Canting

C

cdoc42

New member
I'm not sure which is the appropriate thread for this question, but this one sounds about right.

In another blog among multi-specialty physicians there is a discussion about the Trump attempted assassination. There is an opinion based on photos that Crooks turned his AR-15 90 degrees to flatten his profile, and that he had iron sights installed on the side of the rifle. This sounds to me like an incredible amount of canting, but I question whether or not the placement of sights would overcome that issue. Could he have sighted in the rifle in this manner? If he changed from conventional sights to the side sides, would there be any impact on the point of impact?
 
Yes, canting causes deviation in the POI, if the sights aren't corrected for the change. Sights need to adjusted to allow bullets to hit as they are pointed.
 
If he installed 90 degree offset sight, there was no canting. Definitely he could have sighted in his rifle this way.

45 degree offset sights have been around for long time. Same idea.

-TL

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
 
and that he had iron sights installed on the side of the rifle.
Click to expand...

Sights can be installed anywhere, on the top, the sides, even underneath or even not physically on the weapon itself. As long as the weapon is zeroed properly it will be on target.

I doubt there are side mounted sights on the rifle in this case. The rifle belonged to his father, and no mention of any special, or unusual sights or any other features has been mentioned in the press.

Since the rifle is in the custody of the govt (as evidence) it should be a simple thing to check on. The only photos I've seen of the rifle have been very blurry with details too out of focus to be sure of.
 
There raises the issue of deflection. The user must account for the distance between the front sight blade and the bore. A semi-decent discussion is raised in Adam Makos' book, Spearhead, about the Pershing tank gunner responsible for destroying a Panther in Colonge. For greater distances, one has to account for the offset nature of the sights. You'd think that if he inclined the rifle counter-clockise bullet would go slightly to the right (but the distance was not that great if the rifle was sight in at 100 yds).
 
It was his father's rifle. Indeed it would be very unlikely a 90 degree offset sight was installed. If he just cant the rifle 90 degree to the left (assuming he was right handed), the poi would be low-left. He could be aiming at the president's forehead and ended up hitting his right ear. That really gives the creeps.

Someone must be looking over the man on that day.

-TL

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
 
Installing iron sights in that manner is only for close range emergency use. I seriously doubt if that were the case. I strongly suspect the rifle was equipped with some sort of scope.

A local LE officer spotted the shooter seconds before he fired. The shooter turned around and pointed his rifle at the cop who ducked below the roof line.

That likely saved Trumps life causing the shooter to rush his shots and miss. For even a moderately experienced shooter that would have been an easy shot with any magnification with time to set up for the shot. Not many experienced shooters could have made that shot with irons.
 
Not many experienced shooters could have made that shot with irons.
Click to expand...

Just what shot is "that shot" supposed to be??

I would agree that there aren't many experienced shooters who could guarantee to only hit the tip of his ear at 150 ish yards, but hitting a standing man at that range with iron sights is something everyone who qualified marksman in basic training could do.

Because he's not around to ask, we have NO IDEA what his actual point of aim was. We know he had never been in the military, so he didn't have military level training. We've heard he tried to join a rifle team, but wasn't skilled enough to be accepted.

There has been nothing reported showing any evidence of him practicing shooting in general, and nothing at all that might be considered practice for what we are assuming he thought of as his "mission".

He probably gamed it out a lot in his head, but nothing has been turned up to show he did any physical training for the shooting.

The fact is that we don't, and won't ever know where he aimed, or really even IF he aimed, or just fired in the direction without deliberate aim.

Since there is nothing yet reported solidly explaining his motives, we can imagine anything. Discussing his marksmanship, and apparent lack there of, assumes we know what he meant to hit. Sure, it seems obvious, BUT....those are our ideas, we don't know what his actually were.
 
Not many experienced shooters could have made that shot with irons.
Click to expand...
Assuming he was going for a headshot and that the gun was capable of 2MOA or better then hitting a 6-7" target at around 150 yards should not be that hard for someone who was used to shooting with iron sights. If he was just aiming to hit a man-sized target, that would be quite easy.
If he just cant the rifle 90 degree to the left (assuming he was right handed), the poi would be low-left. He could be aiming at the president's forehead and ended up hitting his right ear. That really gives the creeps.
Click to expand...
As a WAG, I would guess that at 150yds the bullet would be about 6" to one side and 5-6" low if the suspect simply canted the rifle 90 degrees to one side with the gun being set to fire upright and zeroed at around 100yards.
 
Thinking about it, even with sights, with the butt of the stock and the trigger at 90 degrees, how in the world could he come close to firing a shot accurately? From what I've read, when he tried out for the shooting team, holding the rifle in a normal fashion, his shots were 20 feet off target.
 
There's something to that canting business. In 2003 at Ft Bliss we were mobilizing to go to Iraq. We transitioned from the M17 to the M40 NBC mask, and I guess whether we had the new masks or not, they felt it was prudent to go to a live fire range and conduct a familiarization with firing our M16A2's with the new M40 masks.

I believe it was the same with the M17's in that the suggestion was to lower your noggin as close as possible to the rifle and sort of guess-aim over the sights as a proper sight picture cannot be obtained with a mask on (for most soldiers). I'm a righty and thus had my canister filter on the left side, and in the pre-fire prep period, for whatever reason, I attempted to cant my rifle 90 degrees and attempt to get a sight picture. I was surprised that with the mask, helmet, and LBE webbing I was able to attain a good sight picture and maintain a solid prone shooting position.

I don't remember the name of the range, but if anyone spent time at Ft Bliss, it was the ranges north of Dona Ana and McGreggor, the the elevated shooting platforms and 100m pop-up targets. If memory serves, it was either a 60 or 80 round course of fire. I cleaned all target in the first string. I told the Range NCO what I had discovered and asked to also fire on the 2nd string rotation, I cleaned all targets on that course as well. The Range NCO and an Officer observed, took notes, and photographs and they asked a couple of other soldiers to fire the course in the similar manner. I didn't get to hear their opinion or results, but I was sold on the idea and began training my soldiers to cant their rifles when firing in NBC posture. So, it can be done to good effect.
 
In a perfect world 45 degree offset sights work...okay. They will work and in theory are not that different from top mounted sights.

The reality is 45 degree offset sights can be a feces theater.

The offset tends to add additional shooter error due to sight alignment. The construction of the sights is extremely important as even some very expensive sights will not have proper sight/bore alignment resulting in a permanent error.

It is very easy to get an improper zero as a result of wandering sight picture if your stock weld/cant is not the exact same every time. For CQB as an emergency sight they are just fine but trying to use them at distance as primary iron sights...
Not something I would put my life on the line by doing. We had em, some guys used them especially when they first came out....
Most guys took them off.
 
I was sold on the idea and began training my soldiers to cant their rifles when firing in NBC posture. So, it can be done to good effect.
Click to expand...

Absolutely.

We always canted the rifle with a pro-mask on both M17 and M40 in 1/75th and after selection.

Using the stock iron sights you have proper bore to sight alignment and it works fine especially at 100 meters or less. Using sights that are canted is a different animal.
 
I don't remember the name of the range, but if anyone spent time at Ft Bliss, it was the ranges north of Dona Ana and McGreggor, the the elevated shooting platforms and 100m pop-up targets.
Click to expand...

First off, Donna Ana is the armpit of God's green (or, in the Tularosa Valley, brown) earth.

Second off, yes I've also shot that range.

We always canted the rifle with a pro-mask on both M17 and M40 in 1/75th and after selection.

Using the stock iron sights you have proper bore to sight alignment and it works fine especially at 100 meters or less.
Click to expand...

This is how I was taught in the Marine Corps. While service wide its usually more of a fam fire (familiarity fire), but infantry units would often treat it serious and actually make jarheads hit targets. A full 90 degree can't wasn't required, a 45 degree can't would usually let you get sight picture.
 
pics

The only pics I've seen of the rifle are grainy and unclear. There does indeed appear to be a rear BUIS on the rear of the carbine with sight raised. Very little detail has been forthcoming. I have heard statements that the optic was an Eotech. One commenter pointed out what MAY have been a solar tab on the sight, making it a certain model Holosun. Who knows?

Did the sight work, if not, it may explain why the rear BUIS was raised. Shooter (I refuse to use his name) may have used the BUIS as some misguided aid to accuracy WITH the optic. I strongly suspect that the rifle was moved away from the body (as protocol) the BUIS may have gotten tripped at that point. Shooters cheek weld on the carbine is way back in the only grainy pic I've seen.

Followed closely for about 10 days, have not dug any since, but I have not forgotten.
 
From what I've read, when he tried out for the shooting team, holding the rifle in a normal fashion, his shots were 20 feet off target.
Click to expand...

I don't know where you're reading but he either improved significantly or your source was wildly wrong.
 
Did the sight work, if not, it may explain why the rear BUIS was raised.
Click to expand...

My guess would be the shock wave traveling thru the soft tissue as the bullet yawed thru his brain housing group knocked the sight up.

I like to think it is a possibility. :)
 
JohnKSa said:
Assuming he was going for a headshot and that the gun was capable of 2MOA or better then hitting a 6-7" target at around 150 yards should not be that hard for someone who was used to shooting with iron sights. If he was just aiming to hit a man-sized target, that would be quite easy.As a WAG, I would guess that at 150yds the bullet would be about 6" to one side and 5-6" low if the suspect simply canted the rifle 90 degrees to one side with the gun being set to fire upright and zeroed at around 100yards.
Click to expand...
4.5" low-left @150yd would be my estimate. I'm going to try that with my A2 clone.

It would reduce to 3" left / 1.5" low for 45 degree cant.

-TL

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top