Difference Between Sniper and Sharpshooter...SPR

[Guy w/gun]

I was watching SPR the other day and I noticed that they used the term sniper. Is this historically correct? What is the difference between a sniper and sharpshooter in their combat roles?

[This message has been edited by Guy w/gun (edited 03-09-2001).]

[Michael Dorosh]

According to SPR, a "sniper" changes his scope on the fly, doesn't bother to rezero, and gets a 1 in a million shot through another sniper's scope at 2 - 300 yards immediately after.

Not sure what Spielberg's definition of a sharpshooter is.

[Forever Babra]

LOL. And ever tried to target a weaving, dodging target using telescopic sights? Not a good idea...

------------------

"Za Rodentia!"

[jasoncawley@ameritech.net]

"Sniper" is a term that is used both loosely and narrowly. Narrowly, a sniper is a rifleman with a scoped rifle, extra training, considerable patience, and often no parent unit or superiors to speak of.

Turned loose to "hunt" individually with as much stealth as possible and as little or as much risk to themselves as they cared to assume, they often scored their kills at long ranges. They were undeniably more effective, man for man, than ordinary infantry, but depended on the battle "context" those provided.

And they got this impact over long periods of time, not short intense combats. As in, wait a week, get a kill. A man who can do that consistently without high risk to himself, can account for many, many times his own number (um - 1) over the course of the whole war.

Broadly, troops on the receiving end called just about any rifle fire they received, "snipers" or "sniper fire", whenever it was not accompanied by MG fire. And sometimes even when it was. Very rarely were the men shooting at them, "snipers" in the true sense.

A sharpshooter is just any rifleman with above average aim, able to hit stationary, man targets at ~300 yards consistently. CM calls its one-man rifle units "sharpshooters", perhaps because it does not mean to model the stealth, independence, and accuracy of true snipers. Instead, they are more like individual good shots "told off" to work for the platoon as single aimed shooters.

If you want to represent a true sniper in CM, the best way to do it is probably to take a crack or elite sharpshooter, put him on "hide" somewhere well away from most of your forces, and randomly take him off of hide for a few turns out of the whole battle. As soon as he hits someone, hide again or bug out, leaving the map.

But most would consider this rather boring and not very helpful in the local fight. Its cumulative impact, and the near invunerability the tactic can confer on the shooter, and even the psych impact this can have on the enemy, are the militarily useful aspects of what these guys do.

[M. Bates]

Originally posted by jasoncawley@ameritech.net:

If you want to represent a true sniper in CM, the best way to do it is probably to take a crack or elite sharpshooter, put him on "hide" somewhere well away from most of your forces, and randomly take him off of hide for a few turns out of the whole battle. As soon as he hits someone, hide again or bug out, leaving the map.

But most would consider this rather boring and not very helpful in the local fight. Its cumulative impact, and the near invunerability the tactic can confer on the shooter, and even the psych impact this can have on the enemy, are the militarily useful aspects of what these guys do.

I am of the opinion that CM simulates sharpshooters very well. A well implemented unit I think.

But why bother with a special "hide" terrain feature. Foxholes in CM are fine substitutes. Then make the Sniper unit a 2 man team (one scoped rifle, the other SMG & field glasses) and you are ready to go. In fact, just buy two sharpshooters on the defence and the Allied player has his snipers.

[ParaBellum]

After recieving my basic training in the Bundeswehr here in Germany I was trained as a sharpshooter/sniper.

In my Jägerbattaillon (light infantry) there were 2 snipers/sharpshooters in every platoon.

We were trained more to a "sharpshooter" role, e.g. we would stay with our platoon most of the time and try to engage high priority targets (TCs, officers,...).

But we also got some training on how to work independently, as a two-men team.

During a training session at Hammelburg we met some US snipers, and those guys surely played in a different league...

They had (nearly) complete freedeom of what to do, no platoon to which they were assigned, just to "hunt" their opponents.

I think in WWII there were a lot of guys with a telescope on their rifle but that surely didn't make them snipers.

IMHO only the USSR used "snipers" in an important role during WWII.

I've never read accounts of US, british, french or russian troops on how they suffered heavy on enemy snipers, but I read a lot of german units suffering from losses due to russian snipers.

------------------

Klotzen, nicht kleckern!

[Forever Babra]

Originally posted by ParaBellum:

IMHO only the USSR used "snipers" in an important role during WWII.

No, I wouldn't agree with that, but they certainly got more press.

------------------

"Za Rodentia!"

[Guy w/gun]

Thanks all. Someone mentioned that the sniper/sharpshooter wasn't presented accuratly in SPR. I always thought that part about hitting moving targets was a little fishy, even when my friend told me about the scene before I actually saw it myself.

I always figured that Snipers went for mainly stationary targets, trying their best to hit very vital areas of the body for instant kills. Am I right on this?

[LongLeftFlank]

In the autobiography of Petro Grigorenko, the dissident Russian general, he speaks with a Red Army sniper in Hungary 44 who only shoots people in the legs because he doesn't like to kill... as I recall he had shot several hundred however.

Takes a pretty good eye to hit people in the legs.

As I noted in an earlier thread re incidents of lone BAR gunners holding off enemy attacks all night in the Bulge and Korea, the pinning effect of a single weapon in a commanding position can be quite powerful in tactical actions.

It can totally throw off a timetable. Especially when green troops are involved, or it's April 45 and you don't want to be the last guy in your outfit to "cop one".

[Freak]

Forever Babra:

I know this sounds odd coming at a time right before "Enemy at The Gates" is about to open but...from what I have read, and that is not very much, but in the battle for Stalingrad, snipers and sharpshooters played a big role in backing off the germans...now this sounds funny with the Enemy of the Gates coming out next week and its "sniper kept the germans from taking stalingrad" theme...but...Perhaps it is true that sniper / sharpshooter roles for the soviets played a bigger role then for other nations? Maybe becouse of Stalingrad being a place of war for so long and it being a place for snipers to excel and thrive (so many places to hide and take cover) that we hear of Soviet Snipers more so then other nations. Maybe the Nazis who were not fully prepared to take Stalingrad did not have as effective sniper use....

And as for the U.S., the sniper obviously had a different and perhaps lesser role breaking out of normandy and driving across europe. Of course perhaps in german cities the sniper role became more efective/common. But by then, the war was pretty much over. (probably a lesser role or lesser notification).

So in summation, perhaps the soviet sniper sharpshooter deserved more press, surely the battle of Stalingrad was one turning of the war. And the fact that the soviets were defending there country and there own city contributes to more press of the soviet sniper. But perhaps the soviet sniper role was more important.

[Freak]

Bumping for further discussion.

[Guy w/gun]

This a bumper!

[Fan]

A true sniper can take hours or even days to reach his/her firing position (n.b. Gunnery Sergeant Carlos Hathcock, USMC, spending a whole day crossing a single rice paddy in Vietnam). And they might have a mission-specific target (e.g. a local commander or political target). An effective and/or lucky sniper can have an extremely demoralizing effect on local morale. And snipers can often be found as a two-man team, with the shooter having the best gun and the spotter having a back-up scoped rifle.

Cpl. Jackson in SPR was more of a sharpshooter IMO, disregarding the "artistic license" granted his character in SPR. And while it would be difficult to hit a man double-timing it to cover, I would venture to say that it is not impossible, especially from a good ways above, where aspect ratio is not changing extremely dramatically.

[scooleen]

I beleive SPR was what is known as a "movie", if you were under the impression that it was a documentary about the harsh realities of ww2, well then I guess it sucked. IMHO it was a good movie, nothing more, or less...just entertainment.

[Warmaker]

Fan just to add to your last comment on hitting a moving target it is quite easy to ping a guy running full sprint, cover to cover. What does it take? A good angle for one such as being at an oblique angle. The guy can be as fast as the best olympic runner but the amount of time and deflection necessary to take a good shot/3rd burst on the schmuck is minimized compared to shooting from a straight angle of his running direction. Of course the ambush trick is nice if you've got a good feel of where the target is gonna enter/exit. Aim ahead of where you think he's gonna be and send him to whatever creator he believes in.

BTW, though SPR is a pretty good flick despite the inaccuracies I gotta add also that as cool as Jackson was he was just waay to accurate pumping out shots as fast as he was in the last fight. Tunnel syndrome with the scope let him catch that Self Propelled Gun much too late. Oh, was it me or did they show a Panzerschreck also with the German troops? Also, SPR made it seem QUITE OKAY to blast any surrendering POWs. Brutality begets brutality...

------------------

"Uncommon valor was a common virtue"-Adm.Chester Nimitz of the Marines on Iwo Jima

[This message has been edited by Warmaker (edited 03-11-2001).]

[M. Bates]

Originally posted by Warmaker:

Also, SPR made it seem QUITE OKAY to blast any surrendering POWs. Brutality begets brutality...

THEY WERE GODDAMN NAZIS

[Subvet]

This is in response to the SPR sharpshooter criticism. IIRC in the scene where he was shooting the running guys he didn't hit all of them. And yes, he was shooting fast, but lets not forget Lee Harvey Oswald. He fired off some awfully fast shots and was fairly accurate (unless your believe in the conspiracy theories of course). There is plenty of valid criticism on the SPR sharpshooter, but I'm not sure this is one.

As for accuracy, well, I've made some pretty incredible shots in my lifetime. Not that I'm that skilled, more just lucky shots. This includes some very lucky shots with paintball guns, which aren't that accurate to start with. One time I put a paintball into a crawfish hole on the other side of a pond for example. The hole was barely bigger than the painball itself. My friend's jaw dropped open on that one, heh heh.

------------------

Craiger

All your victory flag are belong to me

[Olle Petersson]

About shooting at running targets;

I saw some drama documentary about the life in Balcans during the recent fightings there.

Snipers were common. (Remember "Snipers Alley"?)

The civilians had to run from cover to cover, and they usually moved in groups.

When going between two covers, it was most risky to go as number three.

- The first runner drew the attention of the sniper.

- The second runner was used for target tracking practice (no shot fired).

- The third runner was the target...

Cheers

Olle

[The_Capt]

I am not sure of what the use in WWII was but in modern warfare sharpshooters are usually attached to a parent unit and have training in the use of the scoped rifle. The sharpshooter is , much as in SPR, the local commanders counter-sniper and harassing fire asset.

An inf Bn (Canadian one anyway) has a recce platoon in which the traditional "sniper" supports the Bn and Bde in Long Range Patrolling etc. These guys crawl around in "gilly" (sp?) suits, eat snakes and pick off en COs.

The SF sniper is one who operates well forward or even behind en lines and takes shots at Saddam.

As to sharpshooter/snipers shooting at moving targets, trust me it happens all the time. I was in the Balkans during the war and saw some amazing sniper work, often directed at me, I am sorry to say but I can remember the BG ambulance coming in with a very nice 12 inch grouping right in the centre of the red cross, luckly no one was in the back. The ambulance had been bombing down the highway at about 60kms/hr.

I was personal "led" like a duck in a jeep as another sniper tried to make another 12 inch grouping on me. So at least in that area moving targets were the norm.

I think that with experience sharpshooters or whatever learn to hit moving targets better and eventually it becomes normal practice.

[Michael Dorosh]

There were more snipers on the Russian Front simply because it was the largest theatre of operations involving the Germans.

The Russians had many snipers at Stalingrad because they were on the defensive.

Allied troops after D-Day in Normandy didn't use snipers often since they were on the offensive. In Canadian and Brit infantry battalions, snipers doubled as scouts, so they did do a lot of infantry work, just not a lot of hiding and shooting at "stationary targets."

I don't recall reading of many Commonwealth snipers with impressive kill totals, though they did operate in quiet areas like the Nijmegen salient and Arielli front.

[GriffinCheng+]

BTW, OT, how about that shooter (sorry gotta check up IMDB) in movie "Clear and Present Danger"? I suppose he is sorta mix of sharpshooter and sniper.

BTW, I saw some photos of British snipers in camo, and their camo are really good, You don't recognize there are people even the photo is taken less than 3 meters from them.

Griffin.

P.S. Very tired...must ssssleeppp...ZZZZZZ

------------------

"When you find your PBEM opportents too hard to beat, there is always the AI."

"Can't get enough Tank?"

Come to my Combat Missing Command Post (CMCP) at http://www.angelfire.com/games3/CMCP/

[Mlapanzer]

Just a little history for Y'all. The original Sharpshooters were Morgans rifles during the American revelutionary war. Sharpshooters and Snipers have been a part of the U.S. armed forces every since.

I think the sharpshooter units in CM are really used incorrectly. Most of the times I see people(including me )using them as scouts or screening forces not as true snipers.

There is a very good artical in the most recent American Rifleman about sniper rifles since WW2.

[Croda]

Originally posted by Mlapanzer:

...

I think the sharpshooter units in CM are really used incorrectly. Most of the times I see people(including me )using them as scouts or screening forces not as true snipers.

...

I agree with you here, but I think it's a matter of adaptation, rather than misunderstood role.

Regardless of design and historical basic, the Sharpshooters has two roles in CM at which it excels: Buttoning AFVs and avoiding being spotted.

Sharpshooters can kill TCs or at least get them to button. They can also, if hidden, have enemy units walk right over them (I've seen it) and not be detected. This makes them great scouts, sneaking and crawling forward, or perched upon a hill that covers the field.

Sharpshooters are not good at killing infantry, nor at keeping their heads down. As such, their good points make them worth their cost even if they are not employed in a historically accurate role.

[Ksak]

FM 71-1

The commander has several options in employing snipers to support a movement to contact. Sniper teams can move with the lead element. They can also be deployed 24 to 48 hours before the unit’s movement to perform these tasks:

Select positions.

Gather information about the enemy.

Dominate key terrain, preventing enemy surprise attacks.

-------------------

Granted that the Field Manual from which this excerpt was taken was published many years after WWII but neither people nor the basic elements of ground combat have really changed much since Atilla the Hun. The second task above "Gather information about the enemy" seems to draw the most criticism from the CM High Priests of History. The Field Manuals, and common sense, suggest that most players use sharpshooters in a correct historical manner.

[Joshik]

I'm not sure if I have the story straight, but I thought the term "sharpshooter" came about during the American Civil War. Weren't they a group of skilled marksmen who were outfitted with the Sharpe's Model rifle, thus becoming literally "sharpes-shooters"?

Or is that just a tall tale?

-Joshik