View Single Post
Old 04-08-2011, 16:34   #21
Gene Econ
Quiet Professional
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Lacey Washington
Posts: 737
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buffalobob View Post
So, I am about to the end of my knowledge base on the subject and only have a few thoughts and observations left.

You mention optics used back then and that certainly is important. In about 1977 I began noticing that the animals I hunted were often over othe next ridgeline so I bought a 3X9 Redfield Accutrac. That thing was so great under 500 yards that I built up a whole rifle and topped it off with a 6X18 Redfield accuRange. In its day and in my early years it was great glass. I sold the 6X18 about three years ago because it was trash compared to the new Luepolds and Nightforces. Whether is was the coatings and glue deteriorating or my eyes deteriorating or both I do not know. I also had a friend who built a USMC M24 clone and topped it with a RVN correct Redfield and I looked through it at 300 yards and it was trash although I never adjusted the eyepiece so that judgement is flawed. I have a Wilde Rangefinder (WWII vintage) and I can see clearly to 3K with it. So I am not at all certain about the optics of the RVN era versus what I use today.

However you make this comment


As I mentioned earlier, there is the 1600 M official Americal record and then there is the "unofficial" record. After the Americal left RVN, the 196th LIB operated as an independent unit. The whole long story of how that record was broken is hilarious but I will save it for another day.
I will preface my remarks that everything hinges upon my memory which is about as reliable as my other body parts.

The firing position was the top of a perimeter bunker at Bn Firebase on a ridge and downhill to the old French RR. The background was a water filled rice paddy. Target was two NVA solder walking ( Can you believe shooting a guy walking at over a mile with a 308?) along the RR. Shooter was a second tour sniper using a M21, ART and M118SB with his regular partner spotting on the Bn arty spotting scope. Spotter was calling adjustment based upon splashes in the rice paddy and the NVA reactions. Fourth and fifth round hits on the same guy. One more for the Body Count Board!

Unusual and unique circumstance under which the shots were made and for certain no other sniper I ever had was good enough to do it.

So before I conclude, I will say that my son and my daughter and myself have won mantel trinkets shooting the 175 Sierra MatchKing in long range F-class and several animals have been killed with it which have been posted on this forum. Its a great bullet and I have some loaded right now just for hunting. I also shoot Bergers and have killed several animals beyond 1K with them so they are also good bullets.


Conclusion

Given the great improvements in metallurgy and barrel making and the great improvement in optics, rangefinding, atmospheric meters and handheld ballistic computers and given the continued widespread use of the 308 as a sniper cartridge is seems that one would stop and think whether the bullet in use is limiting the effective range of the snipers because it will not transition well. Back in the good ole days Sniper School was three weeks. Nowadays it is much longer and much improved (I would hope) and the snipers should be capable of outperforming those of my generation. Why aren't the RVN records being broken? Is it because of bullet design?
Bob:

Don't want to make a mess of this one so will be careful about what I say.

I have shot the 24 with the issued M-3 optic at about 1250 - 1300 meters and had to put on all elevation and hold at the base of the duplex. That got the 118 SB out to about 1300. If I had to push it another hundred meters, it would have been impossible for me to see the target through the optic. It brings up something. How could the shooter have seen the targets with that ART scope at that distance? From what I can recall about the ART Scopes, you maxed them out at 1K and I can't see how someone could see a target through their scope at 1600 meters using the type of hold over needed. Just food for thought.

As for guys doing or not doing what this one team did in Vietnam I can only offer some potential reasons. First is that the guys today must ID the target as a threat. Since the enemy doesn't wear a uniform, this means they must see a weapon. Hard to do at those distances with a 10X optic. Also, the conditions you mentioned are very unique. Team on a hill, enemy crossing a rice paddy. Ability to see the bullets literally splash in the water which is way more precise than seeing dust kick up. And in a ten year long war it happened only once.

Technology has gotten better but not significantly better unless you get into night vision and thermals. The old 173 grain service bullet was designed in the 1930's and improvements in design have happened but not enough to make a significant difference in danger space -- which equates to hit probabilities. Basically, the 118 SB and LR are 600 meter shooters and I would bet that if accurate records were kept you would find the majority of one or two shot engagements with 118 SB or LR resulting in a hit happened under 600 meters with the majority at 500 or less.

Another thing to consider and also is probably a reason why no one cares about record keeping is this. When does a shot stop being due to skill and more due to luck? Three shots -- four -- five? That is the big problem if the goal is to see who got the longest shot with a 7.62 rifle.

About the only thing I can say with certainty is that the guys will take the shot if they are allowed to under what ever ROE they must follow and if it means a shot past a reasonable distance, they will certainly try. I can not speak for SF here so understand I am talking about the Infantry. Maybe some SF guys have done the same? I would not know but I do know that some Infantrymen have been successful at distances past 1K but it certainly isn't the rule.

Gene
Gene Econ is offline   Reply With Quote