Slapdragon Posted June 25, 2001 Share Posted June 25, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Cooper: Carlos Hathcock was on a hill at Duc Pho when he made a 2500 yard kill.He shot a member of the viet cong with a 50 caliber machine gun. the heavy bullet allows for accuracy well beyond 2000 yards. And the cyclic rate is also slow enough for single shots to be fired. He pioneered the use of this weapon as a sniper platform.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> But did he regularly shoot at 2500 meters, or did he do it once. Honestly, I do not know anything about him, I am just wondering how often that feat was performed. If he did it a bunch with only a single shot, and the shots were confirmed, then I am absolutely floored. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooper Posted June 25, 2001 Share Posted June 25, 2001 he was only station at the hill for a little while. the used him as a blocking force for marine patrols. Most of his kills on this hill came at less than 1000 yards. he did make a few long range kills here 1500+. The lore with hathcock comes with his ability to hide and hunt viet cong patrols. Both him and his partner usually operated in the jungle and engaged patrols at less than 600 meters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slapdragon Posted June 25, 2001 Share Posted June 25, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Cooper: he was only station at the hill for a little while. the used him as a blocking force for marine patrols. Most of his kills on this hill came at less than 1000 yards. he did make a few long range kills here 1500+. The lore with hathcock comes with his ability to hide and hunt viet cong patrols. Both him and his partner usually operated in the jungle and engaged patrols at less than 600 meters.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> That sounds more reasonable. The reason I say is that a tac sniper told me that most snipers, even military, are taught NOT to shoot at extreme (1400+ meter) distances unless specifically tasked to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooper Posted June 25, 2001 Share Posted June 25, 2001 they relied on concelment to be able to get multipe shots before the enemy could determine their location. This is one point where cmbo falls short. Snipers should be able to get off 2-3 shots before the enemy locates their position. They way it is now, once your sniper shots he is open to attack from any enemy unit in los. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
offtaskagain Posted June 25, 2001 Share Posted June 25, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Slapdragon: If he did make a 2500 yard kill, it was a once in a lifetime shot, I doubt he shot regularly over 1000 meters unless he was in Vietnam with the Marines, who did have a long range sniping program. Even then, like I said, ranged topped out at 1400 meters for M2HB machineguns with scopes, and often needed several shots even with that. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Hathcock is pretty much the God of Marine sniping legend. He had a duel with a VC sniper in the Elephant Valley, somewhat like the one fought by Vasily Zaitsev and Erwin König. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gyrene Posted June 25, 2001 Author Share Posted June 25, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>If he did make a 2500 yard kill, it was a once in a lifetime shot, I doubt he shot regularly over 1000 meters unless he was in Vietnam with the Marines, who did have a long range sniping program. Even then, like I said, ranged topped out at 1400 meters for M2HB machineguns with scopes, and often needed several shots even with that. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Yes, like PW42 said, Gunny Hathcock was one of the top Snipers in the USMC in Vietnam and the originator of scope mounted M2's Ask your friend if he ever heard of Carlos Hathcock Gyrene Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lcm1947 Posted June 25, 2001 Share Posted June 25, 2001 OK here's something to think about. If you zero your rifle in at say 100 yards ( meaning it's dead on at that range ) then the bullet will drop 2.3 inches at 200 and 6.4 at 300 yards. Now that's the 30-06, 180 grain bullet. I would guess that that's the bullet grain that the army used back in WWII. Now, I don't have books anymore since I know longer reload or even target shoot but if I remember correctly or close ,it falls like a bitch after that. My point being anything over even 1000 yards would be a "Hail Mary" type shot. Not saying it hasn't been done before. I believe the longest target shoot is 1000 yards and those guys know that their shooting at 1000 yards so have thier weapon zeroed in at that range and still miss. Even the lightest breeze effects the bullet at that range so - yes it's a damn lucky shot and bet it's not done on even close to a regular basis. Now as far as sniper vs sharpshooter. All sharpshooter means is that the guy is good with a rifle. Everybody has to learn to shoot a rifle in the army. Some are better then others and they are called sharpshooters. Snipers on the other hand are Expect shots much, much better than sharpshooters. That's all those guys do is practice and they are very good. Good isn't a good enough word let's say extremely good. I qualified as an expert myself in the army and target shot a lot but wouldn't even come close to being able to shoot like what it takes to be a sniper. Lots of other things are also involved in being able to be a sniper but we won't go in to that here. Just believe not everybody even if they shot extremely great could have what it takes to be a sniper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gyrene Posted June 25, 2001 Author Share Posted June 25, 2001 ICM, USMC Snipers in Vietnam zeroed their rifles to 700 yards and had the ballistics tables for their rounds memorized for anything beyond that. Even today USMC M16's are zeroed to 300 yards, which is about the useful range of the thing in a real world setting. Gyrene Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slapdragon Posted June 25, 2001 Share Posted June 25, 2001 I zero my M1 to 100 meters using M1 ball (which is all it really likes. At 400 meters with a scope I can usually hit a piece of notebook paper from a rest (no way free standing). Marksmanship is tough stuff, and I think some of it is genetic. That is why I laugh at Hollywood. Whenever I see a person shooting 4-8 armed enemies with a pistol I think about the number of times I missed on the combat range a target 7 meters away that caught me off guard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
offtaskagain Posted June 25, 2001 Share Posted June 25, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Slapdragon: That is why I laugh at Hollywood. Whenever I see a person shooting 4-8 armed enemies with a pistol I think about the number of times I missed on the combat range a target 7 meters away that caught me off guard.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> This reminds me of an assignment in school about "The Patriot". One question was "what did you learn from the movie?" She really didn't get my answers- cannons in 1778 used explosive shells and that it was possible to shoot a charging cavalryman at 200 yards with a smoothbore flintlock pistol on the first shot. I saw a demo on the history channel where a guy with a full-size musket missed a plate at 50 yeards due to the unpredictable spin of the ball. [ 06-25-2001: Message edited by: panzerwerfer42 ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarmo Posted June 25, 2001 Share Posted June 25, 2001 Actually Simo Häyhä would probably be "just" a sharpshooter. "Elite" one, I'm sure. He never got any training for the job and always shot over iron sights with a regular rifle. At some point he tried a proper sniper rifle captured from a soviet sniper, but didn't feel comfortable using it and reverted back. Whatever gets the job done, I suppose. BTW, his sniping career ended with an explosive bullet in the head. As a proper überfinn, he pulled through and was still alive and kicking at least a few years ago... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Crowley Posted June 25, 2001 Share Posted June 25, 2001 Try a book called "With British Snipers to The Reich" by Captain C. Shore. Originally written in 1948, it is reprinted by Greenhill Books. Shore fought on D-day, in normandy and northern Europe and became a sniping instructor in The British Army on the Rhine Training Centre. His book examines all aspects of sniping in detail and covers all the main combatants. It explodes a lot of myths, especially around the Russian snipers. Does rate the Finns very highly. Lots of detail on technique, weapons etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tero Posted June 25, 2001 Share Posted June 25, 2001 >How the hell do you survive a frontal shot >between the eyes without being >ubertruppen? With luck. I think it is even modelled in CM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tero Posted June 25, 2001 Share Posted June 25, 2001 >I think the basis for those arguments were >on totally different perspectives. >If someone's former knowledge of the >Russo-Finnish wars are mainly based on >Soviet and other NON-Finnish sources, then >of course, the information from Finnish POV >may sound like übertruppen propaganda. BE WARE OF Glantz. I purchased the book When Titans Clashed the other day and according to it Mannerheim was a hero of the Russian Civil War. WTF !!! Who does proof reading for him ??? :mad: Also the rest of the data on the Finnish front seems a bit iffy and is almost totally based on Soviet -60's era sources (the only Finnish source is Enge/Paananen's Winter War, a perfect choice I'm sure... NOT). Among the jewels is the statement that the Finns "neglected" to attack Leningrad. The summer of 1944 assault went (for intents and purposes) "Stalin decided by mid 1944 to bring the matter to an end. The assault started June 10th and bada bing, bada bum, the Finns surrendered in September". The fact that they massed 10 000 guns and mortars is mentioned but the line from A to B is very straightforward. I better stop now before I burst a vein... :mad: >Still that in itself doesn't necessarily >make it false. The Germans poisoned the well with their sour grapes and now that the data is becomming available on the net it is hard to weed out the misconceptions and lies that have been spread over the years. Our army stopped and survived the 1944 style Red Army assault but the Germans say that the Finnish defences failed because they were not built according to the German instructions. The attack did breach the initial defensive positions but the rate of advance of the Red Army was far below the average in the Isthmus than it was against the Germans. And the attack got stopped, they did not cease attacking on their own. >And then again, sometimes Tero seems to be >throwing "hot potatoes" on the forum I do try to make sure the potatoes are edible as I may have to take a bite at them myself. Many of them have been deflected but very few have been squashed as false. [ 06-25-2001: Message edited by: tero ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lars Posted June 25, 2001 Share Posted June 25, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by lcm1947: OK here's something to think about. If you zero your rifle in at say 100 yards ( meaning it's dead on at that range ) then the bullet will drop 2.3 inches at 200 and 6.4 at 300 yards. Now that's the 30-06, 180 grain bullet.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Standard hunting sight-in for a .30-06 with 180 grain is for a point blank of 293 yards. 0 in. at 21yds. +4 in. at 140 yds. 0 in. at 250 yds. (what you zero the sight for) -4 in. at 286 yds. -20.8 in. at 400 yds. -47 in. at 500 yds. This allows for hitting a 8 in. Vital Zone with no sighting adjustment. 10 mph wind drift numbers are 0.9 in. at 100 yds. 3.7 in. at 200 yds. 8.8 in. at 300 yds. 16.5 in. at 400 yds. 27 in. at 500 yds. Anything beyond 300 yds. I just go get the .225 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PzKpfw 1 Posted June 25, 2001 Share Posted June 25, 2001 If ppl have problems with WTC's depiction of Finlands defeat, then why not contact Glantz etc & take it up with him?. As to Finlands action's in 1944 it all boils down to, who you choose to believe, Ie, the Soviet's claim very little trouble with the operation, & were even able to pull out their offensive forces, ahead of the timetable. The Finns according to Tero in his typical every Finn is uber fashion claim to have stopped them cold. Who to believe . Regards, John Waters [ 06-25-2001: Message edited by: PzKpfw 1 ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted June 25, 2001 Share Posted June 25, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PzKpfw 1: Who to believe .<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Glantz... tero. Glantz... tero. That's a toughie. I'll have to think about this for a while when I get home Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mannheim Tanker Posted June 25, 2001 Share Posted June 25, 2001 Never mind! Found my answer up a above [ 06-25-2001: Message edited by: Mannheim Tanker ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jshandorf Posted June 25, 2001 Share Posted June 25, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Slapdragon: I can't hit dick at over 400 meters even with a scope. (Maybe, if I put it on sand bags, had match ammo, and something better than my old dog leg 4x I could. Not otherwise). <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Well then, if superfly, I'm always right, god-sniper, I sleep with my Garand and speak softly to it, Slapdragon "can't hit dick" beyond 400 meters, then I geuss that is about the range all snipers from the dawn of time until super mutant, robotic, advanced humans pick up a sniper rifles some far time off in the 24th century, and maybe.. just maybe, shoot beyond 400-800 meter range. And you better believe it... Jeff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slapdragon Posted June 25, 2001 Share Posted June 25, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by jshandorf: Well then, if superfly, I'm always right, god-sniper, I sleep with my Garand and speak softly to it, Slapdragon "can't hit dick" beyond 400 meters, then I geuss that is about the range all snipers from the dawn of time until super mutant, robotic, advanced humans pick up a sniper rifles some far time off in the 24th century, and maybe.. just maybe, shoot beyond 400-800 meter range. And you better believe it... Jeff<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Flame away Mr. Shandorf, just make you look like an unintelligent maggot who formed all of his intellectual opinions from the movie "Force Ten From Navarone." For those of you that read for content (most everyone else) my point was that sniping was much tougher than people think from watching movies. Someone may get a fluke hit at 2500 meters, but engagement is much lower. And Mister Shandorf, when you can hit a piece of notebook paper on a certified range at 2500 meters, please share your amazing and stellar feat with the rest of the list. I know I cannot do it. PS- Grow up and save the flames for an important subject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tero Posted June 25, 2001 Share Posted June 25, 2001 >Glantz... tero. Glantz... tero. > >That's a toughie. I'll have to think about >this for a while when I get home Do not take my word for it. Look the stuff I claim up for yourselves. Glantz uses Soviet sources, I use Finnish sources. Glantz is giving a myopic view of the events. So am I. The only difference is his view is in sync with the established version the Western historians have cited since the end of the war. And that established version has little to do with the actual events. Most of the data I use is readily available on the net in English, his is not. I have said it before it is not canonized. Yet. I am also under the impression neither is Glantz's. Yet. [ 06-25-2001: Message edited by: tero ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slapdragon Posted June 25, 2001 Share Posted June 25, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by tero: >Glantz... tero. Glantz... tero. > >That's a toughie. I'll have to think about >this for a while when I get home Do not take my word for it. Look the stuff I claim up for yourselves. Glantz uses Soviet sources, I use Finnish sources. Glantz is giving a myopic view of the events. So am I. The only difference is his view is in sync with the established version the Western historians have cited since the end of the war. And that established version has little to do with the actual events. Most of the data I use is readily available on the net in English, his is not. I have said it before it is not canonized. Yet. I am also under the impression neither is Glantz's. Yet. [ 06-25-2001: Message edited by: tero ]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Saint Tero...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarmo Posted June 25, 2001 Share Posted June 25, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PzKpfw 1: Soviet's claim very little trouble with the operation, .. The Finns according to Tero in his typical every Finn is uber fashion claim to have stopped them cold. Who to believe . <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Hey! The finns DID stop that attack. So now it's two against one. Tough luck for the Glantz fella. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gyrene Posted June 25, 2001 Author Share Posted June 25, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Someone may get a fluke hit at 2500 meters, but engagement is much lower. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Why does the statement that Hathcock hit a VC at 2500 yards with a scope mounted M2 cause so much consternation? I'll attempt to add some more info to clarify this matter: About the shooter: -Carlos Hathcock was a Wimbledon Cup winner, the premiere 1000 yard match, he was a comptetition shooter for at least 10 years before he even got his first kill (400 yards with an M14) in Vietnam -He had 93 confirmed and 300 unconfirmed kills, most beyond 700 yards. About the shot: -He had devised a scope mount for his Unertl 10x scope to fit on a M2HB (Which has long been used for single shots, it even has a single shot mode), and he had sighted the gun in a spot very close to where the VC showed up. -He took the shot, he hit. Witnessed by the officers and men of an entire firebase. The guy ate and drank long range shooting, that shot was not a fluke had he had the need to do it again he could. He gained (unwanted) fame during the late 70's where being a military hero in the US was more difficult than being a sports hero, most of the media was against anything military and ready to expose frauds and debunk heroes. His story has stood the test of time and probably the most intense scrutiny of any sniper in the 20th Century. He was not a product of a propaganda machine, there were no heralded snipers in Vietnam like Vasili Zaitsev or Simo Häyhä, if anything these guys were kept unknown on purpose: Chuck Mahinney, the leading USMC Sniper of the Vietnam War (103 kills) was virtually unknown until a couple of years ago. If a German, Russian or Finnish Sniper had made that shot it would be the talk of the town and not the object of so much doubt. Gyrene Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slapdragon Posted June 25, 2001 Share Posted June 25, 2001 Because it makes a big difference if it is a fluke -- one time only, or if he regularlly engaged in shoots at that range and made many hits both for my own understanding of bullet ballistics and for the game discussions. Here is why. If the thread gets the idea that 2500 meters is long range for sniping instead of out of the ball park once in the lifetime range, then we are looking forward to a hundred threads that propose to make this or that nationality, or all sharpshooters (and snipers) more powerful, able to shoot at much longer ranges, less likely to miss, etc. People already tend to take the extremes in things like tank kills, tank speed, personal bravery of men, and hold them up as norms. Then when CM, which is based on norms and not extremes is played, they are dismayed when a Sherman kills a Tiger, their paratroopers retreat in confusion, and their Firefly bounces one off a Pz IV. So when people hold up an extreme that is 5 standard deviations from the norm out, it is important to disabuse people who will take this fact uncritically. This is especially important since there would be a dozen threads following this one complaining about snipers and calling BTS a bunch of satan worshipers and calling for the massive increase in a sharpshooters' ability because "I read snipers kill people at 2500 meters." Better to present the facts out right now rather than let it simmer. Again, a repeat: Snipers do not regularly shoot over a 1000 meters, and far less was the norm in World War Two. Sharpshooters are even more limited. Unlike arguments on tank sights, this can be tested. Borrow a rifle, get a scope, and try to shoot a peice of paper at a thousand meters with service ammunition. When you do, you will see how tough the problem is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts