GTA
All Springer/NP/PCP Air Gun Discussion General => Back Room => Topic started by: rsterne on June 22, 2017, 11:23:09 PM
-
An unnamed Canadian has recently made the longest confirmed kill by a Sniper in history in May of this year, at a distance of 3,450 metres (3,773 yards, or 2.14 miles).... Here is an article about this amazing feat.... https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/06/22/canadian_sniper_3450m_shot_iraq/ (https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/06/22/canadian_sniper_3450m_shot_iraq/)
Two Canadians held the record consecutively from 2002-2009, when it was broken by a Brit, at 2,475 metres.... This new record eclipses the previous one by over 1,000 yards.... Here is the list of record holders from Wiki.... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longest_recorded_sniper_kills (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longest_recorded_sniper_kills)
Bob
-
Wow! That is an impressive shot at an unbelievable distance. So many variables in play at that kind of distance.
-
With all those variables, I wonder if he used some sort of shot computer. It would be interesting to know what tools he uses.
-
So, 1 MOA is roughly 38"? :o
This was apparently 1 MOT - minute of terrorist! ;D
-
Can't get my brain wrapped around it. Dozens of feet of holdover, not to mention windage............... :o
-
I cannot imagine the skill required for that shot. My best doesn't even play in the same league. That is some incredible skill and teamwork for that shot to happen
-
I hope he makes a "how I did it" video. I think the skill and equipment necessary would put it out of reach of common folk.
-
I read about this and was just shocked at how crazy it was! I mean a 2 mile shot? That's crazy he was able to see him enough to even shoot that. And I read that it was 10 seconds from firing to hitting the terrorist...that's unreal!!!
-
Props go to him for sure, but the real hero is the spotter. He's the one giving the guy behind the trigger the go-ahead on when to make the shot. And the one doing all the doping calculations, including coriolis and wind across that crazy expanse. That's why they work in teams- and they are both heroes in my book.
And of course, is was a TAC-50. Not really a surprise there. 750 grains of streamlined death on the wing.
-
Apparently a drone grabbed the footage of it going down...
Also, they'd practiced specifically for these types of engagements before heading on their trip. As many of you know, once you figure out what to do and how to do something correctly, doing it again isn't so much a tough thing. That and ballistic calculators and known distances help :)
A mostly windless low mirage day with the added in scope mounting adjustments to make up for the fact there isn't enough dial ability in the scope and a lot of practice goes a long way for stuff like this. A little luck helps too.
The video will hit the internet eventually... mostly you'll just see impact, it will be less than spectacular.
-
Amazing shot.
-
2 miles....meh......it wasn't like it was an off-hand shot ;D
-
Who needs those Inter Continental Ballistic Missiles, eh?
-
Amazing feat. 10 seconds would be enough time to have a couple on the way before anyone would realize that there was incoming fire.
-
Amazing feat. 10 seconds would be enough time to have a couple on the way before anyone would realize that there was incoming fire.
Would probably just have enough time to squeeze in a shower and a shave as well ;D
-
10 seconds is also plenty of time for the target move completely out of danger without even knowing he was in danger. It's quite possible that he was on the GTA reading one of Bob's posts at the time. I know they make me immobile for a minimum of 10 seconds.
-
With a 10 second flight time, I bet even the earth's rotation has to be taken into account.
-
Bob, we know it was you. Who else could figure out the variables to make such a shot?
My head is spinning just trying to imagine how many spotters and wind calculations would be necessary to kill that far away..
-
With a 10 second flight time, I bet even the earth's rotation has to be taken into account.
They did mention the curvature of the earth.
-
With a 10 second flight time, I bet even the earth's rotation has to be taken into account.
They did mention the curvature of the earth.
Coriolis effect has to be accounted for on shots 1200 yards and greater going by what my uncle once said. He used to train marines at Quantico, and though he's a bit off, he's a reallllllly good shot.
You have to know your approximate latitude as the entire earth spins as the same speed, but the perceived rate of spin changes the further you get from the equator, so you aim for where the object will be after figuring out flight time.
This article delves into it pretty well >>> LINKY (https://thearmsguide.com/5329/external-ballistics-the-coriolis-effect-6-theory-section)
Number, numbers.... Math, math, math.
-
Now that's really "Reaching out & touching someone!" 8)
-
So in all actuality... it was probably a lucky shot.
-
So in all actuality... it was probably a lucky shot.
Sniper probably closed his eyes when he pulled the trigger.......hail Mary!
-
Ok, so what would be the GTA, pellet pusher equivalent be?
Not only distance, but caliber, pellet/slug/boolit?
Be interesting to scale that to air.
-
So in all actuality... it was probably a lucky shot.
Sniper probably closed his eyes when he pulled the trigger.......hail Mary!
Point, yeah, that looks about right..... there...... shoot........ do you think maybe a bet for who's buying the Beer was involved......?
-
So in all actuality... it was probably a lucky shot.
Sniper probably closed his eyes when he pulled the trigger.......hail Mary!
Point, yeah, that looks about right..... there...... shoot........ do you think maybe a bet for who's buying the Beer was involved......?
I say beer was already involved and then came the bet to hit a 2 mile target.................completely unauthorized mission
-
How would you even know that?
-
I'd say they practice this type of shot and given how well trained these gentlemen are, it was a matter of using applied mathematics to deliver the projectile on-target.
Perhaps they had a beer later, but in a combat zone, hard to say.
-
Yes they send many practice shots down range and with enough practice all the science and math becomes almost second nature. Then you add the human factor of the well trained shooter which I call the magic factor.
-
Just glad they are on our side shooting at the bad guys and not the other way around.
-
So maybe this should be in the "hunting" gate ha ha.
-
I wouldn't be surprised if more than one shot was fired and it was walked in. That far away, the target probably didn't know that the gunfire was intended for him initially.
Just a guess.
-
I wouldn't be surprised if more than one shot was fired and it was walked in. That far away, the target probably didn't know that the gunfire was intended for him initially.
Just a guess.
Not likely. The TAC-50 is designed for very long range shots, and the Canadians have held the record 3 times for longest kill in the last 2 decades. They practice incessantly, just like US troops do, and taking multiple shots is a no-no as a sniper because it goes against the principle of the job: surgical precision at range. Gotta think about the fact snipers do NOT like giving up their position. In wide-open areas that offer few hides, multiple shots let opposiing forces triangulate.
-
I saw a documentary on the Canadian sniper who held the previous record. He did walk in the shot of the intended target. If I remember correctly, seems it told the shooter 3-4 missed shots before actually making the kill shot.
At 2 miles, there are a lot of cross winds & other factors already mentioned to contend with. I'm glad these snipers are on our side! ;D
-
Just want to follow.
-
Ok, so what would be the GTA, pellet pusher equivalent be?
Not only distance, but caliber, pellet/slug/boolit?
Be interesting to scale that to air.
I don't have the scale for the ballistic equivalent for an air rifle; ie., HW30s with a wadcutter or Air Force Talon in .22 caliber compared to a .50 caliber rifle.
However, I made up a spreadsheet of reduced targets and the equivalent ranges. By my calculations a shot at a 2 inch plastic soldier at 100 meters (109.36 yards) would simulate a shot at 3,450 meters.
Like I said; I don't know what air rifle & pellet combination would simulate the same trajectory on a reduced scale. Nevertheless, here are some figures of what the reduced and simulated ranges would be when shooting at a 2 inch plastic soldier:
Actual Yards: Simulated distance in yards and miles:
5 173 or 0.10 miles
10 345 or 0.20 miles
15 518 or 0.29 miles
20 690 or 0.39 miles
25 863 or 0.49 miles
30 1035 or 0.59 miles
35 1208 or 0.69 miles
40 1380 or 0.78 miles
45 1553 or 0.88 miles
50 1725 or 0.98 miles
55 1898 or 1.08 miles
60 2070 or 1.18 miles
65 2243 or 1.27 miles
70 2415 or 1.37 miles
75 2588 or 1.47 miles
80 2760 or 1.57 miles
85 2933 or 1.67 miles
90 3105 or 1.76 miles
95 3278 or 1.86 miles
100 3450 or 1.96 miles
110 3795 or 2.16 miles
If I remember correctly, the .50 caliber projectile took ten seconds to reach the target. So whatever air rifle equivalent a person wanted to choose, the pellet would have to take ten seconds to travel 100 meters to reach a 2 inch tall plastic soldier.
I don't have any PCPs anymore but the rifles with the slowest pellets that I have are a Beeman R7, HW30s and FWB 300s.
The Beeman R7 is shooting a H&N Match Rifle 8.27 Grain pellet at 624 FPS. So it takes .706 seconds to reach at target at 100 yards. I don't have any figures for the HW30s.
The FWB 300s is shooting a JSB Match Diabolo pellet of 8.27 grains at 566 FPS. So it takes the pellet .714 seconds to travel 100 yards to the target.
Using rough math I would guess that I would have to de-tune these rifles to shoot about 14 times slower to get them to shoot a projectile that would take ten seconds to reach the target. That would be about 40-45 FPS at the muzzle.
I tried using JBM Ballistics Calculator to determine a distance the FWB 300s would shoot at in which it would take 10 seconds for the pellet to reach the target. Unfortunately, the application would only calculate a shooting distance of 330 yards. It would take a little over 6 seconds for the pellet from the FWB 300s to reach a target 330 yards away.
Again, using rough math, I would have to shoot the FWB 300s at a target 500 yards away to duplicate the 10 second travel time. That means that a reduced target at 500 yards would have to be about 9-10 inches tall to simulate a man sized target at 3,450 meters.
If a group of air rifle enthusiasts wanted to put the mini-sniping game on steroids they could still do no better than to compete with plastic soldiers at 100 meters using 10 meter target rifles. Or they could shoot at 10 inch targets at 500 yards with 10 meter target rifles. 8)
-
Very impressive shot, obviously tango never saw it coming, 10 second is a long time to be silhouetted in a position were someone 2 miles away can put you to sleep.
Maybe they (sniper/spotter) caught him in prayer and timed his shot perfectly.
Whatever the particulars the end result one less posmf' great job!
-
Very impressive shot, obviously tango never saw it coming, 10 second is a long time to be silhouetted in a position were someone 2 miles away can put you to sleep.
Maybe they (sniper/spotter) caught him in prayer and timed his shot perfectly.
Whatever the particulars the end result one less posmf' great job!
You would also not be wanting to use an open air latrine in that environment either. Here is an account of Carlos Hatchcock taking down a Vietnamese sadist:
"I really didn't like the killing," he once told a reporter. "You'd have to be crazy to enjoy running around the woods, killing people. But if I didn't get the enemy, they were going to kill the kids over there." Saving American lives is something Hathcock took to heart.
"She was a bad woman," Carlos Hathcock once said of the woman known as "Apache." "Normally kill squads would just kill a Marine and take his shoes or whatever, but the Apache was very sadistic. She would do anything to cause pain."
This was the trademark of the female Viet Cong platoon leader. She captured Americans in the area around Hathcock's unit and tortured them without mercy.
"I was in her backyard; she was in mine. I didn't like that," Hathcock said. "It was personal, very personal. She'd been torturing Marines before I got there."
In November 1966, she captured a Marine private and tortured him within earshot of his own unit.
"She tortured him all afternoon, half the next day," Hathcock recalls. "I was by the wire … He walked out, died right by the wire. Apache skinned the private, cut off his eyelids, removed his fingernails, and then castrated him before letting him go. Hathcock attempted to save him, but he was too late.
Hathcock had enough. He set out to kill Apache before she could kill any more Marines. One day, he and his spotter got a chance.
They observed an NVA sniper platoon on the move. At 700 yards in, one of them stepped off the trail, and Hathcock took what he calls the best shot he ever made.
"We were in the midst of switching rifles. We saw them," he remembered. "I saw a group coming, five of them. I saw her squat to pee; that's how I knew it was her. They tried to get her to stop, but she didn't stop. I stopped her. I put one extra in her for good measure."
Full story at: http://www.businessinsider.com/blake-stilwell-the-american-sniper-of-the-vietnam-war-2015-1 (http://www.businessinsider.com/blake-stilwell-the-american-sniper-of-the-vietnam-war-2015-1)
-
10 second is a long time to be silhouetted in a position
Picked a lousy time to do the manikin challenge ;D
-
I saw a documentary on the Canadian sniper who held the previous record. He did walk in the shot of the intended target. If I remember correctly, seems it told the shooter 3-4 missed shots before actually making the kill shot.
At 2 miles, there are a lot of cross winds & other factors already mentioned to contend with. I'm glad these snipers are on our side! ;D
Yep,
That far away with terrain/echo etc, I think it is not uncommon for a target to know the rounds were intended for them.
-
Shooting at a target at that range?
He was not a forward placed Sniper. Probably 300 meters or more behind the front line and well placed to support the troops on the ground.
No forward Sniper out there on his own with his spotter would even attempt that kind of shot!
-
A good rule of thumb to compare a good PCP shooting pellets with a PB is to scale down the range, and the target size, by a factor of six.... A similar shot with a PCP might be a 1 foot tall silhouette of a man at just over 630 yards.... Even that may be underestimating the equivalent range, because the time of flight is only about 7 seconds.... I think the most appropriate comparison between airguns and PBs is when the drop and drift are similar, regardless of the flight time.... After all, those two factors combined dictate the basic difficulty of the shot, not how long it takes to get there....
Bob
-
Ok, so what would be the GTA, pellet pusher equivalent be?
Not only distance, but caliber, pellet/slug/boolit?
Be interesting to scale that to air.
I don't have the scale for the ballistic equivalent for an air rifle; ie., HW30s with a wadcutter or Air Force Talon in .22 caliber compared to a .50 caliber rifle.
However, I made up a spreadsheet of reduced targets and the equivalent ranges. By my calculations a shot at a 2 inch plastic soldier at 100 meters (109.36 yards) would simulate a shot at 3,450 meters.
Like I said; I don't know what air rifle & pellet combination would simulate the same trajectory on a reduced scale. Nevertheless, here are some figures of what the reduced and simulated ranges would be when shooting at a 2 inch plastic soldier:
Actual Yards: Simulated distance in yards and miles:
5 173 or 0.10 miles
10 345 or 0.20 miles
15 518 or 0.29 miles
20 690 or 0.39 miles
25 863 or 0.49 miles
30 1035 or 0.59 miles
35 1208 or 0.69 miles
40 1380 or 0.78 miles
45 1553 or 0.88 miles
50 1725 or 0.98 miles
55 1898 or 1.08 miles
60 2070 or 1.18 miles
65 2243 or 1.27 miles
70 2415 or 1.37 miles
75 2588 or 1.47 miles
80 2760 or 1.57 miles
85 2933 or 1.67 miles
90 3105 or 1.76 miles
95 3278 or 1.86 miles
100 3450 or 1.96 miles
110 3795 or 2.16 miles
If I remember correctly, the .50 caliber projectile took ten seconds to reach the target. So whatever air rifle equivalent a person wanted to choose, the pellet would have to take ten seconds to travel 100 meters to reach a 2 inch tall plastic soldier.
I don't have any PCPs anymore but the rifles with the slowest pellets that I have are a Beeman R7, HW30s and FWB 300s.
The Beeman R7 is shooting a H&N Match Rifle 8.27 Grain pellet at 624 FPS. So it takes .706 seconds to reach at target at 100 yards. I don't have any figures for the HW30s.
The FWB 300s is shooting a JSB Match Diabolo pellet of 8.27 grains at 566 FPS. So it takes the pellet .714 seconds to travel 100 yards to the target.
Using rough math I would guess that I would have to de-tune these rifles to shoot about 14 times slower to get them to shoot a projectile that would take ten seconds to reach the target. That would be about 40-45 FPS at the muzzle.
I tried using JBM Ballistics Calculator to determine a distance the FWB 300s would shoot at in which it would take 10 seconds for the pellet to reach the target. Unfortunately, the application would only calculate a shooting distance of 330 yards. It would take a little over 6 seconds for the pellet from the FWB 300s to reach a target 330 yards away.
Again, using rough math, I would have to shoot the FWB 300s at a target 500 yards away to duplicate the 10 second travel time. That means that a reduced target at 500 yards would have to be about 9-10 inches tall to simulate a man sized target at 3,450 meters.
If a group of air rifle enthusiasts wanted to put the mini-sniping game on steroids they could still do no better than to compete with plastic soldiers at 100 meters using 10 meter target rifles. Or they could shoot at 10 inch targets at 500 yards with 10 meter target rifles. 8)
Now to get some army men and put them in front of my target box...
-
he definitely shot air rifles when he was a kid.. with the slow fps canadian spec he learned holdover well ;D
-
Further to my comparison with an airgun.... Using a .50 cal Barnes TAC-LR Boattail at 3000 fps, with a BC (G1) of 1.070.... at 3800 yds. in a 5 mph crosswind we get the following....
Drop (in.) = 8182
Drop (MOA) = 205.6
Drift (in.) = 354.7
Drift (MOA) = 8.9
For a .25 cal PCP, shooting a 25.4 gr. JSB King at 950 fps, with a BC (GA) of 0.036.... also in a 5 mph crosswind we get the same values at the following ranges....
Drop (in.) of 8182 not possible (past max. range = 703 yd)
Drop (MOA) of 205.8 at 407 yds.
Drift (in) of 355.7 at 611 yds.
Drift (MOA) of 8.9 at 162 yds.
If we scale the target down to the same MOA sizes as the range, then it begins to make some sense.... The drop in MOA would be the same for the airgun at 407 yards as the sniper shot at 3800 yds.... a ratio of about 9.3:1.... Therefore, relative to a 6 foot tall target at 3800 yds., the equivalent target for the airgun would be 7.75" tall at 407 yds.... However, due to the poor BC of an airgun pellet, the same holdoff in a 5 mph wind would occur at only 162 yards instead of 407 yds.... If we increase the BC (G1) of the airgun pellet to 0.176 (~5 times better), then the drift and drop pretty much coincide....
Drop (MOA) of 205.5 at 776 yds.
Drift (MOA) of 8.9 at 777 yds.
That represents a scaling factor of 4.9 for both, so the equivalent to a 6 foot target would be 14.7" tall at that range.... It would be difficult, but not impossible, to get a .25 cal PCP to shoot a bullet with a BC of 0.176 at 950 fps.... but if you did, the equivalent to that sniper shot would be to hit a 14.7" tall silhouette of a man at 777 yds....
That gives some feel for how difficult that shot was....
Bob
-
isnt that close to the longest possible distance the .25 pellet will travel (on level ground)? We might need to put our soldier down a hill!
-
I'm just thinking it's a tough shot.
Harder than shooting a BB from my Daisy 25 through a straw at 50 yards. And no, I haven't done that.
-
Even though this is an old thread, I thought I'd resurrect it with some new information.
It's my guess that the sniper might have used the .50 caliber Exacto round.
Here's an article on the round:
http://www.chinatopix.com/articles/110470/20170118/darpa-exacto-guided-bullet-lot-smarter.htm (http://www.chinatopix.com/articles/110470/20170118/darpa-exacto-guided-bullet-lot-smarter.htm)
Here are some videos on it's performance:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XW2DwQun95s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XW2DwQun95s)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0IJTfcuMX50 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0IJTfcuMX50)
-
How about just good old sniper skills?
-
Guys,
I would just about bet, that team had a FO, to spot the POI,
and relayed that info back to the shooter, for the corrections needed etc.
That is mighty fine shooting regardless, you would feel the impact before the report.
Tia,
Don
-
I wasn't trying to take away anything from the sniper. I was just pointing out that the EXACTO round might have been a possibility.
An FO could have also been using a laser designator to identify the target as well. And yes, he wouldn't be a sniper unless he possessed good old sniper skills.
I don't know if the EXACTO round is in use in the field at this time. Until its worth is proven I doubt the military (US and Canadian) would want to let it be known that they were beta testing the round in combat.
It's also a good idea to keep the enemy from knowing that we would be using a smart munition like the EXACTO because they would try to figure out a way to keep from being targeted; like staying out of sight more often.
-
Did anyone notice that most of the electronics in the cutaway of the round are inside the cartridge case, with no chance of making it down the barrel?.... I'm not saying the technology doesn't exist, but certainly not in the form presented in that video....
Bob
-
Did anyone notice that most of the electronics in the cutaway of the round are inside the cartridge case, with no chance of making it down the barrel?.... I'm not saying the technology doesn't exist, but certainly not in the form presented in that video....
Bob
I noticed that but figured that it was some artist conception from someone who didn't know anything about firearms. He or she probably thought it would look cool and drew it that way.
On the other hand, I don't think we really know what the round looks like. Keep in mind that the bullet has to be told what laser encoding to use to lock on to the correct laser signal. If the circuitry does, indeed, occupy a lot of the space inside the cartridge then destroyed upon detonation the projectile is the only part of the weapon system that needs to "remember" the encoding.
The article and videos never said how much range the EXACTO round has. If the depiction is correct and most of the circuitry is inside the cartridge case then, the range can't be that much compared to a conventional .50 round. That would also blow my theory about the Canadian sniper using the EXACTO to kill his target.
Here is another illustration of the EXACTO round from this article: https://www.geek.com/news/watch-darpas-self-guided-bullets-hunt-down-a-moving-target-1621546/ (https://www.geek.com/news/watch-darpas-self-guided-bullets-hunt-down-a-moving-target-1621546/)
(https://www.geek.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/arpa-exacto-bullets-625x350.jpg)
Note that the illustration below shows the projectile at a length of 4 inches as opposed to 2.31 inches for the M2 ball round.
(https://i2.wp.com/www.yaabot.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Yaabot_Exacto_2.jpg?w=890&ssl=1)
I would imagine that this round is a tightly controlled item. If it fell into the wrong hands someone could do some reverse-engineering and design a smart bullet of their own.
I have mixed emotions if they ever develop an airgun pellet that will this. That's why I had so much fun and got so bored at the same time when I put a scope on my FWB 300s. I could hit everything that I was aiming at about 99.99% of the time. The scope had to come off so I could enjoy the challenge of iron sights again.