What's your longest shot? Not good enough

[TXAZ]

So much of this is statistical. I'm guessing there were multiple shots taken walking to the target. The variables for shooting ~ 0.1 MOA are astronomical.

My guess is multiple shots. (I took ~35 to hit 5 golf balls at 550 yards with ball ammo. ) Rumor has it these guys use Hornaday 750 gr A-Max.

 

[briandg]

I spent a lot of time analyzing that using the a max, but with no way of calculating precisely the drag against it and the effects on the really long shot, and I didn't believe the results that I got. What was that, maybe a 2-300 feet drop from point of firing to point of impact?

I know that the spotters have computers with programs that can give trajectory figures, markers to dope wind, and those spotters are brilliant. Nobody ever gives them credit.

I don't know how he even got within several yards of it. It's incredible. Impossible. And yes, he bagged him with only one shot, according to reports.

That thing was literally miraculous, the probability of making that shot was astronomical, given all of the obstacles that they faced

We have had the best of the best working with technology and skills that are nothing short of phenomenal. They have been doing this for thirty years, right? It took thirty years to make the shot, and God knows if anyone will ever do it again.

That's my take on a shot taken from over 3,000 yards striking a target that was about a foot square with only a single shot. It makes my skin crawl. What if they were just the tiniest fraction of a degree, a tiny puff of wind, even hitting a June bug and getting the smallest degree of deflection?

Awe is too small of a word. bagging him at that distance implies that he could have nailed a pea at hundreds of yards at any given time, over and over.

Will that ever happen again?

 

[Pond James Pond]

Good grief!! A near-full kilometer more than the next longest shot!
That is a staggering shot!!

 

[Pond James Pond]

Any idea why the Canadians feature in this league table so often?

Is it an area they excel in or they've just been on sniper-duty more than others?

 

[BumbleBug]

Interesting. Could the shot even be heard at that distance? What a psychological score also on those around the dead guy. Where did it come from? Am I next?

Thank you Mr. Canadian Sniper...

 

[Capt Rick Hiott]

8" steel plate at 170 yards,,,,With a Taurus Raging Bull .454. (3 out of 5)

 

[Mainah]

This is a decent article that covers some Canadian sniper history: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...cord-breaking-snipers/?utm_term=.66de7a144aba

 

[briandg]

pond, I can't explain, but they may just be firing more shots. this was a one in a million shot, and the more bullets in the air the more chances for freakish events like this.

It's possible that they are just better. I doubt that they have better equipment.

 

[briandg]

The story referred to having to correct for planetary rotation. From what I know of physics, that can't possibly be an answer. Could a coriolus effect be involved? I don't understand how it could at only two miles. other than this possibility, the momentum principle would maintainany current results of the movement of the earth.

Any effects involving rotational effects would have to be accounted for with exact degrees of deviation from the planetary rotation as well as elevation.
I'm not sure if the relatively small distance of only a couple miles could even affect any principles.

good lord

 

[briandg]

alright, I have spent the last half hour reading the most difficult math I have ever dealt with trying to get a grip on the coriolis effect, and I'm kind of stumped. It appears that it can effect North to South fired projectiles, as the distance traveled increases as the actual girth o the planet increases some.

The Coriolis force minutely changes the trajectory of a bullet, affecting accuracy at extremely long distances. It is adjusted for by accurate long-distance shooters, such as snipers.

this passage refers to it existing at distances of seventy miles and at shorter ranges, varying in any direction or elevation, but doesn't refer at all to how exactly it deviates. Minute isn't a reasonable measurement.

The Coriolis force is important in external ballistics for calculating the trajectories of very long-range artillery shells. The most famous historical example was the Paris gun, used by the Germans during World War I to bombard Paris from a range of about 120 km (75 mi). The Coriolis force minutely changes the trajectory of a bullet, affecting accuracy at extremely long distances. It is adjusted for by accurate long-distance shooters, such as snipers.[24] Unlike large-scale motions of air in the atmosphere or water in the ocean, a bullet's path is not constrained to be horizontal, and the vertical component of the Coriolis force is often more important than the horizontal component: westward shots hit low, and eastward shots hit high.

I apologize if I handed out incorect information earlier, but I personally believe that any effect of this type would be insignificant at the distance of only two miles, compared to any and all other forces at work, especially the human and mechanical shortcomings that must exist.

 

[Rancid]

The Coriolis Force had nothing to do with it. It was a combination of luck, free ammo, and the Murphy Effect. The recipient was sitting next to Murphy. And yes, he was probably very still (sleeping, pooping, or watching "Big Bang") and Murphy was pointing at his head the whole time hollering "here he is, here he is".

 

[briandg]

I don't think coriolis matters, either. the fact is that we could find out by asking the shooter or checking the software parameters, but I honestly believe that the distance is just not long enough for that sort of concern.

But, so many people fail to really take the time to think these things through, just make assumptions, fail to do the math, believe what they are told, etc.

There are a number of people doing videos on liine proving that the earth is flat, using levels. A guy used his cell phone's level to prove it.

I the earth was round, he said, it would tilt as the plane went around the curved planet. Of course not. the plane curves along with the center of the earth's gravity, and the level will aways remain perpendicular to the line of gravitation from the earth's gravitational center.

 

[Don Fischer]

Something I suspect is a lot harder than a long shot is cutting the distance down to very close on foot.

 

[std7mag]

Sniper in question did take multiple shots, from 50 BMG. Canadian team ran out of their ammo, had to use US made ammo, which has more velocity than Canadian.

At that distance coriolis may make diff between hit/miss.

 

[Elkins45]

My longest shot was a measured 349 yards on a whitetail doe. With a 10X scope at maximum magnification the crosshair covered a significant portion of her. I can't imagine what sort of scope you would need to shoot a person at two miles.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

I spent a lot of time analyzing that using the a max, but with no way of calculating precisely the drag against it and the effects on the really long shot, and I didn't believe the results that I got. What was that, maybe a 2-300 feet drop from point of firing to point of impact?

I know that the spotters have computers with programs that can give trajectory figures, markers to dope wind, and those spotters are brilliant. Nobody ever gives them credit.

I don't know how he even got within several yards of it. It's incredible. Impossible. And yes, he bagged him with only one shot, according to reports.

That thing was literally miraculous, the probability of making that shot was astronomical, given all of the obstacles that they faced

We have had the best of the best working with technology and skills that are nothing short of phenomenal. They have been doing this for thirty years, right? It took thirty years to make the shot, and God knows if anyone will ever do it again.

That's my take on a shot taken from over 3,000 yards striking a target that was about a foot square with only a single shot. It makes my skin crawl. What if they were just the tiniest fraction of a degree, a tiny puff of wind, even hitting a June bug and getting the smallest degree of deflection?

Awe is too small of a word. bagging him at that distance implies that he could have nailed a pea at hundreds of yards at any given time, over and over.

Will that ever happen again?

There is a lot that is telling about this story and a lot that isn't. Bagged him with one shot? Well, the sniper sure as heck didn't hit the bad guy with two shots and he didn't manage to hit anyone else despite the fact that there was some sort of battle going one and he would have had other targets. We know that he hit a guy. We don't know if he hit a particular target he was aiming at or just hit one of the people that happened to be in the area (area targets).

Sniper in question did take multiple shots, from 50 BMG. Canadian team ran out of their ammo, had to use US made ammo, which has more velocity than Canadian.

At that distance coriolis may make diff between hit/miss.

So this would be much more of the norm. In reading through many of the events of longer distance sniper hits in conflict, you virtually never get one shot-one kill on the first try.

Coriolis certainly could make a difference, but only once assessed, could be corrected for as a stable factor. The biggest factor is going to be the multitude of atmospheric differences on the 2.2 mile distance and ~1000 feet of elevation and these are not going to be the same from shot to shot.

My longest shot was a measured 349 yards on a whitetail doe. With a 10X scope at maximum magnification the crosshair covered a significant portion of her. I can't imagine what sort of scope you would need to shoot a person at two miles.

There is a high likelihood that the sniper could not actually see hit target if he had the crosshairs on it. The spotter likely had a much better spotting scope and aside from doing the calculations, also provided all the corrections for the trigger puller to land a shot in the approximate area where one happened to strike a bad guy.

Still, it was a great shot, but it isn't so much that the sniper made the shot as much as it is that a team made the shot. You would think from reading many of the articles on the event that the sniper went out, found a target, took a shot to basically assassinate some key bad guy (ala Hathcock's General kill), and then packed up and went home having accomplished the given task. The battle didn't end with the death of a single combatant. As noted, the sniper took numerous shots, had the aid of a spotter, and no doubt continued to take many more shots trying to hit more combatants, but none managed to connect again.

 

[NHSHOOTER]

Wasnt this post "what was your longest shot?..Mine, lasered at 310 yds, ground squirrel with a 22-250 with 25x50 leupold off bipod using my brothers rem 700 heavy barrel and his reloads..We shot alot of squirrels that day, 310 was the furthest kill.

 

[raimius]

Mine was around 715yds with a bolt .308.
It is hard to fathom a 3K+ shot!

 

[LAH]

At that distance coriolis may make diff between hit/miss.

As a hillbilly I've never used that word. Yer getting in deep std7mag.

In physics, the Coriolis force is an inertial force that acts on objects that are in motion relative to a rotating reference frame. In a reference frame with clockwise rotation, the force acts to the left of the motion of the object.

 

[Art Eatman]

My longest shot? Bambi, right at 450 yards. Him then looking like food, I figure that it was a good enough shot.