Top secret sniper formula

[Norrick]

I am watching the military channel and the show is called "Modern Sniper" and what they're basically saying is that they're (Army) using a new formula to accurately take shots without revealing the snipers position. They are not revealing the formula.

Part of the technique involves the sniper shooting through what they keep calling a "loop hole" It is literally some sort of wall with a very small hole in it, just large enough for the bullet to pass through. I guess this is made possible by the new more accurate formula. The idea here being that you keep the sniper concealed.

What caught my attention was the "top secret formula" portion. It was described in a rather vague way so I'm not exactly sure what they mean.

Do they mean a ballistic formula? As in a more accurate way to calculate bullet drop at certain ranges? I use ballistic calculators but I don't really know where they come from. I see G1 function referenced alot, and supposedly there are multiple formulas.

I just took a fluid mechanics class, and I couldn't imagine anything being more accurate than hard math with good empirical constants. So whats so inaccurate about the current ballistic models? Are they created with compromises? Or am I misunderstanding the wording that the television program was using?

 

[the rifleer]

Alot of the information of the stuff in tv shows on the history channel and military channel about guns is not 100% accurate. Its close enough for most people to understand, but to someone who is a true marksman and an avid shooter the info is vague and not descriptive. They never go into much detail about anything.

It sounds like they are talking about the techniques used. snipers idealy shoot from completly consealed postions. If you are shooting threw a hole in the wall of a dark room, this is ideal because even if someone outside is looking in, they still can't see you. i believe that is what a loop hole is, but im not sure. A good sniper would NEVER poke his barrel out a window or something like that, they would shoot from inside the room.

 

[Norrick]

the footage they showed of this "loop hole" was literally a wooden wall made of what looked like plywood, set up maybe 15 yards in front of the sniper. Their field of view of the other side of the wall was literally restricted to what they could see through this 2x2 inch hole in the wall. The target was not just on the other side of the wall, but rather further down range on the other side.

It doesn't seem practical since a target could easily move out of the field of view. Perhaps it was just for training, but like I said, I still don't know if the word "formula" was literally meaning calculations or if it was used analogous to "technique"

 

[Head-Space]

Some recent programs I've seen note that they're placing the shooters deep in the interiors of rooms to conceal position and make the report harder to pinpoint. But that's nothing new.

Physics is physics. Or is that "physics are physics" ? The military is using new range finders and scope dope calculators, faster, simpler, more accurate. And a lot of this technology is secret.

Something that's not secret but all too often gets overlooked in the romance of the big, accurate guns, scopes, and long distance shots. Big aspect of the sniper mission is reconnaissance, intelligence. And you need to be really, really sneaky.

 

[deadeye1122]

I watch the history channel and have seen the show or something similar. I think the Loop Hole is more for concealment than ballistics. Hide behind something that has a large enough opening to see the target and for the round to go Thu and take the shot. Unless deflected wouldn't it be the same as shooting in the open? Deadeye

 

[Double Naught Spy]

Part of the technique involves the sniper shooting through what they keep calling a "loop hole" It is literally some sort of wall with a very small hole in it, just large enough for the bullet to pass through. I guess this is made possible by the new more accurate formula.

No formula is going to change the trajectory of the bullet itself. If the hole is just big enough for the bullet to pass through, then how does the sniper see his target?

Their field of view of the other side of the wall was literally restricted to what they could see through this 2x2 inch hole in the wall.

Okay, that helps. The hole in the was is tall enough to take into account the sight axes over the bore axis/trajectory of the round being fired. My guess is that the sniper is sighting through the hole near the top of it and the bullet passes through the hole closer to the bottom of it. At 15 yards distance, the hole would give away very little light if the shot was in low light and certainly no smoke or firing debris would exit the hole.

The shot isn't hugely remarkable and I don't see where there would be any sort of secret formula to make it possible.

 

[johnwilliamson062]

I think they are actually working on snipers taking shots on targets where they can't directly see the target as some of you guessed. With a set of laser rangefinder/targeters I am guessing this is possible. I don't buy they have some physics bending math formula. Either they just shoot through a really small hole, or they are using an off gun optical device to aim.

I am not positve, but I think that at say 800 yards a 2X2 hole would not afford you both a view of the target and a clear shot at the correct trajectory.

 

[Eagleks]

there is supposed to be some much newer bullet trails technology that will then recalculate changes quickly, to hit the target accurately with a 2nd shot.

 

[Zak Smith]

Wow, this is hilarious

there is supposed to be some much newer bullet trails technology that will then recalculate changes quickly, to hit the target accurately with a 2nd shot.

Like spotting the impact position of the first shot and applying the correction to the aiming device.

I am not positve, but I think that at say 800 yards a 2X2 hole would not afford you both a view of the target and a clear shot at the correct trajectory.

For a regular long-range rifle setup, the hole just needs to be the height of the bottom of the bore to the top of the scope (it can be shorter on the top but it will make the exit pupil proportionally smaller). Thus for a .30 caliber rifle with a 1.75" sight over bore and a 50mm scope objective the hole would need to be approx 3.9" tall. Provided the hole is within ten yards of the shooter, the distance the scope is dialed for makes no difference.

 

[noyes]

Technology great stuff...jet engine ..but ..imagine............


these systems will be capable of detecting and discriminating between types of FOD entering the inlet and leaving the exhaust , “hearing” changes in bear- ... fan, which provided some lift and prevented the engine exhaust from ...


maybe not so funny..i.m.o.

 

[Scorch]

Top secret sniper formula

there is supposed to be some much newer bullet trails technology that will then

Some recent programs I've seen note that

Sorry to sound like an old man, but do you people spend your whole lives watching TV and actually believe what you see on it? Try reading a book or something. Just about everything you want to know about sniper training was developed in the 1960s and 1970s and is public information. Or better yet, join up and go get the training for yourself.

Wow, this is hilarious

I almost agree, Zak, but it scares the heck out of me.

 

[mIcKdOg7]

A loop hole isnt just a hole in a wall, as you may know when sniping in the battle feild snipers may stalk their targets in ghillie suits and so on, as they find a suitable hide(place to take their shot from whilst being consealed)they must make sure they have a suitable loop hole, a loop hole can be described as a natural hole through vegetation, this is where a sniper laying in grass perhaps will have a direct line of sight to the target in order for them to take a shot. i dont see how a formula could have anything to do with this. i belive this formula may be a used in order to calculate the minutes of angle for adjustment they need, if so, i dont see why they wouldnt tell you the formula besides anyone with half a brain could figure out how much to angle their rifle relative to the distance of the target.

 

[Norrick]

but do you people spend your whole lives watching TV and actually believe what you see on it?

When I'm not working, going to class, or spending time with the lady, I usually browse this forum and watch something of interest on TV. Just my routine, yours may vary. I don't believe everything I see; in fact I criticize most television programs (I also mute commercials)--but the heart of my question, if you read my post, was, are current ballistic formulas made with compromises? In other words, is it possible they are switching to some alternative that is more accurate, or more practical in some way?

Or was the word formula more loosely used to mean technique?

 

[ScottRiqui]

there is supposed to be some much newer bullet trails technology that will then recalculate changes quickly, to hit the target accurately with a 2nd shot.

Like spotting the impact position of the first shot and applying the correction to the aiming device.

There's the potential for a lot more information than just the impact point of the first (missed) shot.

There are medium-wave infrared bullet trackers already in the field that visually show you the entire path of the bullet in flight. Right now, they're used in counter-sniper applications to follow the path of a bullet back to the sniper, but there's no reason why they couldn't also be used (with or without additional electronics) to detect the path of a missed shot and provide an aimpoint correction for the next shot. This would be extremely helpful if the geometry of the shot means that the initial miss didn't impact anywhere near the target (like shooting upwards at a target on a rooftop or a ridgeline.)

 

[1911rocks]

Loop Hole Shots

Double Naught Spy is close. When you shoot through a small loop hole (less than sufficient to observe the target through) The math accommodates the distance from the First Focal Plane to the Loop Hole, the bullet drop/rise and windage in that same distance. The math is not that profound, however, the "no sight picture" matter is a bit trickier. The distance and angle to the loop hole is another matter. The Proprietary component is in the latter two areas. Oh, by the way, it's a way big deal. The Hole can actually be as little as 1" x 1" at a distance of 100'. No application for the Mall Ninjas or Halo geeks.

 

[Tangentabacus]

Just remember, you saw it on TV, and the reason it's on TV is so people will watch, and if saying "secret formula" is enough for someone to unknowingly promote their show on some random gun forum... Mission accomplished.

Although, something tells me that they have been doing these through the hole, no sight picture shots for a little while now. I wouldn't doubt the daring and skill of some marksmen.

 

[Flatbush Harry]

I have noticed that, since this show went on a while back, everyone and his brother has been having this sex fantasy about being a "long-range competitor/sniper", playing at 1000 yds and posting here and on other fora (the appropriate Latin plural of forum) asking what rifle and scope to get.

It's kinda funny...when I go to my local rifle range (public), there are more operators and sniper wannabes then in the service of King Barack I. Most of them can't get a group at 100 yds but they're ready to go.



FH, non-operator, non-sniper, not tacticool at all

 

[JackL]

Posted by the rifleer:

Alot of the information of the stuff in tv shows on the history channel and military channel about guns is not 100% accurate.

Substitute "any topic" for "about guns", especially if the topic is at all technical or scientific. Seems like every time I watch a HC or DC documentary on any subject I know anything about, they get a disappointing number of things wrong.

History Channel's Tales of the Gun was a lot better than most; on the episodes I saw, I could usually only pick out one or two real howlers per hour.

 

[kodiakbeer]

The sniper has a spotter to find targets and call corrections. He doesn't need to find a target through a small hole across the room.

Again though, nothing new.

 

[B.L.E.]

Have they developed a device that can accurately measure and range the various cross winds that the bullet will experience during its flight? Or is it done by the shooter's estimation of watching mirage through his scope.

It doesn't matter how accurate a ballistic calculator is, garbage in still equals garbage out.