The Long Road to Recognition - Snipers

Am Shooting Journal ^ | 11/21/2019 | F Jardim

[w1n1]

It is ironic that a country built on a tradition of rifle marksmanship took nearly 200 years to formally embrace the sniper, the man that represents the military apex of that long tradition. In each major war, through Vietnam, our armed forces began with no snipers and had to create training programs, usually in the theater of operations, to train them on the spot.
Training varied from none to good, but the typical formula that has made many a successful American sniper is a rural background with early and continuous exposure to hunting or competitive, rifle shooting. Time after time, at the conclusion of the war, the sniper schools were closed and the snipers faded away.

The knowledge they gained in the deadly art of hunting men faded away with them and had to be retaught in the next war. This happened because America’s senior military leaders saw the sniper as a specialist, of small importance compared to the conventional infantry, artillery, cavalry (and later armored) forces who massively outnumbered him. From the general’s point of view, snipers didn’t win wars; huge armies did.

DURING THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION, volunteers from the frontier colonies took their long rifles to war. No British soldier within 400 yards was safe, and 200-yard, one-shot-kills were common. Riflemen terrorized the British, on the march and in garrison, picking off officers and noncommissioned officers from hidden positions. Without any formal guidance, they were doing exactly the same mission as snipers do today, but the British had far greater respect for them than General George Washington. Slow to load and lacking the capacity for a bayonet, the rifles and the unruly men who wielded them were ill-suited to the linear tactics of the day. General Washington thought the riflemen were more trouble than they were worth and didn’t want them in the Continental Army.

In the American Civil War, snipers were called sharpshooters and recruited for their marksmanship skill. The percussion-lock rifled musket and minie ball of the period greatly increased accuracy, without sacrificing speed of loading, and made the battlefield a much deadlier place. Some sharpshooters made use of early telescopic sights and many used their personal weapons in battle. The breech-loading Sharps rifle was popular among Union sharpshooters because it could be loaded lying down, behind cover. The standard muzzle loading, rifled musket required the soldier to stand up to load it, thus exposing himself to enemy fire.
Confederates favored the British Whitworth rifle (maybe the first long-range sniper rifle in the world), when they could get it. With its unique hexagonal shaped, fast-twisting bore, instead of conventional cut rifling, it fired a six-sided bullet accurately just over a mile. It was the first military rifle built for long range accuracy. A Confederate sharpshooter, armed with a Whitworth rifle, killed Union General John Sedgwick at the Battle of Pennsylvania from a range of 800 yards.

DURING WORLD WAR I - The skill sets and standard operating procedures of our present-day snipers were developed and codified in no-man’s land and the trenches. By that time, the bolt action rifle reached the pinnacle of its development as an infantry weapon. It had a five- to 10-round magazine and fired a much smaller caliber, high-velocity and aerodynamic bullet, propelled by smokeless powder, up to 3 miles.

Once he had a suitable modern weapon, the scout sniper emerged in a form identical to the present day. Now actually called a sniper, he can engage targets at 1,000 yards with more precision than luck. Read the rest of sniper history.

[allendale]

The sniper is the most terrifying soldier on the battlefield. General Bradley ordered his men not to accept the surrender of German snipers who ran out of ammunition and tried to surrender. General Bradley’s order is well understood by other soldiers and of course it is not a subject that is prominently discussed. Yet if the Germans had won, Bradley would have been tried as a war criminal.

[Bonemaker]

[Tallguy]

” A Confederate sharpshooter, armed with a Whitworth rifle, killed Union General John Sedgwick at the Battle of Pennsylvania from a range of 800 yards. “

I think they meant Battle of Spotsylvania? Spell-check probably nailed the author...

[DIRTYSECRET]

No farm boys to replenish the supply. What do they do if there’s no war? Sit around and play cards?

[GOP Congress]

“General Bradley ordered his men not to accept the surrender of German snipers who ran out of ammunition and tried to surrender. General Bradley’s order is well understood by other soldiers and of course it is not a subject that is prominently discussed.”

Perhaps it was in retaliation for how the enemy treated allied snipers, who were usually designated for torture before being killed. Most snipers had pistols with them. Not for protection, but for suicide when they knew they couldn’t escape.

[GOP Congress]

Note that the grouping itself was concentrated in one quadrant of the target circle itself, which indicates his sights were not precisely set. This is an even greater accomplishment in that regard.

[eastexsteve]

Note that the grouping itself was concentrated in one quadrant of the target circle itself, which indicates his sights were not precisely set. This is an even greater accomplishment in that regard.

With manufacturing getting better and better, accuracy will only get better along with it. Rifle and bullet combinations that produce minute-of-angle (MOA) accuracy or better used to be hard to find. Nowadays, MOA rifles are pretty common if you spend the money. I've got a 5 yr old .308 tactical rifle that shoots about 1/2 MOA, and my wife has an AR10 variant in .308 that she just bought that will just about use the same hole at 50 yards. And, that gun is a semi-auto!

[GOP Congress]

Note that the grouping itself was concentrated in one quadrant of the target circle itself, which indicates his sights were not precisely set. This is an even greater accomplishment in that regard.

[GOP Congress]

Sorry, meant to reply and accidentally sent the same message as before. I meant to say that with the advent of DARPA’s self-guided, mid-flight changing bullets, sniping is going to get an epic upgrade.

[Grampa Dave]

Bradley would have been tried as a war criminal, if Obama had been POTUS!

[Rudolphus]

“Note that the grouping itself was concentrated in one quadrant of the target circle itself, which indicates his sights were not precisely set. This is an even greater accomplishment in that regard.”

Precision is the ability to replicate a result. Hence the tight group indicates great precision.

Accuracy is indicative of proximity to actual value. So it is the accuracy that needs to be set in this particular example. An instrument can be precise while not being accurate (the case here), the converse is not necessarily true.

I’ve worked in engineering where we were drilled in the proper nomenclature for instrumentation. Sorry if off topic, I can’t help myself.

[schurmann]

Not sure who “Frank Jardim” (cited as the author at the end of the original ASJ article) is, but he gets much of the detail wrong concerning the American War of Independence.

George Washington did have a low opinion of riflemen. His opinion of local militia wasn’t high either; he went on record as desirous of “an army that would look the enemy in the face.” He wanted regular troops trained to a high standard, able to execute European-style formations maneuvers and tactics with competence challenging the British Army Regulars. He got his wish - after Friedrich Wilhelm August Heinrich Ferdinand Steuben trained Continental cadres in standardized drill, at Valley Forge in early 1778.

Contrary to the article, American riflemen were formed into organized companies, but there never enough. Riflemen weren’t some uber-warriors of surpassing skill or endurance; after firing one shot in open-field engagements they were at the mercy of a standard infantry unit armed with smoothbores, firing a volley every 15-20 seconds. Riflemen could score hits at range, but were not capable of exacting mass casualties on a helpless foe from unreachable distances. Battles were even then fluid and dynamic; groups of riflemen often needed protection and detachments of light infantry armed with muskets were detailed to guard and screen them.

Ultimately rifles could not arm any significant fraction of the Continental Army because they were very expensive custom-made items, built one at a time by skilled craftsmen. Each one had a unique bore size and its owner had to undertake extensive training to learn its quirks, how to load for best results, and make his own ammunition. Repair and logistics were more complex, non-standard, and thus costly. The fledgling American nation - always strapped for resources - could not afford to field very many.

---

The Whitworth rifle was not some amazing game-changing innovation; it came rather late to the party in fact. The USA adopted its first issue rifle in 1803 and fielded an entire series of them alongside muskets until the 1850s.

The British organized their first rifle unit in 1805. The British Army issued the Baker rifle until the 1830s, then replaced it with the Brunswick rifle, firing belted balls. It was so successful it stayed in production into the 1880s.