M107 Barrett .50 cal Rifle

[cassh]

Will U.S. sniper teams get to use the M107 as standard or will a 7.62 weapon be the norm - and how detailed are buildings for ballistics modelling? i.e. will a round's penetration be calculated on varying materials used on load-bearing and interior walls?

It is just the M107 has so much utility in a MOUT engagement I'd hate to see its performance an capability underplayed because of some abstraction in building modelling. Any info on building modelling would be greatly appreciated.

[hellfish]

I think they said you'd have a choice of the .50 or the 7.62 for your sniper teams.

[Sixxkiller]

I am trying to figure out in my head how a weapons system such as the M107 is going to play out at the range limitations of the graphics engine in CMSF. 2000 meters is quite a distance for the computer to render I am guessing. I know really nothing of the engine so this will be very cool. I had better get a great graphics card!!!!

[cassh]

fytinghellfish - cool - I guess they use the stryker as their armoury?

That begs another question - if a wagon goes up in flames can a squad/team draw weapons from other vehicles in their platoon or company - or are they stuffed?

Secondly could this mean the Syrians will want to try and get as many hard kills of strykers early doors from a tactical perspective to deny the US troops access to their gucci weapons and ammo resupply as the fight goes on? Will extra VP be available for early vehicle kills in an engagement - as obviously the earlier in the fight the vehicle brews-up, the greater the duration their dismounts are without their kit and are more vulnerable?

[hellfish]

In an urban fight you're rarely going to have engagement ranges beyond 500m, let alone 2000. At that point the .50 is more useful as an antimateriel weapon, methinks. But in the mountainous terrain a .50 could be very useful for overwatch.

[John Kettler]

fytinghellfish,

I wish to respectfully disagree with your take on the Barrett's utility in MOUT. Back when the Marines were in Lebanon under Reagan, the earlier version of the weapon proved most effective, allowing the Marines to fire through mud brick walls and precisely remove snipers and the like who were all but untouchable with weapons through NATO 7.62mm, given the standard mode of popping up, shooting a few rounds, then ducking back behind the wall's substantial cover. Well, it WAS substantial before rounds smashed through the wall

and the shooter! Years ago, my dad got to tour the Barrett factory in Arkansas and was given juicy operational info as a result of his defense job at the time. He was running the technical side of the then Hughes Thermal Weapon Sight program and told me that the Marines loved the capabilities the Barrett offered over what they'd had before.

Regards,

John Kettler

[hellfish]

Ah, my anti-materiel I meant "punching through things." I was specifically thinking mud brick and concrete when I said that, in addition to taking out vehicles, but I used a poor choice of words. The range of the Barrett doesn't have a whole lot of utility (except, maybe, from a high rise building or with very long LOSes) but the punch of the weapon most definately does have its use.

[SgtMuhammed]

Grunts will always appreciate the ability to punch lots of holes in enemy cover.

[Imperial Grunt]

I concur.

[Battlefront.com]

There is another thing about the .50 that works well in MOUT environments... fear. When one of those rounds smacks into something EVERYBODY knows it. Also, it is impossible to get up and walk away from a hit from a .50. So if the sniper hits, he's finished. No follow up by anybody is necessary. As far as I can tell, the range is a bonus feature for MOUT conditions. Having said that, I've read many accounts of them being used for long range overwatch and road security.

The way we have it set up currently is that a Sniper Team consists of a guy with a M107, another with a M24, and a support Grenadier armed with a M4 and M203 grenade launcher. This is correct TO&E, though we do know that Sniper Teams have flexibility in real life. We're just not sure we have the time to code up some sort of prebattle weapon choice feature for version 1.0.

Steve

[cassh]

I thought snipers operated in pairs usually? spotter and shooter? do the US army use three men then? UK it is pairs - think USMC also pairs but could be wrong...

[Battlefront.com]

Yes, snipers traditionally work in pairs and that is true for Stryker Sniper Teams as well. The third member is there to offer security and to enable the Team to break contact with the enemy more rapidly. Basically, while the Snipers are packing up shop the guy with the M203 covers them and discourages interest in their activities, so to speak.

I'm not sure how things work in the sort of Ops that are going on in Iraq right now (I know what the FM says ), but I wouldn't be surprised if both sniper weapons were employed and the third guy helps out with spotting. Regardless, we are going to try and have CM:SF's Sniper Teams armed with the M107 *or* the M24 for a given sceanrio, not both. We'll have to see how that goes since it is a little tricky to do.

Steve

[DASman]

Everything I know about the current sniper team make up is that it has no TO&E. I've heard accounts of pairs, and everything up to six man teams in Iraq and Afganistan.

The three man team Steve is talking about is by far the norm.

E

[cassh]

How does a third man laser range and spot windage for two men at once?

[cassh]

p.s. usually the spotter is responsible for security during exfil and recovery - usually armed with assault rifle in case of contact. But surely the more men you have, the greater chance of being spotted and compromised. With a 3-man team you've just increased the propbaility of something going tits-up by 50% no matter how good their fieldcraft and stalking because the team has to move into position at some point - and with three men you need to have a body moving for 50% longer...?

[Battlefront.com]

cassh,

How does a third man laser range and spot windage for two men at once?

Picture a rooftop in Baghdad. Picture one guy with a M107 and another guy with a M24 and a third guy inbetween. Some bad guys start moving 1000m away. Spotter only has to call out to the M107 because the M24 is out of range. Conversely, 200m a truck loaded with insurgents is on the move. Spotter calls out range, both start blazing away, with the M107 likely taking out the engine and the M24 picking off personnel.

Works fine

Remember, it isn't like the snipers are dead in the water without a spotter. The spotter just increases the speed and accuracy of each individual shot.

The infiltration disadvantage you mention is valid from a statistical point of view. However, this sounds more like the Hollywood notion of how snipers work rather than the day to day reality. And when they do find themselves in stalking type "crawl 1m per hour" situations I'm sure they'd leave 1 or 2 of the team member nearby under more ample cover as the remainder moved the distance.

Steve

[MikeyD]

[Battlefront.com]

Man, I wish I could see the weapons being used here! M107 in the middle and someone's M4, but can't tell what either guy on the ends has at the ready.

Unfortunately, all the pics I've seen of snipers (vs. DMs) show only one guy squeezing off a round or looking around for trouble. Again, I know what the FMs say in terms of how Sniper Teams are used, but I am sure there is quite a bit of variation on theme since the FMs were written prior to significant time in Iraq.

Steve

[cassh]

MikeyD - If that photo is meant to exemplify a three-man sniper team then please note some points - only one shooter, two spotters/non-shooters i.e. no second shooter. Also note completely exposed with no concealment, personal or positional. Also they have not got any form of physical cover. These are very basic things any “sniper” team would employ not matter what the counter-threat - as some dumb **** can always get lucky and slot you if you make it easy for them.

Not sure if these posers are lying in a “sky lined" position on a ridge but it doesn’t really matter as the set up is for the camera and not tactical. If they actually operated like this then they should be ashamed of themselves and their infantry skills as any half-decent opposition could slot these three lads in short order. They would effectively be lying there and saying “please counter-snipe us”. I’m not saying three-men “sniper” teams are not the US Army TOE/SOP now, but as far as I can see that ain’t a sniper team - that is three riflemen with a big gun and a pair of binos posing for the camera.

Steve - Your cosy Baghdad roof-top scenario is great but what you're describing is sharp-shooting not sniping. Sniping is not shooting out of your own secure area/compound in the Green Zone with a big-bore. It means going out and taking the fight to the enemy. It means setting up shop in his back yard and intimidating him. Restricting his movements, pinning him down, undermining his morale and spreading fear amongst his personnel in the areas he once thought were safe. To be able to do this you need to be able to infiltrate the enemy’s turf unnoticed and remain there undetected whilst you engage the enemy.

Have a look at the syllabus for any sniper cadre/training and you’ll soon detect that most of the course’s emphasis is to do with fieldcraft and operating undetected - not marksmanship. The simple question then must be why is covert operation given such emphasis? This isn’t a Hollywood thing (name me a movie that understands sniping and I’ll drink a warm mug of poo) – this is about the art of sniping. Why have armies sought out backwoodsmen, ghillies and huntsmen as natural snipers rather than simply the best/crack shot? It’s because guile, understanding of concealment, ground, cover and movement are what allows the sniper to do what no other soldier can do.

The spotter just increases the speed and accuracy of each individual shot.

err – no the spotter has other key tasks such as to provide security and threat assessments, defining the target area that can be engaged without having to displace, recording any intelligence activity or information, selecting new potential FFPs, prioritising targets and then all the things that affect speed and accuracy such as range, wind and fall of shot.

With a three-man team the spotter cannot really do his job if two active shooters exist. How can one spotter spot fall of shot for two shooters at once – this is not going to work – how does the spotter respond when both shooter ask for windage adjustments at the same time? There is a very delicate vocal dance between spotter and shooter that allows for accurate and efficient engagement of targets that simply cannot work with another cog in the wheel. It just doesn’t smell right. If that is what the US Army are doing I think they are going down the wrong path.

[hellfish]

Looks like the guy on the right has a weapon. IIRC the company level snipers aren't true snipers - meaning they don't go to the official sniper school - but rather are the people with the best marksmanship scores in the company who get some extra training. I don't think they're trained extensively in stalking like true snipers.

[Battlefront.com]

cassh,

Steve - Your cosy Baghdad roof-top scenario is great but what you're describing is sharp-shooting not sniping. Sniping is not shooting out of your own secure area/compound in the Green Zone with a big-bore. It means going out and taking the fight to the enemy. It means setting up shop in his back yard and intimidating him. Restricting his movements, pinning him down, undermining his morale and spreading fear amongst his personnel in the areas he once thought were safe. To be able to do this you need to be able to infiltrate the enemy’s turf unnoticed and remain there undetected whilst you engage the enemy.

Right, but that isn't necessary when you're in static positions and have zero idea where the enemy is going to show up next. Snipers in Iraq have been CRITICAL in defeating insurgents at key locations, such as road crossings and in view of favorite IED terrain (bridges, ditches, etc.). Obviously they do a lot more than sit around and wait for some numbnuts to come waltzing out of a doorway with a mortar or IED components.

Have a look at the syllabus for any sniper cadre/training and you’ll soon detect that most of the course’s emphasis is to do with fieldcraft and operating undetected - not marksmanship.

Obviously. But then again, Abrams are supposed to be in V formations and what not plinking T-80s at 3500m, but in Iraq they are trundled out to knock holes in walls and see if the local insurgents have managed to put together an IED big enough to flip it on its side.

My point is that in Iraq, and Afghanistan too, much of what units are supposed to do is not the same as what they are doing. From what I've read of Snipers, they are not crawling around on their bellies at 1meter per hour.

err – no the spotter has other key tasks such as to provide security and threat assessments, defining the target area that can be engaged without having to displace, recording any intelligence activity or information, selecting new potential FFPs, prioritising targets and then all the things that affect speed and accuracy such as range, wind and fall of shot.

Yeah, I already said that A spotter can do that for two as easily as he can do it for one.

With a three-man team the spotter cannot really do his job if two active shooters exist. How can one spotter spot fall of shot for two shooters at once – this is not going to work – how does the spotter respond when both shooter ask for windage adjustments at the same time?

I already described how this could work, though I am not totally sure if that is what is going on. It could be the two Snipers are acting as a Sniper/Spotter combo and the third guy is just standing around making sure nobody takes a swipe at them from some other location.

There is a very delicate vocal dance between spotter and shooter that allows for accurate and efficient engagement of targets that simply cannot work with another cog in the wheel. It just doesn’t smell right. If that is what the US Army are doing I think they are going down the wrong path.

Smell has nothing to do with anything, but the fact that the 3 man Sniper Team is described in detail in various Stryker FMs, complete with a special Appendix explaining how Sniper Teams are to be used in one, is kinda relevant

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

fytinghellfish

Looks like the guy on the right has a weapon. IIRC the company level snipers aren't true snipers - meaning they don't go to the official sniper school - but rather are the people with the best marksmanship scores in the company who get some extra training. I don't think they're trained extensively in stalking like true snipers.

AFAIK they go through a shorter sniper course than what cassh is apparently describing, but they are not just the "best shooter" around. They are also officially called Snipers. This is opposed to the Squad Designated Marksman, which is indeed the guy who is deemed the best shot (in theory, of course!).

Steve

[Sixxkiller]

There are a few options called MTT, but I cant recall exactly what that means. Also there is a higher sniper program for operators than the Army Sniper School. The regular school is 5 weeks whereas I think the Marine sniper school is what 9 or 10 weeks?

I would not say that squad marksmen are really all that worse than someone who has completed the school. They have to be very proficient, just most of them dont have to live for days holding an AO as someone who isnt organicly attached to a specific unit with other duties.

[Battlefront.com]

Yeah, no slight on the DMs intended! Just emphasizing that they don't get the same training as Snipers.

Also keep in mind that a Stryker Rifle Battalion has three levels of marksmen. The lowest, and therefore most common, is the Designated Marksman. There is one in each and every Rifle Squad. A Stryker Rifle Compnay has an organic 3 man Sniper Team and a Stryker Rifle Battalion has an organic 7 man Sniper Squad (SL + 2x Sniper Team). The Sniper Teams are "modular" in that they are identical to each other.

Here is a snipit from FM 3-21-21:

Sniper Squad The battalion sniper squad (Figure 1-13, page 1-20) is a modular organization consisting of a squad leader and two similarly equipped three-man sniper teams. (Refer also to Appendix C, Sniper Employment.) Each team is capable of providing the battalion with a full range of sniper support and is equipped with both the M24 7.62-mm sniper rifle (providing anti-personnel fires out to 800 meters) and the .50caliber XM107 sniper rifle (providing antipersonnel and anti-equipment fires beyond 800 meters). This “arms room” concept allows the sniper team to employ the sniper system that best supports the mission parameters. Additionally, the third member of the sniper team is equipped with an M203 rifle system to provide protection and security for the sniper and his spotter as well as a means to break contact if the team is compromised. Battalion snipers are employed to support maneuver, to kill essential enemy leadership or command personnel, to disable lightly armored or “thin skinned” vehicles, to enhance force protection, to provide lethal accurate fires in urban operations, and to perform the counter-sniper role. During security missions, stability operations, or when operating in an SSC with extremely restrictive rules of engagement (ROE), sniper teams are used extensively in the countersniper role as a means of providing force protection without creating unwarranted collateral damage. The modularity of the sniper teams enables the augmentation of a sniper team to a subordinate company or task-organization of a company sniper team to the battalion sniper squad for the execution of specific sniper missions.

[cassh]

Steve said

My point is that in Iraq, and Afghanistan too, much of what units are supposed to do is not the same as what they are doing.

Hmmm... Well as far as sniping is concerned in Afghanistan it is very much as case of "traditional" sniping - i.e. infil into hostile areas - slotting enemy bods - laying low - exfiling and recovery to safe zone. Don't know where you heard contrary to this but I know that is what British, Canadian and US SFO are up to.

In Iraq as well much of the genuine sniping as opposed to sharp-shooting is covert and in hostile zone – often laying in ambush on known IED hotspots or areas of enemy operation. The kill tally they are achieving is very high indeed – some units averaging ten hostiles killed per month per shooter. Routine overwatch on road junctions and VCPs is not really a sniper operation but a sharp-shooting one unless the insertion needs to be covert and/or the FFP is in enemy/hostile control.

If local commanders fail to use their sniping teams effectively and deploy them as sharp-shooters then that is a great waste and a sign of incompetent tactics.

Much of the successful engagements in Iraq and Afghanistan are occurring at night where advanced optics capabilities give us the edge, and cover of darkness offers some degree of additional security and lowers the chance of detection – especially during movement phases of the operations.

Of note the British Army are now implementing a new Sniper Platoon across ever infantry battalion in the army and there is a huge upsurge in sniper training and developing these tactics within the contemporary battlespace – such as how to avoid thermal detection, avoid acoustic-detection sensors, how to use acoustic detection systems within counter-sniping operations etc. The platoon will expand what was for most battalions and ad hoc four or eight man section and creates a formal 18 man platoon.