PDA

View Full Version : Top this one, 1.54 miles, two shots-two kills


kraigwy
May 1, 2010, 11:44 PM
New Record: L115A3 338 Lup.

A BRITISH Army sniper has set a new sharpshooting distance record by killing two Taliban machinegunners in Afghanistan from more than 1 miles away.

Craig Harrison, a member of the Household Cavalry, killed the insurgents with consecutive shots — even though they were 3,000ft beyond the most effective range of his rifle.

“The first round hit a machinegunner in the stomach and killed him outright,” said Harrison, a Corporal of Horse. “He went straight down and didn’t move.

“The second insurgent grabbed the weapon and turned as my second shot hit him in the side. He went down, too. They were both dead.”.......

.......The distance to Harrison’s two targets was measured by a GPS system at 8,120ft, or 1.54 miles. The previous record for a sniper kill is 7,972ft, set by a Canadian soldier who shot dead an Al-Qaeda gunman in March 2002


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/afghanistan/article7113916.ece

HAMMER1DOWN
May 1, 2010, 11:51 PM
American snipers need to step up their game.....tis a shame that Canada and the British are outdoing us.....

predator86
May 2, 2010, 12:40 AM
holy crap, read the rest of the article, he had broken both arms and returned to the front lines after he was healed, a bullet pierced his helmet...this guy is the definition of BADASS...not the mention some awesome shooting..

TXGunNut
May 2, 2010, 12:56 AM
Hammer, we have thousands of heroes over there today, every day. Our snipers save lives every day. Our allies are equally skilled and welcome comrades in this conflict. Snipers and spotters may feel lonely but they're valuable team players, as this incident proves.

brotus2
May 2, 2010, 01:59 AM
Go for it.

Wildalaska
May 2, 2010, 02:19 AM
American snipers need to step up their game.....tis a shame that Canada and the British are outdoing us.....

It's all about the ROE

WildtheusplaysthegameunderdifferentrulesAlaska TM

Jimro
May 2, 2010, 02:29 AM
Superb shots for sure. The 338 Lapua is a great round, the AI is a great rifle. Glad to see the skilled application for our side.

Jimro

Double Naught Spy
May 2, 2010, 08:09 AM
American snipers need to step up their game.....tis a shame that Canada and the British are outdoing us.....

So the Canadians and British are all better shooters than the US guys, or have they simply had a couple of guys who have made outstanding shots?

Never mind the fact that we held the record for decades. :rolleyes:

The point of combat isn't setting records.

Abel
May 2, 2010, 09:08 AM
The point of combat isn't setting records.

That's right. Every kill doesn't find its way into a record book or is confirmed. Sometimes you just have to duck & tuck!

yellolab
May 2, 2010, 09:10 AM
"you don't know what you don't know"

Just because you hear about this shooting means other are better than us?

Wow, you are easily convinced based on 1 data point. You should write a paper.

Kevin

madcratebuilder
May 2, 2010, 09:40 AM
It's all about the ROE

+1000

The elected officials in DC have ham-stung the American GI with the ridicules ROE.

Beowulf5505
May 2, 2010, 09:48 AM
i would be tempted to say that it was a lucky shot given the range but with 2 shots its hard to argue...

kraigwy
May 2, 2010, 10:40 AM
i would be tempted to say that it was a lucky shot given the range but with 2 shots its hard to argue...

Three shots,.......the third took out the Gun.

Three out of Three ISNT LUCK

freakshow10mm
May 2, 2010, 10:55 AM
Luck is preparation meets opportunity.

HAMMER1DOWN
May 2, 2010, 02:19 PM
sorry about my post.. I was tryin to be sarcastic ( that failed) but I know darn well that we have top shooters all over in our Millitary, I am currently serving, will have been in for 6 years this June 1, I shoot expert eveytime at the range but I am not the only one. I respect any country that is helping us in this conflict. And I agree with the Rules of Engagement hindering our efforts, they have kinda castrated us with it.

Tom Servo
May 2, 2010, 02:56 PM
sorry about my post.. I was tryin to be sarcastic
Don't worry: we got it :)

It's amazing, really. Regardless of nationality, the allies are currently displaying a level of marksmanship I would have thought physically impossible twenty years ago. Even the folks who aren't making the headline-grabbing shots are excellent riflemen all around.

I'm more than happy to have Marines half my age show me up at the range :)

bufordtjustice
May 2, 2010, 03:06 PM
Hammer, don't sweat it...I interpreted what you said as more light hearted. I can see how an "lol" or something may have helped clarify.

Anyway, neat link Kraig. Given that many Brits have probably never fired a rifle prior to joining the military, they surely must have a great rifle marksmanship program for their long range shooters AND I would speculate that they also have a lot less shooting bad habits than many of us Americans do/did prior to joining the military.

Have you seen any reports as to our use of the Cheytac in combat yet? I would think that may give the .338 a run for its money so to speak.

TXGunNut
May 2, 2010, 03:44 PM
It's OK, Hammer, I understand. I couldn't pass up an opportunity to show support for the troops who serve us. Not familiar with the ROE's but the ones I hear about are pretty hard to believe. Tempted to get a calculator and ballistics charts out to try and figure out how he pulled this off, that was an amazing piece of work!
Thank you for your service!

TacOps
May 2, 2010, 08:18 PM
Marine Scout Snipers Dominate 9th International Sniper Competition

The 2009 International Sniper Competition was as exhilarating as the competitors. The 9th International Sniper Competition, held in Ft. Benning, GA differed from previous years in that this year the teams were divided into two classes. Service Class consisted of teams firing a 7.62×51 or smaller caliber. Open Class consisted of those firing a 7.62×51 or larger.

In a stunning display of sniper skills, the U.S. Marines took first place overall in the competition. My congratulations to the Camp Pendleton, CA, Scout Sniper School, well done.

Final Results:

Overall
• Team 3, Scout Sniper School, Camp Pendleton, CA

Service Class
• 1st place- Team 3, Scout Sniper School, Camp Pendleton, CA
• 2nd place – Team 24, Delta Company, 2nd Battalion, Ft. Bragg, NC – Special Warefare Training Group
• 3rd place – Team 6, Charlie Troop, 1st Battalion, 73rd Cav, 82nd Airborne, Ft. Bragg, NC

Open Class
• 1st place- Team 10, Able Company, 2nd Battalion, 46th Infantry Regiment, 194th Armor Brigade, Fort Knok, KY
• 2nd place - Team 23, Delta Company, 2nd Battalion, Special Warfare Training Group, Fort Bragg, NC
• 3rd place- Team 21, U.S. Army Special Operations Command, Fort Bragg, NC

2010 Army Marksmanship Unit - Ft. Benning:

http://i268.photobucket.com/albums/jj31/jsatienza/2010ArmyMarksmmanShipUnit.jpg

Bigjfb
May 3, 2010, 12:17 AM
This story is mostly propaganda with a little fact thrown in.

kiwi56
May 3, 2010, 12:33 AM
I would have thought Rules of engagement would have been the same for all nationalities invoved in our side of the conflict. It certainly was in East Timor. I have a friend over in Afghanistan at the moment with the SAS.

LanceOregon
May 3, 2010, 06:38 AM
That was really funny to read the head of the British Tactical Rifle company Accuracy International saying that the feat was more luck than anything else.

I'm sure that if the sniper had been using one of their rifles, and not the McMillan Tac 50 that is made here in the USA, he would have sung a much different tune.

It is a bit odd that the British military is using an American made tactical rifle, instead of a UK made rifle from Accuracy International.

Here is a photo of what the McMillan Tac 50 rifle that was used in this incident looks like:

http://mcmillanusa.com/images/rifles/tac_main.jpg



It sells for $7,600, which is about the same price as the AW 50 rifle from Accuracy International. Here is a photo of the AW 50:

http://www.accuracyinternational.com/cssimages/AW50.png


Interestingly, the Canadian Army also chose the McMillan Tac 50 over the Accuracy International AW50. And they have been racking up lots of long range kills in Afghanistan with it too.

See:

http://mcmillanusa.com/pdfs/Tactical%20Weapons_TAC-50.pdf


I guess that a .50 BMG round still hurts a lot when it hits someone, even well past 2,000 yards.

.

yellolab
May 3, 2010, 07:18 AM
This is a very cool thread.

I shot a crow out back with my 204ruger yesterday, it was around ~210 yards, and I felt like quite the sharpshooter. Yikes !

Kevin

Longdayjake
May 3, 2010, 09:03 AM
At my range we have guys that spend thousands and thousands of dollars for rifles that can help them shoot out to 1000 yards. Then when they finally do it there is a ton of chest thumping and high fives. Knowing how far 1000 yards is makes me very impressed to know that people are getting kills past 2000.

ScottRiqui
May 3, 2010, 12:43 PM
That was really funny to read the head of the British Tactical Rifle company Accuracy International saying that the feat was more luck than anything else.

I'm sure that if the sniper had been using one of their rifles, and not the McMillan Tac 50 that is made here in the USA, he would have sung a much different tune.

It is a bit odd that the British military is using an American made tactical rifle, instead of a UK made rifle from Accuracy International.

The sniper *was* using one of Accuracy International's rifles - the L115A3 in particular.

fisherman66
May 3, 2010, 05:57 PM
Two shots - two kills? That's a waste of ammo. A real gun would've just used one.

Stevie-Ray
May 3, 2010, 06:15 PM
The sniper *was* using one of Accuracy International's rifles - the L115A3 in particular. Yes, and the quip about luck was made by the AI spokesman about their own rifle, not the McMillan.

kaylorinhi
May 3, 2010, 06:24 PM
I really don't care how just that they are. If they had chosen a diplomatic solution we would acquiesce.

I am glad he is getting some recognition for pushing hhimself and his equipment.

Tropper Harrison, "Crack-on Mate"

44 AMP
May 3, 2010, 06:33 PM
Natural talent and luck recognise no uniform. Expertise through training and practice does. Modern militaries top shooters have both.

With today's equipement (guns, optics, ammo, etc.) its more of a science then a skill, but skill and natural ability still play an important role.

Drop is a constant. Know the range, calculate the drop. Windage, however is a huge variable. Compensating for the wind at extreme ranges is part science, part skill, AND part luck. The best shooters leave the least to luck, but you cannot eliminate it.

Fantastic long range shots. Good job. Now ask how many times they shoot at those ranges, and miss "by that much"? We don't hear about those.

riverwalker76
May 3, 2010, 07:42 PM
What they failed to tell you was that he used US made cartridges. His Canadian cartridges wouldn't reach! ;) I know this story!

TXGunNut
May 3, 2010, 08:17 PM
Someone please help me out, I'd love to know the BC of the round the Brit sniper used and the muzzle velocity of that round from the L115A3. I have no idea how a GPS rangefinder works but probably won't understand it unless I read a book on it. Anyone?
Luck? The only luck in this incident was for the BG's, all bad. The picked the wrong marksman to be within 1.54 miles of. Trusting luck to make this shot would be a waste of ammo. Three shots, three hits? The man was dialed in!

Bigjfb
May 3, 2010, 09:37 PM
external ballistics computer program predicts that the bullets of British high pressure .338 Lapua Magnum cartridges using 16.2 g (250 gr) Lapua LockBase B408 bullets fired at 936 m/s (3,071 ft/s) muzzle velocity under International Standard Atmosphere conditions at 1,043 m (3,422 ft) elevation (air density ρ = 1.1069 kg/m3) arrive at 2,475 m (2,707 yd) after approximately 6.017 s flight time at 251.8 m/s (826 ft/s) velocity and have dropped 121.23 m (4,773 in) on their way.


This story is not holding water with some of the best long range shooters and snipe instructors in the world, being dismissed as propaganda. Maybe they are just haters? Doubt it.

You can't dial up the elevation needed for that shot on an SnB at anything more than 8x without losing the target out the bottom of the FOV.

TXGunNut
May 3, 2010, 10:17 PM
Not familiar with the technology and optics in use but I knew the drop below line of sight would be mind-boggling. 3000fps sounds pretty optimistic but am guessing its due to a longer barrel. Thanks for doing the math, Bigjfb. My head hurts tonight and I would have tried to use a calculator, pencil and paper.
Our hero not realizing it was a new sharpshooting record for days sounds a bit like an "aw shucks" comment, kinda sounds like spin. I still want to believe it happened, even if the details got a bit of "spin" for propaganda's sake.

kraigwy
May 3, 2010, 11:04 PM
This story is not holding water with some of the best long range shooters and snipe instructors in the world, being dismissed as propaganda. Maybe they are just haters? Doubt it.

Without evidence to the contrary, I buy the story. How many of us have made wild guesses and lucked out, hitting something we shouldn't. Whats to say the guy didnt make a wild guess and caught the wind and elevation just right, remembered the hold and then fires two more rounds.

It happens.

Many years ago we orderd 42 LAWS to train a AK Native NG Unit. Weather kept them from making the training. We all know its easier to draw ammo then to turn it in so we fired up the laws.

There was an old APC about 460 yards from the firing line on the 40-90 Range at fort Lewis. With my first law, I figured the wind, held some nasty elevation and let her rip. I lucked out and hit the APC. I fired 8 more LAWs using the same hold and got 8 more hits. Did I know what I was doing, Heck NO. I've never played with the ballistic tables for a M-72 Law, I lucked out, and my comrades think I was the best anti tank dude in the Alaska NG.

IT HAPPENS. Give the guy credit until proven otherwise, it is doable if all the planets line up. I've seen some wierd shooting in my time, many that cant be explained.

44 AMP
May 4, 2010, 01:30 AM
Luck is always involved. Not the kind needed to make the shot, but the kind needed to not miss.

I suppose that sounds a little confusing, but its the way I see it. What I mean is that you calculate everything you can, and then trust to luck that both your calculations are right, and that nothing changes to screw things up badly enough to cause a miss in the time between the bullet leaves the muzzle and when it gets to the target.

Military snipers today have the benefit of the best equipment and training that exists, so the luck factor is smaller than it would be for me, even on one of my good days!:D

Tikirocker
May 4, 2010, 02:23 AM
It is always a shame to me when a story like this devolves into a debate about " which nations marksmen are better than another". While I can be proud that an Englishman was behind the bolt, I personally choose to recognize the skill of the man ... after all, an entire nation didn't take those shots.

Tiki.

mapsjanhere
May 4, 2010, 07:40 AM
I played with similar numbers as Bigjfb in JBM's calculator when this was first reported and can't see how you do it either, unless you're sighted in at 1000 yards and have a 40 MOA base. Even then you have to compensate for 100 MOA drop, and have a subsonic transition.

Come and take it.
May 4, 2010, 11:33 AM
If a bullet is heavy and well balanced how will it perform when going trans-sonic? Will it maintain stability better, than say a lighter bullet?

I wonder this because black powder sharps rifles usually send the bullet out of the barrel a little more than the speed of sound but drop shortly after, yet they can hit very accurately at extreme range.

Of course buffalo calibers used some pretty hefty bullets.

mapsjanhere
May 4, 2010, 12:48 PM
My guess would be that the big cylindrical slug with all the aerodynamics of a dump truck has enough turbulent layer around it that the extra turbulence from the transsonic regime doesn't matter much. Modern high BC round live of their nice smooth flow regime even close to the bullet surface which is lost in the transition.

Jimro
May 4, 2010, 05:29 PM
I've been thinking about this, and if the snipers were elevated above the bad guys then the shot becomes much more doable, as the straight line distance between the two positions can be large (the hypotenuse of the triangle) but the distance for drop is the basically the adjacent side of the triangle.

In the Mountainous terrain of Afghanistan uphill/downhill shots are pretty common. A flat 1.54 mile shot with a 338 is very unlikely.

Remember the straightline distance multiplied by the cosign of the angle of elevation gives you the correct dope. If there were 30 degrees of angle, then the drop would be dialed in for 1.33 miles, or 2,144 meters. An angle of 45 degrees cuts the dope to 1,751 meters, or just over a mile, which is much more in line with known ballistic distance of the 338 Lapua.

Shave off a couple more MOA for high elevation also experiencing a low pressure zone, and it is firmly in the realm of "doable". Like Kraigwy said, sometimes the planets just align and you have a great shot.

Jimro

Palmetto-Pride
May 4, 2010, 05:53 PM
Hey if the guy made the shots my hats off to him, but the most incredible and unbelievable thing is that no matter what, the target would have had to have been way under the sight picture of the scope. I just don't see how you can shoot a target you can't see thru the scope. For those that question this like myself I feel we are being realistic not unpatriotic. Maybe they have some kind of contraption that turns the rifle into a mortar launcher thing-a-ma jiggy........:)

kraigwy
May 4, 2010, 08:25 PM
Maybe they have some kind of contraption that turns the rifle into a mortar launcher thing-a-ma jiggy........

Maybe people do just that.

I've ran machine gun schools using the T&E and indirect fire to engage targets you couldnt see.

My first trip to 29 Palms after I got my Dist. Badge, my shooting partner and I desided to take our service grade DCM M1s. This was going to be a fun shoot for us.

Just after I started my string at 1000 yards, my buddy, who was scoring for me spotted a coyote on a hill about 400 yards beyond the target. I couldnt see it over the iron sights. I could through my 20 X spotting scope. I pick an aiming spot I could see, and my buddy guides me to the target. I was using M-72, match. I could shoot, turn my head to the scope and watch my bullet kick up dust under the coyote, I didnt get him but I did spash dirt on him sending him running.

I'm sure if I had better equipment, and was a better shot, I could have got him.

I'm not the best shooter by a long shot, but I've shot enough to know that there are people out there, with the right equipment, who could pull it off.

We shouldnt be so quick to call faul because of what appears to be a difficult shot just because we dont have the equipment or abilities to pull it off.

mapsjanhere
May 5, 2010, 07:30 AM
Kraig, the problem with the story is that we know what equipment they supposedly used, and the properties of it. Aimed direct shots are pretty much out. So it surely would be possible to walk the rounds in if the target wasn't too attentive; the bullets were subsonic at the distance, and if there's something taking their attention, like shooting closer by, they might not notice a couple impacts above them on the hill.

BlueTrain
May 5, 2010, 08:03 AM
I've been told that even with a 120mm tank gun, the original sighting equipment was not sufficient to take aim out to the effective range of the gun. But that shortcoming has been made good since. In the same way, every element of the equipment has to be capable of handling the extreme ranges the cartridge is good for, not to mention the shooter. And luck is an indispensible element of the exercise, too.

I thought indirect fire with machine guns went out with water cooled guns.

LanceOregon
May 5, 2010, 08:30 AM
The sniper *was* using one of Accuracy International's rifles - the L115A3 in particular.

Man, you are right. I totally misread the story. I'm having much worse health problems than I thought.

.

Come and take it.
May 5, 2010, 10:15 AM
If he had fired several shots and once he connected with target 1 he took out target 2 with the next shot I could believe it.

Keep in mind that back in the 1800s a man shot an indian off a horse at around 2500 paces with a buffalo gun. It took a few shots to get the range though.

kraigwy
May 5, 2010, 03:28 PM
You're talking about Billy Dixon, the 2nd Battle of Adobe Wells. It was one shot, Billy himself said it was a lucky shot, but it was a one shot. It was surveyed by army surveyors and the distance was confirmed. It wasnt 2500 yards, it was just short of one mile (1760 yards).

Later at another simular battle, Billy Dixon was an army scout and recieved the MOH for his activities, One of only 4 civilians to recieve the MOH.

I'm shooting a BPCR Creedmoor match later this month, following the Creedmoor match will be a One Mile Match. Should be interesting. I'll be using a 45-70 with a midrange trajectory of about 650 feet.

(405 cast bullet, BC 250 @ 1300 FPS)

Jimro
May 5, 2010, 05:00 PM
Kraig, the problem with the story is that we know what equipment they supposedly used, and the properties of it. Aimed direct shots are pretty much out. So it surely would be possible to walk the rounds in if the target wasn't too attentive; the bullets were subsonic at the distance, and if there's something taking their attention, like shooting closer by, they might not notice a couple impacts above them on the hill.

And I've sat down and done the math. With 56 MOA of "UP" available on the SnB PMII scope (at least advertised on one websight) that gets a 0.662 Lockbase bullets at 3071 fps out to 1700 meters (and as you increase in altitude it increases the distance). When you are shooting uphill or downhill you multiply the distance by the cosign of the angle to get your correct hold distance. 2474m times cos45 = 1749m, which is well within the relm of 56 MOA given by the optic plus the "estimated six feet above the head" holdover reported (which works out to about 3 MOA since the impact was in the chest) gives a total of 59 MOA, which is firmly in the realm of the 60.5 MOA needed if the elevation was 5000 feet.

1.5 MOA at 2474m is roughly 40 inches, which is within the realm of a human body.

Now I don't know if the .mil version of the PMII is different from the civilian version (single turn or dual turn, MOA or milrad) but I doubt the mil version has less than the advertised 56 MOA of adjustment from zero for the civilian version.

Jimro

Palmetto-Pride
May 5, 2010, 05:10 PM
No matter how you slice and dice it there is no way that he could have seen his target in the scope with that much hold-over which for me puts this shot more on the side of luck than skill..........:rolleyes:

Disclaimer: (The above is just my opinion and in no way represents any facts)

Jimro
May 5, 2010, 05:18 PM
Palmetto-Pride,

Are you saying that bottoming out the "UP" adjustment on the scope, and holding over 3 MOA (less than a mildot distance) is not possible? If the shooter had to shoot flat 2,474 then I would agree with you, but shooting on an angle is different, you calculate the distance for the shot by multiplying straight line distance with the cosign of the angle.

I'm asking because that is exactly how my snipers have gotten shots at 1200 and 1300 meters with the m24 in 308. Bottom out the scope and use the mildots for holdover.

Although this is purely academic until someone knows the GPS locations of shooter and target.

Jimro

Sulaco2
May 5, 2010, 05:39 PM
"May 4, 2010: It was recently revealed that, last November, a British sniper (corporal Craig Harrison) set a new distance record when he killed two Taliban in Afghanistan, at a range of 2,620 meters (8,596 feet). He did this with a L115A3 rifle firing the 8.6mm Lapua Magnum round. The previous record was held by a Canadian soldier, corporal Rob Furlong, who dropped an al Qaeda gunman at 2,573 meters (7,972 feet) in 2002, also in Afghanistan. Furlong, however, was using a 12.7mm (.50 caliber) rifle. These weapons are good at 2,000 meters or more, but weigh twice as much as the 6.8 kg (15 pound) 8.6mm rifles."

Palmetto-Pride
May 5, 2010, 05:58 PM
Ok I wasn't really thinking about a downhill shot, I suppose that it would be possiable. Well I stand corrected if that was the case.

mapsjanhere
May 6, 2010, 07:46 AM
Even shooting down hill at high altitude you still have a 100 MOA drop to deal with. The S&B scope will bottom out after 50 MOA adjustment (unless they have bases with some pre-tilt, but no one mentioned that). To get the rest of the holdover, the estimate is you have to dial the magnification down to 8x or so. A guy at 2500 yards with 8x is pretty wee tiny, and you're out of hash marks.
PS: Played a bit more with JBM, you can try this at home :):
Just get a 38 special and start shooting at 600 yards with 2x magnification on your scope. You need to hit a 6" target.

Jimro
May 6, 2010, 02:15 PM
A guy at 2500 yards with 8x is pretty wee tiny, and you're out of hash marks.

I don't disagree with you, except that you don't need 100 moa of drop to shoot 1750m with a 338 Lapua, which is the drop distance for a 2474m shot with a 45 degree angle.

Since each mil = 3.44 moa, the scope could bottom out at 56 MOA and it would be a simple mil and a quarter holdover. Even with a straightline distance of 2474 it is only covering 1750m worth of horizontal, it also means that the shooter would be 1750m vertical difference with the target.

And let's not forget that Hathcock used an 8x Unertl scope on the ma deuce for his beyond 2k shot. So it can be done that way if you insist.

Jimro

N.H. Yankee
May 7, 2010, 05:52 PM
I dare ANYONE to stand 1.54 miles out from this guy and tell him it was luck.:D He might pull it off again, I guess some guys are just born lucky. Perhaps he got one of the best rifles McMillan made, maybe just enough better to pull off the shot, not all rifles are created equal, not even by McMillan.

Palmetto-Pride
May 7, 2010, 06:26 PM
Is it a double dare!!!!!:eek:

5RWill
May 11, 2010, 01:08 AM
I want to comment on the science part. Yes it takes skill to do what the guy did it's truly remarkable and especially with the .338. But as far as science goes for the military these shots are becoming easier. While they are still extremely hard to make, they are making progress. A prime example is the ballistic computer cheytac sends in it's M200 package for military sells. Allows for calculations so accurate a skilled shooter can hit a man size torso from 2500yds away.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ptErcYMppwg&feature=related

Go to 4:08 in the video, then go to 8:40 3 shots man size torso