Army approves full fielding of M-107 sniper rifle [Archive]

NousDefionsDoc

04-02-2005, 10:54

Link (http://www4.army.mil/ocpa/read.php?story_id_key=7102)

Army approves full fielding of M-107 sniper rifle
By Kathy Roa

PICATINNY ARSENAL, N.J. (Army News Service, March 31, 2005) -- The Army has approved its new long-range .50-caliber sniper rifle, the M-107, for full materiel release to Soldiers in the field.

The M-107 program is managed at Picatinny Arsenal, N.J., by the Project Manager Soldier Weapons with engineering support provided by Picatinny’s Armament Research, Development and Engineering Center.

The term “full materiel release” signifies that the Army has rigorously tested and evaluated the item and determined that it is completely safe, operationally suitable and logistically supportable for use by Soldiers, officials said.

Product Manager for Crew Served Weapons Lt. Col. Kevin P. Stoddard said that PMSW previously equipped combat units in Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as other units supporting the Global War on Terrorism, with the M-107 under an urgent materiel release.

The Army expects to complete fielding of the M-107 in 2008, Stoddard said.

The M107 was funded as a Soldier Enhancement Program to type classify a semi-automatic .50 caliber rifle for the Army and other military services. It underwent standard type classification in August 2003.

A production contract was awarded to Barrett Firearms Manufacturing, Inc., Murfreesboro, Tenn., the following month.

Compared to the M24 7.62mm sniper rifle, Stoddard said, the M107 has more powerful optics and fires a variety of .50 caliber munitions.

“This provides sniper teams greater capability to identify and defeat multiple targets at increased ranges,” he said.

The M-107 is based on the Marine Corps special application scoped rifle, the M82A3.

The M-107 enables Army snipers to accurately engage personnel and material targets out to a distance of 1,500 to 2,000 meters respectively, he said.

The weapon is designed to effectively engage and defeat materiel targets at extended ranges including parked aircraft, computers, intelligence sites, radar sites, ammunition, petroleum, oil and lubricant sites, various lightly armored targets and command, control and communications.

In a counter-sniper role, the system offers longer stand-off ranges and increased terminal effects against snipers using smaller-caliber weapons.

The complete system includes the rifle itself, a detachable 10-round magazine, a variable-power day-optic sight, a transport case, a tactical soft case, cleaning and maintenance equipment, a detachable sling, an adjustable bipod and manuals.

The Army plans to modify the M107 in the future by adding a suppressor to greatly reduce flash, noise and blast signatures.

Peregrino

04-02-2005, 18:57

This one's for LR1947! Have you guys had a chance to play with it at the longer ranges yet? Is the M107 any more accurate than it's predecessor? I've already heard a few opinions about accuracy problems against precision targets. What's the skinny? Inquiring minds want to know. :munchin

ZoneOne

04-02-2005, 20:20

According to GlobalSecurity.org,

"The M107 is the Barrett Model 95, a smaller, lightweight .50 caliber rifle with emphasis on accuracy and durability. The bullpup design results in a compact rifle with no sacrifice on accuracy or velocity thanks to its cryogenically treated 29-inch (73.7 cm) barrel, the same length as the Model 82A1. Recoil is reduced by the dual-chamber muzzle brake and specially designed recoil pad. "

All pic's I've seen don't have the bullpup design. Maybe they are reffering to the m82/m95 or I could just be VERY slow.

Any insight from ppl in the know

Footmobile

04-02-2005, 22:38

The ammo tends to be the weak link in this system. You just aren't gonna get true sniper rifle accuracy with ball, API or even Raufoss. The USMC calls it a SASR for a reason. Special Application Scoped Rifle, not a sniper rifle.

It is a good system for what it was designed for; man portable and able to put accurate heavy caliber fire on a selected target. If you want true first shot, sniper rifle accuracy with a .50cal, I'd choose a bolt action McMillan.

longrange1947

04-04-2005, 19:15

Zone One - You are confusing the Barrett name for their bull pup wihtt he army nomenclature for the newest POS built by Barret and bought by the army.

We also describe the .50 as an "anti-material weapon system" and not a sniper rifle. Besides ancedotal stories of long range kills, in which most fess up that it was luck and not planned, the .50 will not do any of the crap put out in the movies, nor stories by Waxman and his scare tactics.

I personnally would have prefered that the money wasted on the Barretts had been put into a good system AND training money for the shooters. However, it is sexier to buy these things then to actually equip the soldiers with what they really need. Unfortunately, there is now a clammer to get more because of over inflated claims of kills at over 2000 meters and all think they should be able to do the same thing. Unfornately it is not in the cards as most can't ID a target at that range, only a group of people. Next, just what is the wind doing at that range? Not even the McMillian can overcome those problems at those ranges. Sniping much past 1500 to 1800 meters is luck at best when shooting at an indivdual and hitting the target in a stratigic location is required to put the item out of business. The goal has been to take down a piece of material not shoot one guy. The next problem is that the location to take down a piece of equipment is, alot of the time, as small or smaller then a human torso. That again brings your effective range to a much closer range then advertised. As far as a counter wniper rifle, I will take a .338 before a 50 as it is more accurate and if I am going to piss off another sniper I want him dead pissed off not shooting back at my giant dirt ball that I just kicked up when I missed him due to the panning accuracy of 2 to 4 moa.

Think about it. :lifter

EchoSixMike

07-29-2005, 20:50

Question regarding the M107: Does anyone have personal experience with a .50 cal rifle using a suppressor? I seem to recall reading that a can was supposed to be part of the M107 system, possibly as some sort of follow on buy, and was wondering how far progress has gone down that route, if any. It makes sense from my perspective, as blast is one of the biggest complaints with the weapon and it already is a burden to haul about regardless. S/F....Ken M

The Reaper

07-29-2005, 21:37

EchoSixMike

07-29-2005, 23:42

I deserved that. OK, sir; any significant negatives? S/F....Ken M

The Reaper

07-29-2005, 23:52

I deserved that. OK, sir; any significant negatives? S/F....Ken M

The can is big, and heavy, but it could be worse.

I did not put enough rounds through it to find out if it is high maintenance.

TR

Gene Econ

07-30-2005, 08:54

[QUOTE=longrange1947] I personnally would have prefered that the money wasted on the Barretts had been put into a good system AND training money for the shooters. However, it is sexier to buy these things then to actually equip the soldiers with what they really need. Unfortunately, there is now a clammer to get more because of over inflated claims of kills at over 2000 meters and all think they should be able to do the same thing. Unfornately it is not in the cards as most can't ID a target at that range, only a group of people. Next, just what is the wind doing at that range?

Guys: I concur with everything Rick has stated on this abortion called an M-107. I have what I consider to be the unfortunate circumstance of having to deal with these since the mid 90s when the L-82 was available for issue to SF through JOS. Periodically, the Barret rears its ugly head and I am the one who has to deal with them.

The Army did some sort of user evaluation on a .50 sometime in the late 90s. SF, Rangers, and conventional guys went to Hawaii and shot various .50s and gave their thoughts to TACOM. Some of the Rangers were out of 2/75 so I was able to ask them what happened and what their recommendations were. According to these specific Rangers, and by some of the SF guys -- neither the Rangers or the SF guys recommended the Barret. Can't remember which rifle they said shot 'better' (loose term with issued .50 cal ammo) but none of them recommended what the Army eventually issued. So, the Army got the Barret.

I have run a couple of NET training events on Barrets with 3/2 SBCT, 1/25th SBCT and 2 CR SBCT. Most recently was one with 2nd CAV Regiment SBCT -- about a month ago on Lewis. The M-107s will normally function when they are used. The L82s were very irregular in their function due to what I consider poor design and poor quality control. However, the 107s did function and didn't break extractors. Even their magazines worked -- a significant change from the L82s.

When I run a NET or any other type of training with these rifles, I will always have the best shooters shoot groups at 300 yards known distance on paper and I will have them measure their shot groups so they can realistically see the accuracy potential of the rifle and the particular ammo they are firing. Raufos and M-8 API generally hold about 3 - 4 minutes of angle. I have never seen anything less than 3 minutes at 300 yards. M-2 Ball holds 4 plus minutes -- I figure about five minutes for planning purposes. I figure most 107s can hold the flank of a M-113 at 1000 yards -- eight of ten times anyway -- with Raufos and M-8.

Anyone claiming kills on humans past about 700 yards by one deliberate shot either has a damn good Barret or is using hand loaded ammo with decent bullets. So far, I haven't seen anyone who can consistently hold an upper torso -- shot after shot -- for ten straight shots -- at 500 yards with an issued M-107 and issued ammo. Shooter error? Well, the shooter is part of the equation but I have had enough guys try this at 500 to believe the results.

Have shot these for group with the suppressors in the mid 90s. The suppresors make the Barret experience a-lot more user friendly. Groups were about double in size and zeros were highly irregular but I will say that the suppressors did work and worked very well. Not sure what suppressor they want for today but firing a Barret with a suppressor makes an otherwise horrible experience tolerable.

I contend that a M-2 BMG mounted in the Remote Weapons Station on a Stryker will outshoot a Barret. Have been waiting for the opportunity to do so and may get it in a few months. Am very curious.

Well -- Rick says the Barret is an anti-material rifle. I agree totally. I told the 2 CR Snipers to look at the Barret as a man portable semi-automatic M-2 BMG.

I have met only one 3/2 SBCT Sniper who used a Barret in Iraq. Apparently the 1/25th SBCT Snipers use them more than 3/2 but at very short ranges -- 100 yards or less -- on vehicles or to blow through walls -- just like you may do with a M-2 BMG. They are used in conjunction with small arms so saying the 107 is more a man portable semi-automatic M-2 may be a good way to put this particular abortion into perspective. If you want to smoke something at ranges past 1000 --use a Javelin.

Could the Army have spent its money better? You bet. Money would have been better spent in SF for a .338 IMHO. Agree totally with Rick on that. Don't think the Infantry needs a .338 though.

Gene

HOLLiS

07-30-2005, 12:07

I have seen a lot of good rifles get blamed for the poor preformance because of the crapping ammo that was used.

EchoSixMike

07-30-2005, 12:14

I'm not sure how the M107 differs from the M82A3 the USMC uses. One of our teams hit a savage at 980yds with Mk211 and terminal effects were quite satisfactory IOW it blew the arm from his shoulder, which held on by flesh and sinews, guy went a short distance and piled up to bleed out. The sniper reported that he was surprised by the flash when it hit the guy, we were expecting that the ammo wouldn't function on something as "soft" as a human target. IME, the M82A3 is a 2-3MOA rifle using Mk211. That's 6 different rifles and maybe 4000rds fired. During our pre-OIF workup, the guns would hold "minute of jeep tire" at 960-1020 yds(we had a row of jeep hard targets at an oblique). The same engagement mentioned above had the Barret put two-three rds of Mk211 into the fuel tank of a bongo truck, which didn't do anything other than allow fuel to leak from the tank. It was gasoline vice diesel. Some of the other sniper plts had McMillans and even Cheytac's, but I don't know how much use those actually received and I have no post deployment feedback from them. The McMillan is a much better LR people shooter but using a match load is the only way to get any real increase in range. I'm not sure what could be gained from a match prepped load using a Raufoss API projectile. might be worth looking into. S/F....Ken M

The Reaper

07-30-2005, 12:38

I think that a match Raufoss might gain a bit, but the problem IMHO is with the projo's accuracy potential, not with the case, primer, or powder.

Easy test would be to pull Mk 211 rounds down, work up safe loads, and replace the projos with 750 grain Hornady A-Max bullets, then test for accuracy.

You could also use Match A-Max loaded rounds to test the Mk 211 projos. The Mk 211 bullet is a bit lighter, so again, you would have to work up a safe load with the powder.

Good experiment!

TR

longrange1947

07-30-2005, 15:46

I have seen a lot of good rifles get blamed for the poor preformance because of the crapping ammo that was used.

Not the case with the Barrett. It is a stamped metal case that rattles and will not give the same lockup shot after shot. We have fired some of the newer French ammo through it and get the same results as the Mk211. While it is better than the API, though not by much, it is still over 2 moa as the norm. The Barrett makes it worse.

As far as the Chey Tec, the demo for us and some of the other demos I have heard of, give it about the same planning groups, 4 moa. We got two hits, out of 6, on a 6 x 6 target board at 900 meters with it and that was with the rep shooting, not us. The ammo is also dangerously over pressured and I would be hesitant in shooting it under hot desert conditions. It may be fine at first but he pressures are going to climb.

Hell, as far as planning purposes, if the round is 2 moa that is a 34 inch group at 1500 meters and too big for a human shot, go to 3 moa and you see what I mean, most is BS hype with a lot of luck thrown in. At 900 meters you are looking at almost 20 inches with a 2 moa gun, now go to 4 moa and consistently hitting a human is going to be difficult at best.

Footmobile

07-31-2005, 07:14

Gene Econ

07-31-2005, 08:13

HOLLiS

07-31-2005, 09:54

Longrange, nice new avatar. Rocket Mountain has a spectacular view no?

A friend of mine who was in the only sniper platoon in the Corps to test run the Chey-Tac said the samething about the ammo. Shot great in the cold in Utah on Chey-Tac's range, shot terrible in the heat at 29 Plams before deployment. Said about 1 in 5 primer blow outs when the temps went above 100.

There is a old trick, though NOT very practical for a combat situation. That is to keep your ammo in a cooler. I saw a chart that shows the increase of chamber pressure in relation to temperature. A number of SASS shooter will place their ammo in a "cool" compartment on their carts after that article came out.

I think, the military should, if it doesn't, teach and allow their sniper teams to reload for their specific rifles. Down side would be acquiring ammo in the field from another sniper team. Generally a reload for a specific rifle is only neck sized for greater accuracy. The case may or may not "chamber" in another rifle. I think they could probably they could work around that problem. Factory loads are sized for minimum chamber size, so that it chambers in all rifles but accuracy is not as good.

Longrange1947, thanks for the info on the barret. Seesh, sounds like the Army ordinance is still run by General Ripley (Civil War), He was a strong supported for smooth bores with buck and ball and would delay the development of any of the "newer Rifled muskets".

Bill Harsey

07-31-2005, 10:09

The word "cryogenic" was used here earlier in relation to possible improvement in a rifle barrel.

I've had some serious discussion about this exact thing with the top metallurgists at Crucible Specialty Tool Steels.

Does cryogenic treatment of rifle barrels do what is claimed?

The Reaper

07-31-2005, 10:27

Seesh, sounds like the Army ordinance is still run by General Ripley (Civil War), He was a strong supported for smooth bores with buck and ball and would delay the development of any of the "newer Rifled muskets".

And repeaters. He said that if the troops could fire more rounds per minute, they would just waste them. :rolleyes:

TR

longrange1947

07-31-2005, 16:30

Footmobile - Thanks and yes it is Rocket, was shooting at the destroyer turret at the 1200 meter mark on the right limit of the range. Hit it three of five times. :lifter

Of course that sucker is what, 12 feet by 15 feet in size, kinda hard to miss. :D

Had a 'group' try downloading the Chey Tec ammo to make it safer and it shot like crap.

Gene, you know the dude. I refused to be there becasue I knew there would be an arguement. Of course there was one anyway, but when I get "It would have been a .5 moa group if it had hit" then it is time to hang it up. When I get six shots with only two within measureing distance and they want to measure the group off of those two shots, I call BS. This too has happened at other shots. Of course the guys came back and originally said it had done great trying to get to me, but all I care about is getting a good piece of equipment in the hands of the shooter, I don't care who lmakes it. My problem is when junk is bought because someone has an unholy relationship with the manufacturer or it "appears to be" that way.

Hollis - We teach reloading at SOTIC. It was done originally because when we started the Air Land Battle 2000 doctrine stated that we would be behind the lines, read Soviet, for however long without resupply. We worked up loads so that the shooter could take in only primers, Lee hand press, and bullets. Then using powder from the 7.62x 54R ammo load up to continue the mission. The problem is the legality of shooting hand loads. The XM118LR says not for combat as it had not been cleared to use in combat when it was first manufactured, the same is the reason why M852 ammo states the same thing.. You can run into a problem by handloading bullets not approved by JAG as a combat round. ie, the plastic ballistic tip rounds guys love is a no no as the plastic tip does not show up in xrays. Could be a problem. Reaper could probably talk much more intelligently about this then I can.

Bill - I have heard good and bad things about cryoing a barrel. I don't see how it would hurt and if it stress relieves it the way it claims it should stop some of the POI shift caused by hot barrels. The Chey Tec, I don't think that is the problem. They test their ammo in the north moutain region and it is cold. They can get away with the hot loads. but the military can't take that chance.

Hollis - As far as cooling, you would have to have a set of charts for your ammo and keep a thermometer on the ammo all the time to monitor the temp as it woudl shift during the day as the ice melted an the inside of the container increased in temp. At those temps, the POI shift would be dramatic if not monitered and could be detrimental to the overall mission.

The problem really isn't that the Ord people do not want change, they change on the wrong whim. For an Ord officer to decide to buy a shit load of Barretts based on "hey that one is neat" is rather stupid. They also listen to only one side and if he talks loud enough then he is heard. Could be loud bad advice, and many times it is.

Reaper, the repeater on is the best and was the augrement against the M1 as well, waste of ammo. The soldiers will just shoot it up. Well, unfortunately that one has proven almost prophetic for full auto when you see the full auto spray and pray shooting done at times.

Well time to run off and hide. :munchin

Rick

The Reaper

07-31-2005, 16:51

Gene, you know the dude. I refused to be there becasue I knew there would be an arguement. Of course there was one anyway, but when I get "It would have been a .5 moa group if it had hit" then it is time to hang it up. When I get six shots with only two within measureing distance and they want to measure the group off of those two shots, I call BS. This too has happened at other shots. Of course the guys came back and originally said it had done great trying to get to me, but all I care about is getting a good piece of equipment in the hands of the shooter, I don't care who lmakes it. My problem is when junk is bought because someone has an unholy relationship with the manufacturer or it "appears to be" that way.
Rick

I was there for that demo, as was Peregrino.

I told the shooter (let's call him DM for short) that he should call it a day after he couldn't get it to hold 6" at the 200 yard line.

He refused, and Ed rode him like a borrowed pony. I do not believe that DM is with them any more.

TR

Smokin Joe

07-31-2005, 17:36

I'm not trying to hijack this...while attempting to stay with the theme of this thread

The Candian the broke Hathcock's record...what did he use? I have heard a McMillian TAC-50 rifle. Google seems to confirm this.

But,

Was this a lucky shot?
Is the McMillian (that was used) the superior rifle?
Also at that range (I understand it to be 2,430 meters) who is actually making the shot the shooter or the spotter?

Technically I know the shooter is...however if LR1947 is saying its difficult to ID targets past 1200 meters (and I have no reason to doubt that) isn't the spotter really doing the IDing and shot calling at 2,400 meters not the shooter?

The Reaper

07-31-2005, 17:42

Bill Harsey

07-31-2005, 18:46

Footmobile

07-31-2005, 18:53

Small point here, Hathcock, with all possible (AND I MEAN IT!) respect doesn't hold the record for USMC confirmed kills. An Oregon boy named Chuck Mawhinney does.

Bill, I think he's refering to Hathcocks long distance shots in Vietnam with a Ma Deuce. I can't remember the distance of that one, but I do know the canucks had him beat by quite a few hundred yards, and it was a true sniper team kill, not luck, as would have had to have been a great deal of what Hathcock did with that Ma Deuce and a jury rigged scope.

Not taking anything away from him at all either.

longrange1947

07-31-2005, 20:50

OK, will try this again, my computer froze like a tastee freeze last time. Had a long explanation post but screwed it up.

Sorry Footmobile, it was pure luck. At that range a one mph wind shift moves the bullet over 25 inches. A one moa bullet and one moa gun still shoots a group over 27 inches, which is bigger than the human body. What this means is that even if he did everything right he would still miss some of the shots. The angle of fall on the bullet is great enough that he must estimate the range to within 20 meters or the bullet will pass over head or fall in front of the target. Now add in the human factor of the shooter having to do everything right. He can not nudge the weapon at all to settle it in his shoulder while firing, a very common shooters error that is not a problem until you get to the 900 to 1000 meter mark. He can not get a muscle twitch, adrenalin cannot be racing the heart or the pulse will take the sights from below the target to over the top of the target. The shooter must fire exactly right. A very hard thing to do, even top shooters throws shots at 1000 yards, or 914 meters. With that and multiple wind shears, mirage dancing, and other environmental conditions, well, lady luck was smiling that day. Now if the target is alive and standing then he is in constant motion and that is erratic motion at best. Time of flight would have been about 3 seconds; a lot can happen in that time. Saying that shots like that are the norm for anyone is not realistic and for those that make those claims, such as regular head shots at 1000 meters I give them a bullet and say show me. No one has yet been able to do that.

The 82d guy that fired a Barrett shot at almost 2000 meters admits that it was luck. He stated that he observed a group of Iraqis and held Kentucky holds, both elevation and wind, and fired. He hit one and now that seems to be the expected norm with the Barrett, not happening. Yes the McMillan is a far superior weapon to the Barrett, but nothing can change physics.

Now then, as to the question of, “who makes the shoot”. The shooter is the monkey on the trigger and the observer is the more experienced sniper. He is the one that is indexing the target, doing final range computation and then figuring the rest of the environmental effects on the shooter’s zero. Once that is accomplished, he will watch the wind and compute winds for the range computed and watch for wind shears, he computes dominate wind then computes winds changes for other wind shears that modify the dominate wind. If the target is a mover he then computes the wind effect on the shooter’s normal lead and gives the shooter his final hold. If you want to see what I mean come to our range and what the interaction of the shooter observer when we are running a course. The observer can make the shooter miss the target.

On Hathcocks shot with the Ma Deuce, even he admits, in his book, that it was luck and that the one always quoted was fired on a VC kneeling in the same mud spot that he had just zeroed the weapon.

OK, settling down and waiting for incoming. :munchin

Smokin Joe

07-31-2005, 21:20

Thanks LR1947,

That is kind of what I thought.

So why not go with the MacMillian over the Barrett (besides politics)?

longrange1947

07-31-2005, 21:39

Thanks LR1947,

That is kind of what I thought.

So why not go with the MacMillian over the Barrett (besides politics)?

Your last two words (besides politics) say alot. One of the problems right now is the desire to go semi for rapid shot follow up. Problem with that is that the weapon bounces enough that you must get the weapon back on target and then wait for the correction. Heck by then you have racked the bolt and have one chambered in a bolt gun. Oh well.

Another problem is that there are those that just feel that the Barrett is the best way to go and they fight tooth and nail to keep it. Again, Oh Well.

The McMillan is not the only good shootng bolt gun, there are a goodly number out there and I would like to see a good shoot off. I would like to see a realistic doc of needs set up that has realistic requirements and that can be met by weapons and also a test program that properly identifies the best weapon. Still waiting on that one. :munchin

The Reaper

07-31-2005, 21:52

LR:

None of that matters without the right ammo.

1 MOA gun with 4 MOA ammo is not going to get the job done any better.

Would love to see us try the AMAX rounds or one of the Bore Riders.

TR

longrange1947

07-31-2005, 22:12

LR:

None of that matters without the right ammo.

1 MOA gun with 4 Moa ammo is not going to get the job done any better.

Would love to see us try the AMAX rounds or one of the Bore Riders.

TR

Fully agreed and they are working on that problem as well. So the last thing we need is a 1 moa bullet in a 4 moa gun. :D

Smokin Joe

08-01-2005, 00:47

LR:

None of that matters without the right ammo.

1 MOA gun with 4 MOA ammo is not going to get the job done any better.

Would love to see us try the AMAX rounds or one of the Bore Riders.

TR

Wow, the ammo is that bad?

Sounds like the M-107 overall is a bad idea and a waist of money. I understand it is good as far as an anti-material rifle goes, but if the accuracy is as bad as you guys say it is I think this weapon answers a small problem in the big scheme of things. Sounds like they should have gone with something different to answer more problems or to be a more diverse weapon. What a shame.

HOLLiS

08-01-2005, 10:01

LR1947, Thank you for the information. I built my first bench rest rifle in the mid 70's and from there on it has been a learning lesson in methodical control of every variable as humanly possible and patience. Each step is a precise duplication as it was just done. Reloading is a ART in itself. Developing a round, understanding what round and how the outside condition effects it, wind, distance, etc is also a ART, along with the actual shooting. In each shot all variables are maintain to insure a round will follow just like the previous round. Nothing is left to chance. Most shooters do not need the precision that a 1000M shoot needs and reloading generally plays a very little part in their shooting. I told a friend, reloading to shooting is like foreplay to sex. He is a good shooter but does not reload. As with most shooters, they hope for the luck of the draw when they buy ammo hoping that it will work with their rifle. Yes, I buy cheap ammo for those mad minutes or spray and pray target shooting. Accuracy is not a issue, just shooting a lot of rounds is.

The human factor is the other critical part, as you mention. Not to diminish a shooters ability but at extreme distance 1,000 M plus, there are externalities that come into play that will influence a hit or miss. A little at 10 feet is a mile at 1000 M. I think the critical aspect of all of this, is training, training, and training. Regardless of what one is shooting, knowing what it can and cannot do, being very proficient in it's use, and one's emotional and physical self being resigned and capable to do the task at hand with commitment to success, other words PROFESSIONALISM. When money, politics, or ? becomes a factor in the decision making process of training personal, Professionalism erodes and we have amateurs shooters.

frostfire

08-03-2005, 22:54

[QUOTE=longrange1947] As far as the Chey Tec, the demo for us and some of the other demos I have heard of, give it about the same planning groups, 4 moa. --- The ammo is also dangerously over pressured and I would be hesitant in shooting it under hot desert conditions. It may be fine at first but he pressures are going to climb.
Rick:
My, there is something strangely familiar about this story.
I am sure the fellow presenting this rifle and ammo made detailed technical claims concerning the design of the rifle and the ammo. Do you recall any of the technical features that were used as selling points for this particular rifle and ammo?
GeneHad a 'group' try downloading the Chey Tec ammo to make it safer and it shot like crap.

Gene, you know the dude. I refused to be there becasue I knew there would be an arguement. Of course there was one anyway, but when I get "It would have been a .5 moa group if it had hit" then it is time to hang it up. When I get six shots with only two within measureing distance and they want to measure the group off of those two shots, I call BS. This too has happened at other shots.
I was there for that demo, as was Peregrino.

I told the shooter (let's call him DM for short) that he should call it a day after he couldn't get it to hold 6" at the 200 yard line.

He refused, and Ed rode him like a borrowed pony. I do not believe that DM is with them any more.

TRAs far as the Chey Tec, the demo for us and some of the other demos I have heard of, give it about the same planning groups, 4 moa. We got two hits, out of 6, on a 6 x 6 target board at 900 meters with it and that was with the rep shooting, not us. The ammo is also dangerously over pressured and I would be hesitant in shooting it under hot desert conditions. It may be fine at first but he pressures are going to climb.

At 900 meters you are looking at almost 20 inches with a 2 moa gun, now go to 4 moa and consistently hitting a human is going to be difficult at best.A friend of mine who was in the only sniper platoon in the Corps to test run the Chey-Tac said the samething about the ammo. Shot great in the cold in Utah on Chey-Tac's range, shot terrible in the heat at 29 Plams before deployment. Said about 1 in 5 primer blow outs when the temps went above 100.

This Chey-tec being discussed, would you gentlemen be referring to the Intervention rifle chambered for .408 Cheyenne Tactical Cartridge?

The same model that was demonstrated during blackwater shootout?

TR Sir, since I believe it's mentioned somewhere here you were present during the LEMAS demo, I assume you were there (and tested it) during the .408 CheyTac demo?

Having neither access nor smackaroos to the rifle, I've been drooling ever since I came across the review years ago. I thought it was a wonder-weapon. Accuracy, range, take-down and all.
I guess you can't believe 100% everything you read and assume it's valid anywhere, anytime. Just plain dumb civvie here

The Reaper

08-04-2005, 05:45

Yes.

Yes.

Yes, though the demo we are referring to here was conducted at Ft Bragg for SOTIC.

TR

longrange1947

08-04-2005, 07:46

Frostfire, the articles that you are refering to at the end of your post were written by a man that is rather self serving and has a tendency to "stretch" the facts a bit. He is the one that stated, had they hit they would have been within a .5 moa group. He also told me and another site that shooting a .5 moa group with a Savage rifle at 1000 yards was "routine" for him.

Take it from there. :munchin

Team Sergeant

08-04-2005, 08:58

[QUOTE=Gene Econ]

This Chey-tec being discussed, would you gentlemen be referring to the Intervention rifle chambered for .408 Cheyenne Tactical Cartridge?
The same model that was demonstrated during blackwater shootout?

TR Sir, since I believe it's mentioned somewhere here you were present during the LEMAS demo, I assume you were there (and tested it) during the .408 CheyTac demo?

Having neither access nor smackaroos to the rifle, I've been drooling ever since I came across the review years ago. I thought it was a wonder-weapon. Accuracy, range, take-down and all.
I guess you can't believe 100% everything you read and assume it's valid anywhere, anytime. Just plain dumb civvie here

Frostfire,

Enough of the URL's!

If it is your desire to read what "civilians and amateurs" have to say about rifles and bullets do so, but do us a favor and leave out their links.

And no, I don't care what "Combat, weapons, tactics, equipment etc" magazines you read either. Please save them for the airsoft readers and their forums.

A little insight Frostfire, most of the people promoting "COMBAT" or "COUNTERTERRORIST" weapons, tactics, equipment and training HAVE NEVER BEEN IN ACTUAL COMBAT! NEVER!

And 99.999% of the people training in or stating they have been trained in "counter-terrorist" techniques, tactics and procedures have been trained by the very same people that have NEVER received any REAL training themselves.

Enjoy amateur hour on the other forums, spare us your links.

Team Sergeant

Yes, 99.999%

frostfire

08-04-2005, 11:21

busted :(

Ryoukai, TS.
won't happen again.
Also no, I don't read or subscribe tactical etc. magazines.

CoLawman

08-04-2005, 14:41

TS I sent you an attachment of some Nice shots with a .50 cal. Didn't know how to post it so sent it to you via email. Perhaps this might be an excellent thread to post the video on.

longrange1947

08-04-2005, 14:49

Would this be the video of the goat killings? :munchin

CoLawman

08-04-2005, 14:53

Would this be the video of the goat killings? :munchin

This is a video from Afghanistan. Video recorded by the Spotter. OH MY!
The Horror......The Horror. And they are improving on THAT! :D

Team Sergeant

08-04-2005, 15:21

TS I sent you an attachment of some Nice shots with a .50 cal. Didn't know how to post it so sent it to you via email. Perhaps this might be an excellent thread to post the video on.

You a month (or two) late.... I've seen it a long long time ago.... :D

CoLawman

08-04-2005, 17:22

You a month (or two) late.... I've seen it a long long time ago.... :D

Should have known! Will accept demotion to ASSet! :o

longrange1947

08-04-2005, 20:13

TS - Is it the flying bodies? If it is they are rams. Look at the first one and you can see the horns, same with the third one, forth one you can make out the hind quarter and shoulder as it moves into postion on the ridge line.

We got that video some time ago.

Team Sergeant

08-04-2005, 21:08

Cyclops

05-13-2006, 07:28

Gentleman,

First of all, This is a very excellent thread. I'm learning volumes.

My experiences with the M107 were both good and bad. I was a Sniper Section Leader in Iraq for a Light Inf. Bn. and we were issued 3 M107's. Other than firing an M82 at School this was my first experience with the .50 cal. SWS. When we were mobing at Ft. Drum we were given WWII era .50 ammo (ball) to zero with. Man we couldn't hit shit out to 500 meters consistently. I blamed the ammo. We then deployed and recieved Mk211 Mod 0. We still couldn't maintain decent groups, 3 MOA was the norm. I was so GD pissed off that I zeroed it to the best of my ability then set that bitch aside. My BC was one of those officers that brought into all of the inflated kills stories and he thought that me alone with my M107 could win the war. I had to take that bitch on all sorts of missions. One day I was in an ambush position and 4 BG's presented themselves at 900m. I fired my first round and it hit approx 4" above one of their heads smacking into a concrete wall. The funny thing is that the guy next to him went down (turns out a piece of concrete from the wall was broken loose by the round and entered his abdomin, he died several days later). I adjusted my POA and fired the second round at the same guy and it did hit him with very effective Terminal ballistics. After that the weapon mis-fired every other round. I wanted to take that M107 and throw it in a ditch with an incendiary grenade. We learned the limitations of that particular weapon system early and I didn't really use it again unless we were overwatching a TCP and were planning on using it for stopping vehicles at 500m or so. It is also important to note that it was our experience that the API and Mk211 Mod 0 is very corrosive and if you don't scrub the shit out of your chamber/barrell every 10-20 rds or so you will get malfunctions (like I experienced). The army does need to provide snipers with a better cleaning kit for the M107, the half Otis half USGI kit wasn't cutting it. The real weak link was lack of solvents strong enough to break down the build up associated with the .50 ammo.

Gene Econ

05-13-2006, 09:12

Gentleman,After that the weapon mis-fired every other round. I wanted to take that M107 and throw it in a ditch with an incendiary grenade. We learned the limitations of that particular weapon system early and I didn't really use it again unless we were overwatching a TCP and were planning on using it for stopping vehicles at 500m or so. It is also important to note that it was our experience that the API and Mk211 Mod 0 is very corrosive and if you don't scrub the shit out of your chamber/barrell every 10-20 rds or so you will get malfunctions (like I experienced). The army does need to provide snipers with a better cleaning kit for the M107, the half Otis half USGI kit wasn't cutting it. The real weak link was lack of solvents strong enough to break down the build up associated with the .50 ammo.

Cyclops:

Sounds familiar. Having seen enough new 107s being fired for the first time or with under 100 rounds through a barrel, I have noted that two of ten will probably do what yours did. Fire a few shots then fail to extract or feed. Believe it or not, the 107 is more reliable than the older Barretts.

The accuracy is unchanged. Poor to mediocre. I group M-107s with the guys using Mk-211 at 300 yards known distance and measure groups. About 3 MOA with the Mk-211. About 4 with M-8 API and 4 plus with M-2 Ball. Have done this over enough years to believe my statistics.

That M-8 API that seems to be the norm these days was made between the late 40's and mid 50's from what I can tell. Not positive if the primers are corrosive as during WWII most of the large bore ammo used non corrosive primers. The powder is really no different than the very slow burning extruded powders used today, except that it is sixty years old and that is pretty old for powder of any sort. Powder decays over time. No one is really sure what its rate of decay is, but ammo that old is probably evaluated constantly by the Army. For a while the Army stopped use of that M-8 API with barrets out of fear of high pressures due to powder decay. That has been lifted.

Talking with some guys out of Benning, it seems the old M-8 API round may have some decay in terms of its incendary compound. The guys at Benning have told me that at times the M-8 kind of fizzles as it heads down range, particularly when used in the heat of the summer. I haven't experienced this but Lewis is a whole bunch cooler and dryer than Benning.

I view the Barret as a man-portable, semi automatic, M-2 Browning in terms of maintenance and use. So I tell guys to clean them as if they were a issued service rifle instead of what the 107 isn't (a precision rifle). No need for any fancy cleaning gear with the Barret. GI sectional .50 cal rod with GI brushes will be as good as anything else. RBC and CLP is fine. Using Shooters Choice or Hoppes Bench Rest solvent is a waste of money on a Barret.

If you think you are using corrosive primers, buy some Sweets 7.62 copper remover or just carry a small bottle of household ammonia with you. Windex with ammonia also works. When you got the crud out of the barrel and bolt face, clean it using some ammonia of some sort. Hose off with carb cleaner, dry, and a light coat of lube if you are in an area prone to rust. Ammonia neutralizes the effects of mecuric primers but you really must get the rifle clean quickly after firing with that type of ammo.

Gene

The Reaper

05-13-2006, 09:18

Cyclops:

Good post, thanks for sharing.

The system and the ammunition both have their limitations. If you or your CO want to get the best accuracy the M107 is capable of, you will need better bullets, like the Hornady AMAX. The tradeoff is the payload, pyro, and AP characteristics of the rounds you are currently using. The rifle itself is probably not going to be much better than a 2 moa gun, but you never know.

I shoot a fair amount of .50 have to tell you that current production API and Mk 211 are not corrosive. That characteristic is only found in ammo with a mercuric primer, and the ammo you are using does not have it. The WW II stuff you shot probably was. I think that Army transitioned in the 50s, except for the large bore ammo. Furthermore, corrosive ammo does not cause malfunctions, it pits the bore. Maybe you are saying that it is unusually dirty ammo, and the powder fouling is causing problems. What type of malfunctions are you getting? Failures to chamber or extract?

Good work, thanks for your service.

TR

zahal_boyscout

05-13-2006, 09:46

The Reaper

05-13-2006, 09:49

I'm surprised the US hasnt adopted some of the bracket sniper firing techniques of the Soviets. It is a system where more soldiers are sniper trained, and fielded with a moderately accurate sniper rifle (the dragunov), and backed up by a squad of crew-served weapons, and anti-armor weapons.

zahal_boyscout...

zb:

We have no idea who you are.

Before you post again, tell us a little more about yourself by filling in your profile and introducing yourself in the proper place.

You might alo want to do some more reading, especially threads that are stickied or titled Introductions.

Bad SA and bad manners here.

TR

Cyclops

05-13-2006, 10:01

What type of malfunctions are you getting? Failures to chamber or extract?

TR

We were getting failure to chamber/seat the round fully malfunctions. At the time it was explained to me by an 18B we had near our FOB that this was due to carbon build up in the chamber caused by the "overly corrosive ammo we were firing". I took his word for it as I didn't have much experience with the 107. You guys seem to be in aggreement that M8 anf Mod 211 mod 0 isn't corrosive so I either mis understood what he told me or he was wrong. That being said once I gave the chamber a little more TLC with some Sweet's it seemed to not happen as often. Thanks for the knowledge guys.

optactical

05-15-2006, 04:48

I'm surprised the US hasnt adopted some of the bracket sniper firing techniques of the Soviets. It is a system where more soldiers are sniper trained, and fielded with a moderately accurate sniper rifle (the dragunov), and backed up by a squad of crew-served weapons, and anti-armor weapons.

zahal_boyscout...

So what is a Designated Marksman? If you are going to talk shit then do some research... we do the same thing, and we do it better.

The Reaper

05-15-2006, 08:07

We were getting failure to chamber/seat the round fully malfunctions. At the time it was explained to me by an 18B we had near our FOB that this was due to carbon build up in the chamber caused by the "overly corrosive ammo we were firing". I took his word for it as I didn't have much experience with the 107. You guys seem to be in aggreement that M8 anf Mod 211 mod 0 isn't corrosive so I either mis understood what he told me or he was wrong. That being said once I gave the chamber a little more TLC with some Sweet's it seemed to not happen as often. Thanks for the knowledge guys.

There are some great .50 chamber brushes which are essentially a hard handle, like a screwdriver, connected to a piece of heavy cable with a BIG brush on the end. They were originally made for shotgun shooters, but the 12 gauge brush works well in .50 chambers as well. I can pull my bolt and clean the chamber of powder fouling in less time than it took to type this. They are not particularly expensive either. I would recommend that your unit pick some up.

The brushes are listed in the Brownell's catalog and are on the web site. If your 18Bs or armorers do not have the Brownell's catalog, I highly recommend that you get them. IIRC, quite a few teams use them for pre-deployment purchases.

Careful with the Sweet's, you leave it in more than 15 minutes, it is corrosive and is eating metal.

Good luck and happy hunting!

TR

Cyclops

05-15-2006, 16:07

TR,

Thanks for the info. I will definitly pass that on to the new Sniper Section Leader. I've been promoted out. :( Good and bad I guess. I do however have influence over all of our Brigade's Sniper Sections in my new job. :lifter Thanks again.

Sinister

05-17-2006, 20:59

Hard to imagine that a weapon that does great as a 300-yard max support by fire asset has been bought to fill a long-range "Sniper" anti-personnel/anti-materiel role. The M82/107 makes a much lighter and transportable support section weapon than a complete Ma Deuce (tripod, pintle, T&E), but a sniper weapon? No way.

Put makeup and lipstick on a pig and it's still a pig.

longrange1947

05-18-2006, 18:20

Put makeup and lipstick on a pig and it's still a pig.

DAaaaaammmmmm Dave! :D

626

05-22-2006, 11:12

FWIW. If you are stuck trying to find decent sniper loads for the .50 try SNC Sniper Elite they are sub minute and come in different tactical loads (even working on an IR tracer but not out yet). Here's the link below

http://www.snctec.com/html/en/products/ammunition-small.php

For the record I'm no believer in a .50 SWS either for all the same reasons previously mentioned. Snipers engage people not material (IMHO)and they have to have the tools, trg, and skill to do it in 1-3 rounds (spotted).

NousDefionsDoc

05-22-2006, 11:42

skill to do it in 1-3 rounds

LONGRANGE! Come look what he said!;)

Gene Econ

05-22-2006, 21:11

FWIW. If you are stuck trying to find decent sniper loads for the .50 try SNC Sniper Elite they are sub minute and come in different tactical loads (even working on an IR tracer but not out yet). For the record I'm no believer in a .50 SWS either for all the same reasons previously mentioned. Snipers engage people not material (IMHO)and they have to have the tools, trg, and skill to do it in 1-3 rounds (spotted).

Yo:

So please do tell us of your practical first hand experience shooting this SNC Sniper Elite Ammo. Spare no details. What type of rifle, optic, mean radius and range fired, environmental conditions etc.

Your public records indicate you are in an SOF outfit. After your post I am curious as to which SOF unit, and in what capacity are you a member of this SOF unit?

Gene

Peregrino

05-22-2006, 21:51

Yo:

So please do tell us of your practical first hand experience shooting this SNC Sniper Elite Ammo. Spare no details. What type of rifle, optic, mean radius and range fired, environmental conditions etc.

Your public records indicate you are in an SOF outfit. After your post I am curious as to which SOF unit, and in what capacity are you a member of this SOF unit?

Gene

:munchin :munchin :munchin

On another note: it's TEOTWAWKI (The End Of The World As We Know It). I had the pleasure of shooting a 1000pt NRA HP Match this past Saturday at Camp Butner NC. LR1947 - We missed you! (I know - you had a legitimate excuse. :p ) I was fortunate enough to get to shoot with Ken S. and we both had a good time, despite sub-par shooting. To add insult to injury Ed H. was the line boss running the range - from right behind our position. Talk about old home week. The "End of the World" comment came about because one of the Juniors came up to us at the end of the match wanting to borrow a calculator to figure his percentages because he was "too tired to think". (Remember this was a 1000 pt. match. For those of you that don't know - take the final score and move the decimal place.) The kid came across with the exact same attitude that gets so many of them banned with their 1st/2nd post here, and like them didn't understand our vocal lack of sympathy. And Ed let it go. In fact he said "I don't even chew out E-7s any more unless they really deserve it." I almost choked. I did spray my soft drink all over the place. It's a good thing I had already finished shooting and Ken was too busy chasing an annoying wind shift to pay attention. Ed has mellowed and the world has changed (though I wouldn't recommend any of the uninitiated push their luck). The community will miss him when he retires this summer. JFTFOI - Peregrino

longrange1947

05-23-2006, 14:07

LONGRANGE! Come look what he said!;)

No!! I refuse to! I'm tired.

So what would the per centage of 925 out of 1000 be anyway? :p

Got to get on my reloading bench and get some more 77 and 80 gr loads made up for a fun weekend of cross the course. Now that I have quit smoking and drinking coffee I should really shoot like crap!

HOLLiS

05-23-2006, 15:17

No!! I refuse to! I'm tired.

So what would the per centage of 925 out of 1000 be anyway? :p

Got to get on my reloading bench and get some more 77 and 80 gr loads made up for a fun weekend of cross the course. Now that I have quit smoking and drinking coffee I should really shoot like crap!

Did you give up Beer too?

longrange1947

05-23-2006, 17:24

Did you give up Beer too?

Hell no!

I'm in the dog house now from having a "couple" with Scott. He just clame back from A'stan and we were just BS'ing. :D

626 - I'm interested in answers to Gene's questions as well. We are both instructors and have a small amount of experience with the 50 Cals.

BamBam

05-24-2006, 08:36

Rick if you ever give up beer let me know, I 'm gonna go to church and repent for the end of the world will not be far away.

626

05-24-2006, 18:23

Rick and Gene PM inbound.

Roguish Lawyer

05-25-2006, 08:17

Rick and Gene PM inbound.

PM? Inquiring minds want to know!

GunPig

05-27-2006, 07:01

:munchin :munchin :munchin

On another note: it's TEOTWAWKI (The End Of The World As We Know It). I had the pleasure of shooting a 1000pt NRA HP Match this past Saturday at Camp Butner NC. LR1947 - We missed you! (I know - you had a legitimate excuse. :p ) I was fortunate enough to get to shoot with Ken S. and we both had a good time, despite sub-par shooting. To add insult to injury Ed H. was the line boss running the range - from right behind our position. Talk about old home week. The "End of the World" comment came about because one of the Juniors came up to us at the end of the match wanting to borrow a calculator to figure his percentages because he was "too tired to think". (Remember this was a 1000 pt. match. For those of you that don't know - take the final score and move the decimal place.) The kid came across with the exact same attitude that gets so many of them banned with their 1st/2nd post here, and like them didn't understand our vocal lack of sympathy. And Ed let it go. In fact he said "I don't even chew out E-7s any more unless they really deserve it." I almost choked. I did spray my soft drink all over the place. It's a good thing I had already finished shooting and Ken was too busy chasing an annoying wind shift to pay attention. Ed has mellowed and the world has changed (though I wouldn't recommend any of the uninitiated push their luck). The community will miss him when he retires this summer. JFTFOI - Peregrino

Yea, you guys will miss Ed at SOTIC, but if you stick with the civilain LR matches you will still see him all over the place. I always enjoy shooting with him. He's a constant source of entertainment....and one hell of a shooter also.

Gunpig

Snaquebite

01-03-2007, 14:53

longrange1947

01-03-2007, 15:57

email sent. :)

As a matter of information for those shooting this beast, the number of rounds a shooter can tolerate. It is broken down into single and double hearing protection and includes ALL personnel within 57 feet of the weapon. So if you have shooters 20 feet apart then three shooters rounds must be added together for each shooter. Thus is each shooter fires 10 rounds, they are actually counted as having fired 30 rounds each for hearing. This is a problem wiht your range personnel as they too must be in the count. If I remember correctly, it is 37 rounds single protection and 100 rounds double.

Check into it guys and get the figures straight or you will have shooters with the hearing and ear ringing that I have. :lifter

Gene Econ

01-03-2007, 19:42

reviving this thread...read it all the way through and didn't see what I'm looking for. A friend e-mailed me from the sand box and is looking for any specific break-in requirements for the M107 specifically the barrell. He's in an EOD unit and they issued it with no manuals. And don't ask me why? I dunno. I realize this is sometimes a controversial subject so maybe one of you experts can help me out. (Gene? Rick?) any info appreciated....PM me if you want..

Snaquebite:

Tell your friend to treat the Barret like it was a man portable, semi-automatic, M-2 to include maintenance and he will never be let down. If he thinks it is a long range sniper rifle, he will be let down. No need to break in the barrel as there is nothing unique about them. Just clean like any other rifle and it will be fine.

Rick probably sent you more info but that is what I do with them and they function as well as a Barret can be expected to function.

Gene

Gene Econ

01-03-2007, 19:46

email sent. :) As a matter of information for those shooting this beast, the number of rounds a shooter can tolerate. It is broken down into single and double hearing protection and includes ALL personnel within 57 feet of the weapon. So if you have shooters 20 feet apart then three shooters rounds must be added together for each shooter. Thus is each shooter fires 10 rounds, they are actually counted as having fired 30 rounds each for hearing. This is a problem wiht your range personnel as they too must be in the count. If I remember correctly, it is 37 rounds single protection and 100 rounds double. Check into it guys and get the figures straight or you will have shooters with the hearing and ear ringing that I have. :lifter

One more thing if I may. Wear eye protection and if one is smart he will have his sleeves down and will be wearing gloves. I always used ear plugs and muffs around those things.

Gene

Snaquebite

01-03-2007, 19:47

Thanks Rick and Gene,
Pretty much what I told him. Bever did much with Barretts and didn't really think they required too much "special" attention.

George

brianksain

01-05-2007, 18:01

Good to see you here Cyclops.

Man I read the thread too fast.

I got a visual image of Rick painted like a pig with lipstick ... after he quit smoking and drinking coffee.

Now that would be one cranky tush hog ...

7624U

01-05-2007, 19:50

The Reaper

01-05-2007, 20:06

Gene Econ

01-05-2007, 20:34

I once tried to shoot 50.cal Sabot rounds I delinked threw the M107 needless to say it dident work :p the rounds are slightly to long to feed from the magazine, so i was stuck loading them 1 at a time.

You shot SLAP through the muzzle break or did you take the break off?

The fellows out of Rock Island who do quite a good MTT on the Barretts advise guys not to shoot the SLAP through a Barrett. I believe them. Chamber pressures are huge and if a petal from the SABOT lodges in that break, you will probably have problems.

SLAP has impressive ballistics but the accuracy leaves something to be desired. Last I heard you could expect one of fifty to have in bore sabot failure which chews up barrels and I don't think Olin ever got a handle on making the SABOT petal as perfectly as it should for decent accuracy. They will put a hole through things though. Oh yes, I think part of the accuracy problem was also related to slipping inside the SABOT.

I pulled a projo from a round of SLAP and dissected it. Interesting construction. Will try to find it and post a picture.

Too much time on my hands I think.

Gene