your ammo but for the M1 using Ball ammo its 15.
I think we are getting too reliant on electrontic gadgets, 22 years in Alaska convinced me batterys and cold weather dont play well together.
The on critical aspect of this sort of shooting (excluding marksmanship fundamentals) is map reading.
Re: Vietnam Snipers
kraig,
You are a wealth of knowledge! I sure can attest to electronics in alaska! You cant even use your car without a heater for most of year. I never get to use electronics(for the most part) due to the cold. Its eats batteries.
kraig,
You are a wealth of knowledge! I sure can attest to electronics in alaska! You cant even use your car without a heater for most of year. I never get to use electronics(for the most part) due to the cold. Its eats batteries.
Re: Vietnam Snipers
My dad never talked much about it but he did teach me to shoot. And we shot alot. I always wandered how he never missed. Now my sons always ask me how I never miss. I just tell them that is what dads do.
My dad never talked much about it but he did teach me to shoot. And we shot alot. I always wandered how he never missed. Now my sons always ask me how I never miss. I just tell them that is what dads do.
Re: Vietnam Snipers
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: CubeWarrior</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
The critical flaw on the XM21 was the scope mount. The XM21's ART-TEL mount was made out of <span style="font-weight: bold">anodized aluminum</span> and had one screw and an slot on the side mount to mate with the receiver. The slot on the side mount was usually a little too big for the receiver's slot. Contact area was lower than it could have been, so most of the pressure went into the single screw. The mount had a nasty tendency of loosening under fire and would eventually become so loose that it had to be discarded or <span style="font-weight: bold">welded to the receiver</span>. (I was so disgusted with mine that I asked Mike Sadlak to modify it to make it fit better.) </div></div>
Not to pick an argument, but I see a critical flaw here- either the mount was steel, or this is bad information. Steel and Aluminum cannot be welded together. At least using any common methods/ methods available at the time. Maybe it was brazed?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: CubeWarrior</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
The critical flaw on the XM21 was the scope mount. The XM21's ART-TEL mount was made out of <span style="font-weight: bold">anodized aluminum</span> and had one screw and an slot on the side mount to mate with the receiver. The slot on the side mount was usually a little too big for the receiver's slot. Contact area was lower than it could have been, so most of the pressure went into the single screw. The mount had a nasty tendency of loosening under fire and would eventually become so loose that it had to be discarded or <span style="font-weight: bold">welded to the receiver</span>. (I was so disgusted with mine that I asked Mike Sadlak to modify it to make it fit better.) </div></div>
Not to pick an argument, but I see a critical flaw here- either the mount was steel, or this is bad information. Steel and Aluminum cannot be welded together. At least using any common methods/ methods available at the time. Maybe it was brazed?
Re: Vietnam Snipers
You might want to read this:
http://www.amazon.com/Dear-Mom-Joseph-T-Ward/dp/0804108536
You might want to read this:
http://www.amazon.com/Dear-Mom-Joseph-T-Ward/dp/0804108536
Re: Vietnam Snipers
good info. thanks for your service!
good info. thanks for your service!
Re: Vietnam Snipers
barry c jolly has it nailed - maps were the Marine snipers friend in Vietnam . terrain association and map reading is something that Badlands Tactical is STILL teaching and when you combine this with truly KNOWING your rifle/round you are a bad ass dude walking the earth
Marine sniper Steve Suttles told me once during a break in a class i was taking at Badlands, 'just give me a sporter weight rifle and a solid, reliable scope' i asked why ?
his response is telling - to a combat mindset for rifle shooters, 'you are only going to get 1 maybe 2 shots at a guy and then they are going to be hauling butt and when you carry your rifle ALL day, lighter is better'
he went on to say MOST rifles being offered today are way way way too heavy
now that i think about it , i have learned some good lessons from Badlands -
another time, at a competition there, we were doing unknown distance shooting on steel, with targets from 200-600 and MOST of us shooters could use prone but one shooter could not , he was toward the end of the firing line and prone did not work for him. well he complained, 'hey i can't see the targets and still use prone!?"
this part is killer - Steve said 'who said you had to use prone!?" too funny !
barry c jolly has it nailed - maps were the Marine snipers friend in Vietnam . terrain association and map reading is something that Badlands Tactical is STILL teaching and when you combine this with truly KNOWING your rifle/round you are a bad ass dude walking the earth
Marine sniper Steve Suttles told me once during a break in a class i was taking at Badlands, 'just give me a sporter weight rifle and a solid, reliable scope' i asked why ?
his response is telling - to a combat mindset for rifle shooters, 'you are only going to get 1 maybe 2 shots at a guy and then they are going to be hauling butt and when you carry your rifle ALL day, lighter is better'
he went on to say MOST rifles being offered today are way way way too heavy
now that i think about it , i have learned some good lessons from Badlands -
another time, at a competition there, we were doing unknown distance shooting on steel, with targets from 200-600 and MOST of us shooters could use prone but one shooter could not , he was toward the end of the firing line and prone did not work for him. well he complained, 'hey i can't see the targets and still use prone!?"
this part is killer - Steve said 'who said you had to use prone!?" too funny !
Re: Vietnam Snipers
OK, this is a great thread, but... needs pic's. If someone can post them I will get some of a few rifles that will fit well. I can email them tomorrow. PM email address if anyone is interested. I do not know how to post pics. Thank you.
OK, this is a great thread, but... needs pic's. If someone can post them I will get some of a few rifles that will fit well. I can email them tomorrow. PM email address if anyone is interested. I do not know how to post pics. Thank you.
Re: Vietnam Snipers
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Marine sniper Steve Suttles told me once during a break in a class i was taking at Badlands, 'just give me a sporter weight rifle and a solid, reliable scope' i asked why ?
his response is telling - to a combat mindset for rifle shooters, 'you are only going to get 1 maybe 2 shots at a guy and then they are going to be hauling butt and when you carry your rifle ALL day, lighter is better'
he went on to say MOST rifles being offered today are way way way too heavy</div></div>
That Sir, is the most realistic, honest statement I've seen on the Sniper Hide.
I don't know about todays wars, I was in an infantryman in SE Asia, we were in the jungle, 30-60 days at a time and weight (or lack there of) is everything.
If one would study Peter Senich's books (and he wrote lots of them), the average sniper engagement in SE Asia consisted of 1.9 rounds, (that include some rare 5 shot engagements).
All well with in the mag. capacity of the Model 70 Winchester.
I have two Model 70 Featherweights, both shoot excellent until the get hot which takes between 5-7 rounds. But both are much ligher then the M21 I used in Sniper School.
Same with the combat rifle, I would still pick the M16a1 over the 'A2s just because of the weight.
Wayne Young was one of the members of the USAMU sniper instructors sent to SE Asia. He retired and moved to Alaska and we became fairly good friends. (he was the one who sold me my M1A in '77 and got me lined up for the USAMU Sniper School).
He told me that sniper programs today (this was in the late 70s) were too 'equipment heavy".
If one is really interested in Vietnam Era snipping, you need to check out Peter Senich's books.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Marine sniper Steve Suttles told me once during a break in a class i was taking at Badlands, 'just give me a sporter weight rifle and a solid, reliable scope' i asked why ?
his response is telling - to a combat mindset for rifle shooters, 'you are only going to get 1 maybe 2 shots at a guy and then they are going to be hauling butt and when you carry your rifle ALL day, lighter is better'
he went on to say MOST rifles being offered today are way way way too heavy</div></div>
That Sir, is the most realistic, honest statement I've seen on the Sniper Hide.
I don't know about todays wars, I was in an infantryman in SE Asia, we were in the jungle, 30-60 days at a time and weight (or lack there of) is everything.
If one would study Peter Senich's books (and he wrote lots of them), the average sniper engagement in SE Asia consisted of 1.9 rounds, (that include some rare 5 shot engagements).
All well with in the mag. capacity of the Model 70 Winchester.
I have two Model 70 Featherweights, both shoot excellent until the get hot which takes between 5-7 rounds. But both are much ligher then the M21 I used in Sniper School.
Same with the combat rifle, I would still pick the M16a1 over the 'A2s just because of the weight.
Wayne Young was one of the members of the USAMU sniper instructors sent to SE Asia. He retired and moved to Alaska and we became fairly good friends. (he was the one who sold me my M1A in '77 and got me lined up for the USAMU Sniper School).
He told me that sniper programs today (this was in the late 70s) were too 'equipment heavy".
If one is really interested in Vietnam Era snipping, you need to check out Peter Senich's books.
Re: Vietnam Snipers
On a bit different subject, is the M16a1. Few released how effectively it was used "as issued" as a sniper system in Vietnam. The rifle was often tried with some sort of optics, most being the Colt Scope, but also with iron sights.
The average sniper shot was a hair north of 400 yeads, (some records report a hair less) well within the range of the 'a1. With the ease of mounting the starlight scope on the M16 made it quite effective at night where ranges were shorter.
Best thing is the M16a1 was light, it gave you mid range rifle and an assualt rifle if needed.
On a bit different subject, is the M16a1. Few released how effectively it was used "as issued" as a sniper system in Vietnam. The rifle was often tried with some sort of optics, most being the Colt Scope, but also with iron sights.
The average sniper shot was a hair north of 400 yeads, (some records report a hair less) well within the range of the 'a1. With the ease of mounting the starlight scope on the M16 made it quite effective at night where ranges were shorter.
Best thing is the M16a1 was light, it gave you mid range rifle and an assualt rifle if needed.
Re: Vietnam Snipers
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The M40 was not a heavy rifle by todays standards, What do you think of it?
The 70 HB is a bit heavier, but still lighter than todays rifles.</div></div>
I liked the orginal M40s. I was not impressed with the ideal of accrurange redfield scopes. Apparently most Marines weren't either, most sighted them in for 500 yards and left them alone.
I like to keep it simple, less stuff to break and stuff likes to break in the jungle. I would have picked a good solid fixed 6X scope. Maybe 4X, field of view was more critical then scope power.
When I went to sniper school I had two goals, to start a sniper program for the Alaska National Guard, and for my department.
The AMU had a good program for LE counter snipers and in their recommendations for Civilian LE, they pretty much suggested the M40 only in 223. Their Counter Sniper Guide didn't mention the Remington by name, but did discribe it. Suggesting something along the lines of the M700 Varment in 223, with a fixed 6 or 8 power scope.
I choose and used just that, a M700 BDL Varment in 223 with a Redfield Widefield 6X Scope. It's held up quite well since '78, I still use it for varmits. Nothing on it has been modified.
It's rugged. I use to take it to guard drills and sniper schools. Even jumped with it. Never lost its zero.
Fine for carrying in the trunk of a police car, but way too heavy for me to want to carry in the jungle.
Besides the weight, the crap they hang on today's rifles just wouldn't cut it in the jungle. Too many wait a minute vines and such. Not to mention the noise you'd deal with in a bamboo thicket.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The M40 was not a heavy rifle by todays standards, What do you think of it?
The 70 HB is a bit heavier, but still lighter than todays rifles.</div></div>
I liked the orginal M40s. I was not impressed with the ideal of accrurange redfield scopes. Apparently most Marines weren't either, most sighted them in for 500 yards and left them alone.
I like to keep it simple, less stuff to break and stuff likes to break in the jungle. I would have picked a good solid fixed 6X scope. Maybe 4X, field of view was more critical then scope power.
When I went to sniper school I had two goals, to start a sniper program for the Alaska National Guard, and for my department.
The AMU had a good program for LE counter snipers and in their recommendations for Civilian LE, they pretty much suggested the M40 only in 223. Their Counter Sniper Guide didn't mention the Remington by name, but did discribe it. Suggesting something along the lines of the M700 Varment in 223, with a fixed 6 or 8 power scope.
I choose and used just that, a M700 BDL Varment in 223 with a Redfield Widefield 6X Scope. It's held up quite well since '78, I still use it for varmits. Nothing on it has been modified.
It's rugged. I use to take it to guard drills and sniper schools. Even jumped with it. Never lost its zero.
Fine for carrying in the trunk of a police car, but way too heavy for me to want to carry in the jungle.
Besides the weight, the crap they hang on today's rifles just wouldn't cut it in the jungle. Too many wait a minute vines and such. Not to mention the noise you'd deal with in a bamboo thicket.
Re: Vietnam Snipers
I don't know about your's, Kraig, but I've a Redfield Widefield 3-9X and that piece of glass is as clear, bright and sharp as any I've ever seen. It's of about a 72 vintage.
I don't know about your's, Kraig, but I've a Redfield Widefield 3-9X and that piece of glass is as clear, bright and sharp as any I've ever seen. It's of about a 72 vintage.
Re: Vietnam Snipers
i learned a lot from this guy.....
i learned a lot from this guy.....
Similar threads
