• 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!

WHY WHY WHY

L

Louis Corkern

Sergeant
Full Member
Minuteman
Dec 28, 2005
852
4
49
AR, USA
www.thorgdg.com
Ok guys, bear with me a minute while I rant with a list of "why" questions.


1. Why do so many "Tactical" shooters oppose ELR?

2. REMOVED THIS QUESTION as I do not desire to bring military applications and operators into this discussion. The Mil has their special units that perform the ELR/HTI roles superbly and do not warrant being lumped into this discussion.

3. Why do so many "shooters" choose to argue scientific principles ONLY because their chosen shooting genre does not use it based on that genre needs?

4. Why do "shooters" always want to compare training and operational tactics of ELR/HTI to "Urban Sniping"?

5. Why do "shooters" always want to compare target size and accuracy rate of ELR/HTI shooting to precision shooting?

6. Why do "shooters" choose the path of "Its not needed or can't be done" just because they do not understand the need or just because they can't do it?
 
Re: WHY WHY WHY

Later,

I suspect because it is outside their comfort zone of knowledge and experience.

This reminds me of how the Palma shooters fought tooth and nail to prevent the FCSA from being able to use many of the ranges they shot at. They had the opinion that we were not at legitimate sport, that we were just a bunch of wackos, and shot up the target frames and damaged the impact berm. Of course the black powder shooters did far more damage to the target frames than we ever did.

Those who have never had the opportunity to spend time shooting targets from 1200 to 1800 yards on a regular basis, it is difficult for them to relate to, especially if all they ever shoot is a paper target, or steel target at shorter ranges. They do not understand that this is a fairly well researched and mature discipline, because they have NO experience with it.

Now we strive to extend our distances to 2000 to 3000 yards, and it is even harder for them to relate to as a legitimate endeavor. In reality, it is just an extension of any other precision shooting, but the difficulty at being successful has become exponentially more difficult. But it is that challenge that draws you and those of us other "nuts" to meeting that challenge, and pushing the envelope.

I have been through this once with the 50. Ignore the nay sayers, and just push on. There are those of us who not only understand the pursuit, but are just as interested as you. "If it was easy, anyone could do it."
 
Re: WHY WHY WHY

As to some of the why's.....Coming from a non military viewpoint.I know I'm stating the obvious but......

1. Why do so many "Tactical" shooters oppose ELR?

I think that many of the Tactical shooters just can't afford to buy or can't justify spending the money to shoot these beasts.

Also it's hard for them to find a place to shoot ELR and they would prefer some type of tactical competition if they did spend the money.

Later do you have any stories or "links" about Extreme Long Range/Hard Target Interdiction so we could get a grasp on it's importance?

How about an example or scenario for each "why question" so people less informed like me can understand what the nuances would be.

Steve









 
Re: WHY WHY WHY

For military shooters it comes down to METT-T. RISK = Probability x Consequences. What defines your success/failure criteria? Just because you CAN do something doesn't mean it's the right tool/technique.

If it's important enough to go after it's worth destroying. Why take an "Iffy" shot if I can literally blow it up with a Javelin or JDAM, or an Apache or Kiowa with a Hellfire or chain gun? That conveys a certain message as well.

If you can see it you can hit it. If you can hit it you can kill it. If you can't see it how do you know what it is you're engaging?

If I take a shot with a rifle and miss, does it affect my mission and my team mates? If the point is general interdiction and harassment then ELR shots are worth taking. If not, get closer and be sure of a kill.

There are also very few shooters and units who train for ELR engagements. Most Soldiers have tons of things they need to keep up-to-speed on, and ELR equipment and facilities are fairly specialized -- how much time do you dedicate to a skill that will only be employed occasionally, if at all?.

Most prudent commanders and shooters do NOT confuse enthusiasm with capability if it means getting one of your own shot or killed.
 
Re: WHY WHY WHY

I tend to agree with the above responses. From a military point of view, the integration of CAS in the last 20 years has vastly improved and resulted in far more accuracy in the terminal guidance arena. That combined with lower signature fire-and-forget portable systems like Javelin have made HTI missions with firearms even more of a niche capability. The reality is that things get complicated exponentially the farther we go out with rifles. The variables that affect accuracy increase with distance and the energy delivered to target decreases. Distance has none of these effects with CAS or a missile system.

That being said, an HTI team with sufficient rifles can provide an *ultra* low signature capability unlike the above. CAS requires highly overt use of airspace. Missiles leave debris that can identify country of origin, among other things. A small team with rifles will police-up their brass
wink.gif
 
Re: WHY WHY WHY

Steve,

Here you go.

http://www.remingtonmilitary.com/articles/DA%202005.03MH.pdf

I just find it ironic that decades ago the usefullnes of the 14mm, 15mm and 20mm systems was figured out very quickly during battle but afterwards (like alot of other things) was pushed aside. And that alot of what we consider 3rd world countries employ with great sucess the 14mm and 20mm systems yet we are stuck on the "50 or just blow shit up mentality".
There is a reason the USN has tested a couple 20mm systems so there is light at end of tunnel LOL

DOG: I agree completely that the operational niche is very small these days but then again I can remember when the operational niche of the 338LM was small and thought to be not needed too lol. BUT someone giving that is the reason I find acceptable but just giving the reasons that I listed in OP I have a hard time accepting due to they give that answer because its easy
smile.gif
 
Re: WHY WHY WHY

Thanks for the article, Later.

I liked the shooting through the wall part to hit the snipers hiding behind it.Or at least move them out of their position.

What's that called...I know!Hard target Interdickheadtion.I invented a new word,LOL.

Shoot those dickheads behind the hard target.

Steve
 
Re: WHY WHY WHY

What is your definition of a "Tactical" shooter?

I have not see any operational snipers eschew ELR platforms or ELR shooting. If the target can shoot back I would much rather be as far away as possible and still accomplish the mission.
 
Re: WHY WHY WHY

I think the lack of 14mm 15mm and 20mm is just due to destructive device laws and the joy of the .50 is the baddest legal round in town syndrome. I also agree with the cost factor. you will be into an ELR 3 times that of a high end tactical including all the good stuff (scope, reloading component, software, cost per round, etc.).
 
Re: WHY WHY WHY

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: The Mechanic</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I think the lack of 14mm 15mm and 20mm is just due to destructive device laws</div></div>

I have a hard time seeing that logic, just look around at how many people have suppressors, SBRs, and full autos. People are willing to abide by the laws and pay the NFA legalities. Or you could do like JD at SSK industries done with his 14.5 system and file an exemption. I do not know the details on what it takes for exemption though.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: The Mechanic</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> I also agree with the cost factor. you will be into an ELR 3 times that of a high end tactical including all the good stuff (scope, reloading component, software, cost per round, etc.).</div></div>

OK lets examine cost of components as this is what people always bring up first. For this comparion I am specing a 375 build and a 308 build. I will spec the 375 to MY personal builds and the 308 to what I see people want here.

Barnard P-Chey for 375 = 1400$ with top knotch trigger
Badger SA for 308 = 1000$ then need trigger
Lawton Barrel for 375 = 510$ for 32" SS
Bartlein Barrel for 308 = 300$ for up to 29" SS
McRees Stock for 375 = 750$
AICS stock for 308 = 1000$ for SA Stage 2

SO the price of actual rifle is not that drastic of a difference that people make them out to be.
Scopes ---- well I have seen more expensive scopes on the 308 class rifles than the 375s and 408s. If you notice most 375 and 408 have NXS 5-22x compared to the 308s having S&B, Premier, etc. And I attribute that logic to the big gun guys not wanting FFP.
Now as I have said for years the cost associated with the big guns comes from the "support equipment" but with prices of the lil gun ammo components these days the cost difference is not soooo dramatic
smile.gif


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: dmg308</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Because ELR is VooDoo and that which is not understood must be outcast.</div></div>
LMAO the scary part is thats not the first time that has been given HAHAHA

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LoneWolfUSMC</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I have not see any operational snipers eschew ELR platforms or ELR shooting. If the target can shoot back I would much rather be as far away as possible and still accomplish the mission.</div></div>
LoneWolfUSMC, stick around you will see them reply lol. Seems everyone wants to preach speed is king these days and slow and methodical is not needed. Notice the increase in DBM builds over the past couple years? They wanting ammo capacity of gas gun in their bolt guns. And there are a ton of reasons they give for that too.

Thanks to all the have replied so far. It is nice to see the wide assortment of opinions come together and discuss single "items".

 
Re: WHY WHY WHY

I think what sinister is trying to tell you is, it's tactically irresponsible, especially with today's communications and high tech weaponry. It compromises personal safety for a single shot alarm telling everyone "he's here".

It's an unnecessary risk, not to mention the idea behind the whole "sniper" thing is too get closer to identify & guarantee a hit, hence the 360 camouflage, not hope that the stars line up to hit something they can 1, barely identify as a proper threat, and 2, never train to hit in a realistic manner. (See: MOVERS & TIME OF FLIGHT)

The systems are heavy, requiring multiple personal with little return on investment. (Again see: RADIO)

We do it because we can and we are arrogant enough to try, not because it is a effective. What is the percentage of 1st round hits at 1500m - 1800m, that will probably give you the answer you are looking for. Nothing wrong with playing with it, a lot of technology can come of it to help in practical distances, but frankly, I'd rather use my radio, and I can shoot far just fine, I just dislike the delivery systems. 338LM is as big as I want to go and I know I can stay above 80% hits at 1000 yards with it, so why drop that number for something else.
 
Re: WHY WHY WHY

I'm still not quite sure who you are bitching about. You have explicitly exempted the military from your complaint, so it's not a complaint that strategically ELR is not employed more on the battlefield. That pretty much only leaves the hobbyist.

Are you complaining that people are wrong for shooting what they shoot and playing the games they play, when they should be playing your game? Or is there some sort of group of shooters out there that is trying to prevent you from playing your game? If it's the later, then who are they? If it's the former, then you've just got to accept that your game is a bit of a niche market and move on with life. It ain't easy to find a 1500+ yd range in most parts of the country, heck it's hard enough finding somewhere to stretch out a 308. And spending a $6+ cartridge every time you pull the trigger isn't for most folks either.

For me, even if I DID have somewhere to shoot that kind of distance, it just wouldn't be enough about marksmanship or sport for me. At those ranges you don't exactly go down and measure groups or even shift steel around very much, so once you're in position it becomes either:

A) You work very hard on your firing solution for some time, put it together, send your shot and... HIT! Hooray. Ok, now what?

B) You work very hard on your firing solution for some time, put it together, send your shot and... miss! Hmm, well, I'll send another one. Miss! Maybe wind is a touch more than I thought... Miss! Hmm... saw impact that time... hit! Alright, send it again... miss! Huh? Boom. Miss! damnit, I know this is right... boom. hit!

Either way the day is either going to be spent mostly in driving to the range, setup, and tear down and about an hour maybe on shooting, OR, you are going to be investing far more in both time and money than someone shooting at 1000yds. I prefer that my limited range time be spent developing some sort of skill or another. I fear that ELR would basically boil down to me doing a slow-motion spray and pray.

Now, I've never shot past 1000yds so I have no idea if this is what ELR is really like or not, but when I sit and analyze if I want to get a .50 and try it, this is what I inevitably end up with the scenario playing out like. Maybe this is why what you see on you tube is videos of some guy's wife or some guy's kid firing the 50. Cause the experience for most is more about "Dude, you just shot a 50!" than it is about marksmanship. So even if I'm completely wrong, I'm still answering your question of "why?"

Out of curiosity, what is the ELR game de jour? 1000yd has F-class and practical and highpower, but I really don't know anything about how ELR games are played. Again, you've already exempted Military shooters from this discussion, so all we are talking about here is games.

I notice there are a lot of "beloved" 50 cals that come up for sale with only 10-20 rounds put through them. To me this says that it's more about knowing you've got something big and badass and that your dick will fit in the chamber to make you longer than your bro-in-law than it is about marksmanship or sport or the intellectual exercise. To be clear, I'm referring to the many barely-used 50 cals I see out there which seem to make up a majority of the 50cal hobbyist market. I do not mean to imply that you personally are not entirely committed to the sport of ELR.

As for the DBM's, I have them installed for 1 reason only. Because range rules and game rules pretty well handicap anyone who doesn't have one. When you have to dump your magazine and reload every time you move from one position to another an internal box just doesn't do the trick.

Now if you will excuse me, I'm taking my 22LR to the 100yd line to try and learn something...
 
Re: WHY WHY WHY

Shooters enjoy shooting, an activity for which there are many aspects, including both mental and physical challenges.

It's a natural human tendency to think that what interests us should interest others. 'Tain't necessarily so.

No problem.

However, a very smart man, Abe Maslow, once said, "If the only tool you have is a hammer, you tend to see every problem as a nail."

As Sinister - who is a guy who would know - properly noted, there's a very small niche in military operations for ELR shooting. And Lowlight agrees - and he's another guy who knows.

Given that, aside from recreational shooting, what is the <span style="font-style: italic">practical </span> problem which ELR is meant to solve?

I defer to no one in my pursuit of useless trivial activities - I still own a bamboo slide rule, for god's sake - but I don't confuse them with essentials, nor wonder why everyone doesn't have a bamboo slide rule or a Jeppesen-Sanderson CR5 circular flight computer.
 
Re: WHY WHY WHY

why is 1,000 yards the limit that we set on ourselves? What made that the magical distance? Why is that where we decide if we can't sneak closer than that, then we don't shoot? What if through R&D we could RELIABLY stretch that distance to 1500 yards? What about further? I am definately not in the know, and may be out of line, but I don't understand why we don't try to increase our effective distance when it may entirely be possible? Maybe this means paying attention to things such as the coriolis effect and spin drift? I sure don't know. I just believe that there are constantly guys stretching the limits of what we know for certain today, and next thing you know there is a man running the mile under 4 minutes even though no one believed it was possible...

Dave
 
Re: WHY WHY WHY

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">why is 1,000 yards the limit that we set on ourselves?</div></div>

Most legacy ranges only go to 1,000 yards. Field fire ranges (military and private) farther than that are just static targets out in the middle of a field, pasture, or public land -- no convenient KD or electronic range equipment to give feedback on where the round actually splashed without walking or driving (you need steel, sheet rock, or dust to spot fall-of-shot).

Artillerymen and (rifled) mortarmen have applied projectile drift for over a hundred years -- it's not exotica or occult science to those who deal with it on a daily basis, it just doesn't <span style="font-style: italic">normally</span> apply to rifle fire. It does over extended ranges where people have been trying to go for the last/recent 20 years.

<span style="font-weight: bold">Precision Shooting</span> has run articles of guys shooting 308s in the Scottish Hebrides Islands to over 2,000 yards, and busting prairie dogs in Colorado over similar ignorant/fun distances. The Colorado fellas custom built scope mounts and rings with some serious range/slope compensation.

50s and 338 variants seem to be the break-even point for hobbyists with access to land to shoot those long stretches.
 
Re: WHY WHY WHY

Point 2 is best removed Louis. They have so many other options available that ELR makes no sense. A burst of 20 or 30MM HE or laser or GPS guided projectiles, from ground or above, at the same distance has a much higher hit probability. Not to mention terminal effect.

LE has no need for it.

ELR becomes another hobbyist's toy.
 
Re: WHY WHY WHY

Most don't have a clue.......... I'm into my 7th year of running a 1000 yard league at our local club and its beyond most shooters to show up with a zero two weeks in a row much less shoot ELR.
 
Re: WHY WHY WHY

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Ratbert</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Are you complaining that people are wrong for shooting what they shoot and playing the games they play, when they should be playing your game?</div></div>

No complaining or bitching at all really. And nope I have never pushed my game onto others by saying they are wrong for shooting what they want BUT I canNOT say the same with scenario reversed though.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Ratbert</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
For me, even if I DID have somewhere to shoot that kind of distance, it just wouldn't be enough about marksmanship or sport for me.</div></div>

The above quote is more inline of what I was intending the thread to open discussion on. Did not start this thread to argue who is right or wrong. So thanks for the above quote..Can we discuss what IYO makes those distances not enough about marksmanship for you?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Ratbert</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
To be clear, I'm referring to the many barely-used 50 cals I see out there which seem to make up a majority of the 50cal hobbyist market. I do not mean to imply that you personally are not entirely committed to the sport of ELR.
</div></div>
No offense taken as I too have seen tons of those rifles sold with little rounds.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lindy</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Given that, aside from recreational shooting, what is the <span style="font-style: italic">practical </span> problem which ELR is meant to solve?
</div></div>
Was not aware there had to be a problem to solve in order for people to push for new developements in projectiles, powders, weapon systems but by pushing the ballistic limits problems can arise from non ELR setups.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lindy</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
It's a natural human tendency to think that what interests us should interest others. 'Tain't necessarily so.
</div></div>
Could not have said it better. Just wish more people seen that as a 2way street.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: NineHotel</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
LE has no need for it.
</div></div>
Agreed with the ELR side of that but the HTI side is becoming more and more needed on the LEO side.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sinister</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
<span style="font-weight: bold">Precision Shooting</span> has run articles of guys shooting 308s in the Scottish Hebrides Islands to over 2,000 yards, and busting prairie dogs in Colorado over similar ignorant/fun distances. The Colorado fellas custom built scope mounts and rings with some serious range/slope compensation.
</div></div>
LOL I too have seen the scope mount setups on some of those prairie dog setups LOL.
And thats what makes the 375/408 such a great ELR system due to only takes 67MOA to go from 100yd to 2400yd zero and a 20mph wind at full value only 16MOA adjustment
smile.gif


Once again Thanks for the replies guys.
 
Re: WHY WHY WHY

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: NineHotel</div><div class="ubbcode-body">LE has no need for it.</div></div>

I wouldn't go so far as to say that. I just had a conversation about our team possibly acquiring a Barrett .50BMG from a neighboring agency. They don't see a need for it, but WE have a large airport in our jurisdiction. That weapons system could possibly allow us to disable vehicles or aircraft without entering into small arms range. Is it a likely scenario? No. But if we CAN have that tool in our toolbox why shouldn't we? My concerns were not how we could employ the weapon system but more of how/where could be train on it since there are no local ranges that are .50BMG safe.

And I do agree with Lowlight on the "other options". I have made MUCH longer shots with my radio and a battery of 155mm on standby than even our M82A1A was capable of.
 
Re: WHY WHY WHY

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Later</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Ratbert</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Are you complaining that people are wrong for shooting what they shoot and playing the games they play, when they should be playing your game?</div></div>

No complaining or bitching at all really. And nope I have never pushed my game onto others by saying they are wrong for shooting what they want BUT I canNOT say the same with scenario reversed though.
</div></div>

Ok, so follow up the 2nd part of my question... what shooters are telling you that you shouldn't shoot ELR?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Later</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Ratbert</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
For me, even if I DID have somewhere to shoot that kind of distance, it just wouldn't be enough about marksmanship or sport for me.</div></div>

The above quote is more inline of what I was intending the thread to open discussion on. Did not start this thread to argue who is right or wrong. So thanks for the above quote..Can we discuss what IYO makes those distances not enough about marksmanship for you?

</div></div>

My answer to that immeadiately followed the quoted statement:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Ratbert</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
At those ranges you don't exactly go down and measure groups or even shift steel around very much, so once you're in position it becomes either:

A) You work very hard on your firing solution for some time, put it together, send your shot and... HIT! Hooray. Ok, now what?

B) You work very hard on your firing solution for some time, put it together, send your shot and... miss! Hmm, well, I'll send another one. Miss! Maybe wind is a touch more than I thought... Miss! Hmm... saw impact that time... hit! Alright, send it again... miss! Huh? Boom. Miss! damnit, I know this is right... boom. hit!

Either way the day is either going to be spent mostly in driving to the range, setup, and tear down and about an hour maybe on shooting, OR, you are going to be investing far more in both time and money than someone shooting at 1000yds. I prefer that my limited range time be spent developing some sort of skill or another. I fear that ELR would basically boil down to me doing a slow-motion spray and pray.

Now, I've never shot past 1000yds so I have no idea if this is what ELR is really like or not, but when I sit and analyze if I want to get a .50 and try it, this is what I inevitably end up with the scenario playing out like. Maybe this is why what you see on you tube is videos of some guy's wife or some guy's kid firing the 50. Cause the experience for most is more about "Dude, you just shot a 50!" than it is about marksmanship. So even if I'm completely wrong, I'm still answering your question of "why?"</div></div>

For me there is just too much cost, overhead, and damn luck involved. I feel like I can learn a lot more about marksmanship by taking my 22 to the 100yd line. For the same cost in money and time I will get a lot more practice in with a lot more direct feedback to my performance. Simple as that. Maybe it's just because I'm a relative novice, don't know. But I've seriously considered if I even want/need a 338L and every scenario I've imagined comes back with I really won't learn anything or be able to do anything that I couldn't do with a 308 or 6.5x55 swede. There just isn't any point, either in the terminal ballistics or in learning the principles of marksmanship to me shooting a round outside those ballistic constraints.






<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Later</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lindy</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Given that, aside from recreational shooting, what is the <span style="font-style: italic">practical </span> problem which ELR is meant to solve?
</div></div>
Was not aware there had to be a problem to solve in order for people to push for new developements in projectiles, powders, weapon systems but by pushing the ballistic limits problems can arise from non ELR setups.
</div></div>

I think this is why he asked about need :

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Later</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
6. Why do "shooters" choose the path of "Its not needed or can't be done" just because they do not understand the need or just because they can't do it?
</div></div>




 
Re: WHY WHY WHY

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LoneWolfUSMC</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: NineHotel</div><div class="ubbcode-body">LE has no need for it.</div></div>

I wouldn't go so far as to say that. I just had a conversation about our team possibly acquiring a Barrett .50BMG from a neighboring agency. They don't see a need for it, but WE have a large airport in our jurisdiction. That weapons system could possibly allow us to disable vehicles or aircraft without entering into small arms range. Is it a likely scenario? No. But if we CAN have that tool in our toolbox why shouldn't we? My concerns were not how we could employ the weapon system but more of how/where could be train on it since there are no local ranges that are .50BMG safe.

And I do agree with Lowlight on the "other options". I have made MUCH longer shots with my radio and a battery of 155mm on standby than even our M82A1A was capable of. </div></div>

Clearly you are confusing ELR with moderate distance HTI/payload delivery. The two are not the same. ELR and M82 are not compatible.
 
Re: WHY WHY WHY

Just an observation...

The pattern of reasoning utilized in the "my radio is a safer, and more expensive way to solve this problem", sounds much like the F-8 Crusader vs. F-4 Phantom debate of many years ago.

We were so cock sure of our unlimited resources, and technological advantage, that the first F-4's came without guns entirely (and we paid dearly for that omission). The era of guided missiles had come of age, and the Crusader was to go the way of the Kiwi. The Crusader ultimately was supplanted by the Phantom, but not until gun pods were added. It seems that high-tech had inherent disadvantages, which guns never noticed in the heat of conflict. We have not built dogfighters without guns since. Vectored thrust, a "modern" innovation, presumes dogfighting (with guns at close range).

Reverting to Laters original question... "tactical" shooting can do nothing but benefit through implementation of the advancements afforded by ELR experimentation. The distinction is largely artificial in my opinion, at least from the standpoint of practical application. We could probably bomb the Taliban with B-17's, but the energy delivery, and accuracy, of a B-52 makes choice of the latter easy. The B-2 is always available for deployment against our technological competitors should the need ever arise, but I sure am glad we did not scrap the B-52 because of it's age.

Even primitive weapon systems, like the 308, can be upgraded on the identical principle. The "Brown Bess" gave way to the Colonial rifle, and in my opinion we are ready for change once more in our notion of tactical sniping. It is not necessary to go beyond 1,000 yards to see the advantages.

Afghanistan appears to be our next adversary, hardly a hot-bed of advanced technology. I do not think there are enough radio-responsive resources available to cover that much geography, with sufficient reliability to address the "safety" consideration employed against the relevance ELR proficiency. I would welcome feedback from those in the know on this issue, as I have personal interest.
 
Re: WHY WHY WHY

Okay, I'm very far from being an expert here, but lemme say this:

1. Because most tactical shooters are thinking with a swinging hammer and not with a solid cerebellum. They don't see the value of ELR except as "survey and deter" or "precision support", most likely because they're thinking of engaging targets in CQB. What they fail to realize is that often the enemy sniper will either seek deep cover in the terrain, or go to a high ground with maximum LOS and advantage. ELR with a high caliber weapon eliminates both of these advantages. Also, many don't see the benefit of investing in the mental work required to train and compensate for firing at ELR.

2. Well put.

3. I have an analogy for this... I disagree with Mixed Martial Arts (MMA) for the same reason I dislike this trend in shooting. Think about a circle. If hypothetical "Dave and Torfinn" begin training in the martial arts at the same time, choosing different courses, they will eventually reach a point where each teacher is saying the exact opposite of the other. Their training and approach and philosophy will eventually be diametrically opposed, at either side of the circle.

Dave's teacher will say, "You must always do this."

Torfinn's teacher will say, "You must never do that."

Each martial art has its value, and its specific purpose. Each martial art developed to meet a specific need, and to overcome a specific genre of adversary. These techniques and methods developed philosophies and perspectives to help adjust to these modes of action. But if one isn't mindful of this, it becomes easy to say "Hey, I like what Dave's doing, I think I'll go study with him for a while," and never finish out the course you started out on.

Most of the time, if you finish out the course you're on, you end up at the same place on the circle as your friend, opposite from where you started, and you can compare things from an equal place. A particular principle or punch or kick may be applied differently in the other art, but it is still applied and no less valid. It is simply used differently, and that can lead to a lack of understanding in those with lack of attention. MMA is like arguing principles in shooting. It's just another expression of the Attention Deficit.

4. As in the above analogy, it is a failure to understand why things are done in a specific way, and an inability to appreciate why specific principles are applied differently in different arts.

5. See #4.

6. See #5.

I think the solution to the overall problem is to try and engender in shooters an understanding of the different demands of specific applications. Teach them that while you can put an AR-type rifle in the hands of three different shooters, that an army sniper is not a police marksman is not a marine.
 
Re: WHY WHY WHY

I think a lot of the problem is that most dont have or arent willing to donate the time involved in ELR. That or they just cant afford the cost per round as stated above. Talented yes it is, practical for the AVERAGE shooter probably not. But if a person has the brains, skill, money and desire i think its a great thing, because of the advancment in everything involved in shooting, and the more of a draw that their is for something eventually the cheaper it will become. Their is no wrong in only 1000 yds or trying for 3000+ yds, the only thing wrong with either is that thinking that one way is right and that the other is obsure or irrelevant. The sky is the limit. If someone can hit something at those long ass distances my hats off to them and its nice to see something to be able to try to better yourself towards.

I do agree though there can be a lot to be learnt from a 22 at 200 yds or plus.
 
Re: WHY WHY WHY

+1 here
illinois your lucky to find 1000


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sinister</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">why is 1,000 yards the limit that we set on ourselves?</div></div>

Most legacy ranges only go to 1,000 yards. Field fire ranges (military and private) farther than that are just static targets out in the middle of a field, pasture, or public land -- no convenient KD or electronic range equipment to give feedback on where the round actually splashed without walking or driving (you need steel, sheet rock, or dust to spot fall-of-shot).

Artillerymen and (rifled) mortarmen have applied projectile drift for over a hundred years -- it's not exotica or occult science to those who deal with it on a daily basis, it just doesn't <span style="font-style: italic">normally</span> apply to rifle fire. It does over extended ranges where people have been trying to go for the last/recent 20 years.

<span style="font-weight: bold">Precision Shooting</span> has run articles of guys shooting 308s in the Scottish Hebrides Islands to over 2,000 yards, and busting prairie dogs in Colorado over similar ignorant/fun distances. The Colorado fellas custom built scope mounts and rings with some serious range/slope compensation.

50s and 338 variants seem to be the break-even point for hobbyists with access to land to shoot those long stretches. </div></div>
 
Re: WHY WHY WHY

There is nothing to keep one from shooting a 375/408 at 600, 700, 800,900 or any other distance. Suppose you are 800 yds from a target that you really need to hit with the first rd. Now throw in a 10- 25 mph wind changing up and swapping directions. I ask you, would you rather be holding a 375 or a 308. Also after firing a 375 quite a bit I am confident a managable rifle in this cal. can be built that will be lighter than many of the 308 sniper rifles. As soon as I get finished testing the banded solids in 375/408 and 338/408 I intend to build a rifle in one of these chamberings that will be under 13 lbs scope and all. As long as there is plenty of eye relief on the scope, I feel recoil will be manageble.
 
Re: WHY WHY WHY

Interesting discussion. To me it all boils down to one of three things: stealth, overwatch (w/friendlies in close proximity), or limiting collateral damage, all of which the sniper does better than other weapons delivery like the 155, jdam, or laser guided bombs.

If stealth is not a priority (ie open war like OIF/OEF) the friendlies are not inside of danger close and the collateral damage is acceptable to the target value then the sniper ELR mission just doesnt make sense unless it is all you have.

Our squadron's first round hit rate (F-15E) with GPS or laser weapons and the (ironically enough) SNIPER laser targeting pod was astronomical, in fact I recall only two misses out of hundreds of weapons, and one of those was a weapon that immediately detonated as soon as the fuse armed just a few seconds after release (not good) and another one shacked the target but didnt fuse, which we call a miss. Interesting aside: THAT one was a 500 pounder that zipped vertically through the roof and floor of an al qaeda safe house like a giant bullet (at about 1100 fps), prompting 4 survivors inside to walk out and just surrender to our guys calling in the strike, who thought it was great! Bottom line though, it was just routine to get first round shack after shack because of the GPS or manual laser guidance. Personally I never had a weapon off by more 6 feet from POA, and was still a direct hit. This is good- enemy sniper and the floor he is standing on vanishes, bad guy vehicles disintegrate, mortar team vaporizes, etc.

I would put the F-15E up against anything in terms of firepower and accuracy and yet with today's collateral damge concerns I believe today we are more likely to fight a "sniper's war" than any other, OIF and OEF obviously being great examples of that. Also note that as sniper platforms are increasing in range and lethality we are actually trending to smaller weapons in the fighter world (google boeing's SDB)Unless it is WWIII things are just too politically sensitive, and unfortunately this country will continue to put our brave shooters on the ground in what I would call unnecessary danger. So with that context I believe ELR will actually increase, although I would certainly call that an unfortunate result of bad policy rather than war fighting efficiency. Much more satisfying to pull the good guys back or let em get prone behind cover and just make their problem go away with a big boom. Puts smiles on both our faces.

Now with all that being said I would love to have a 408 Cheytac anyway!!!
 
Re: WHY WHY WHY

KY,

Good comments.

I believe that maximized "war efficiency" is possible only where all out war is possible, and the irony of "superpower" status is that "war efficiency" has been, effectively, off-the-table as an option almost the instant the U.S. could claim that title. Once the calculus is made that infliction of greatest possible damage, will return less than the greatest possible political outcome, strategies evolve that cost the lives of our military personel in larger numbers. That is a, regretable, cold fact of life.

"Liberating the hell" out of an opponent had a serious downside even in the pre-nuclear age, and while the effects of "bad policy" still abound, it's consequences pale in comparison with unrestrained application of military force (and I am no pacifist). Perhaps "efficiency" will need to be redefined to mean ever enhanced effectiveness of the individual soldier. When he can, with high confidence, put a bullet through a head sized object at 1,000 yards, with a highly portable weapon, an element of terror can multiply (many times over) the actual force used. It is something we should have learned from our adversaries.

- Noel
 
Re: WHY WHY WHY

Later,

Thanks for posting the link. I wonder what the flippers will think of this report. They were not enthusiastic to say the least after doing the tests last fall.

The recoil was one issue, but the 70 lb weapon system weight was the biggest issue to them.
 
Re: WHY WHY WHY

I like the canon breech loading solution for weight reduction. I plan on using the sliding-wedge mechanism myself.

The question remaining for me is the accuracy potential of the <span style="font-style: italic"> </span> Sugg <span style="font-style: italic"> </span> recoil damping system. The evaluation conclusion seems to rely heavily upon this patent, with only passing reference to magnetic damping which shares some of the same engineering challenges. Sighting is separated from the barrel by two coil-spring actuated "brake-shoe" assemblies, and a co-axial bearing tube. While that is an excellent arrangement for recoil mitigation, it is a nightmare for point-of-aim consistency. That is probably why one of the stated patent applications was "shotgun" recoil reduction.

The urge to make surplus 20mm ammo useful may be eliciting unwarranted optimism.

Best,
Noel
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

G
Question of the Day - WHY Zero at 100yards
Replies
116
Views
4K
PlinkIt
PlinkIt
E
URSA 3000 Yard Challenge (2024) - Announcement
Replies
18
Views
565
cameljockey230
C
Lowlight
The Everyday Sniper Podcast:That last 10%
Replies
3
Views
310
mobo215
mobo215
RackSqueezeBang
Fitness for Fundamentals
Replies
30
Views
1K
Proviteer
Proviteer
ChrisWay
Mastering the Basics
Replies
5
Views
8K
Baron23
Baron23
Top Bottom
Back