Interesting trick for those who use optics for quick target interdiction

B

Blacksun

Inactive
So I heard about this and even though I have attended multiple LRTI / Tactical Real World Sniper Schools. I had never been taught this method even in advanced schools. So after hearing about it I talked to a few friends from different SOTIC, Corps Sniper Advanced School and a few others come to find out they were familiar with it. This method is to be used for quick snap shots and after about 500 rounds of playing with it. I have to say it works. I use Mil, FFP optics so I can't speak to using any other but I don't see why it wouldn't work if that's what you use.

You will need to create a marksmans report until you learn your distances per Mil (dot) half value to Dot etc.

Instead of zeroing crosshairs at say 100 ( I use different zeros depending on rifle)

Zero your top dot at 100 yards, then using your half value try for the 200 hundred. Etc etc this will allow you to practice hold over/ hold over without ever touching your turrets. I am not a great writer I am aware but I think I am getting my point across. With this method I have been able to mark 1000 yards but it has not been consistent. I do however slay 900 - 925 consistently. This for me anyway method is in no way a place to talk the groups that so many shooters chase. This is a combat application method ( as it was explained to me) after about 250 rounds I am happy to report all my contacts have been kill shots, not that I haven't had my share of fly by's due to wind but now that I have this method down I have started working on wind compensation and things are getting better. This is not for bench rest shooting or as put to me from a very good Army sniper friend of mine, method to be used on a high value target. I did take a buck this year using it.

If you have questions I will try to answer them. If I can't I will try to reach out to those in the know and get the answer. I hope you guys find this interesting and may even give it a try.
 
Dots, stadia wires, what ever other reference points are in your sight picture, all can be used as fast reference points, once you figure out just where they hit at certain distances.

Its not a new principle.
 
When the marines came out with the M-40 using the Redfield acra range they were suppose to be able to range the targets with the 18 inch stadium lines. A window in the scope gave the range then quickly adjust for the range.

How ever most just sighted the rifle in for 500 yards and held over/under.

Nothing new.

Take the BSZ of the M16a1. It was sighted in at 250 yards. Up to 300 yards the path of the bullet would never be over 4 inches low, or 4 inches high. At 400 yards it would drop 17-18 inches, meaning you could aim for the head and still get the a good body shot. This was about as far as you could use the BSZ effectively at 450 yard it drops about 28 inches which, depending of the size of the target my get you a low body shot, or might not.

At distance its hard to know how much to hold over if you aren't experience of judging target size in the air over the target.

Go back to the old WWII or earlier Field Manuals, they teach similar methods.

The problem lies in the fact that most soldier don't get the opportunity to shoot their rifles enough to learn what their bullet does at distance.

The real problem is not in hold overs vs. adjusting, its applying wind corrections. Taking the M16a1 used above, at 300 yards a 12 MPH wind will take your bullet completely off target.

Again the military doesn't give the soldier the opportunity to learn wind estimates and adjustments. Sure they will tell you about it, but hearing about wind and thousands of shots in the wind is different as night and day.

Now the topic was (I believe) about snipers), same thing, contrary to the info out there military snipers also don't get the rounds down range to properly learn what their rifle/ammo combination will do.

Target shooters do, to make my point.

The Weapons & Materials Research Directorate of the Army Research Laboratory published a white paper of these efforts called Sniper Weapon Fire Control Error Budget Analysis.

They took experienced military snipers and civilian target shooters to the range for comparison. The snipers could not preform as well as the civilian marksman. The reason is the civilians shoot more, therefore they know their equipment.

Also target shooters don't hold over/under, they adjust.

http://firearmusernetwork.com/2013/07/20/shooting-skill-snipers-vs-competition-shooters/

I've taught both military and police sniper schools. By far the best results were obtained by adjusting rather then holding over/under. If one is willing to put in the time and effort (which few are) then you could get by with the method the OP was discussing.

But again, by far, most errors are in judging and correcting for wind.
 
But again, by far, most errors are in judging and correcting for wind.
Click to expand...

Of course. Drop is a constant. For a given bullet, at a given speed, the drop is a constant, calcuable amount for any given range. (or near enough for any practical use.

Wind is the ultimate variable. Not only does it exist where you can see it, but it exists where you can't, and often at differing amounts and even directions between you and your target.
 
It works, but the properly calibrated BDC reticles work better. I have a custom reticle on my 300 win Mag tactical rifle that is hashed accurately out to 1k and has the wind drift lines for a 10 mph wind extending from the hashes. It works quickly and most importantly to me pretty brainlessly.:D
I think my favorite system is my custom turrets with 1 moa click adjustment. I can literally dial the scope to any distance I want, without looking at the turret, in the time it takes me to put my head down. I can then either dial or hold off on mil hashes for windage.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top