Matt's shot in a million

The Sun ^ | Fri, Apr 4, 2003 | NICK PARKER

[Ruth A.]

Just staggering to the imagination.

[Constitutionalist Conservative]

I would've preferred that he show just a little more tact.

Tact ain't his style. He's popular partly because of his reputation for speaking his mind.

[gcruse]

Yet it flew straight to the target, hitting the Iraqi in the chest.

Hah!  Well, no it didn't, and that's the point.  The wind
and the elevation bent the trajectory.  The bullet
flew precisely to its target, not straight.

[pragmatic_asian]

Well, it all worked out and I suppose that short of converting to Islam, there's nothing that he could've done to make the anti-american crowd like him.

[Lancey Howard]

A ROYAL Marines sniper told yesterday how he felled an Iraqi gunman in a strong wind from more than half a mile..... The 7.62 calibre round from Matt’s L96 sniper rifle was aimed 56ft to the left to allow for the wind, and 35ft high to allow for the distance..... Matt said: “Sam told me I would have to fire exactly 17 metres to the left of the target for the bullet to bend in the wind and take him out.

And there are never any fluctuations in wind speed - - it always blows at exactly the same speed. Okay.

"Is this story for real?"

Good question. It really, really strains credibility.

[bonesmccoy]

darn glad that guy wasn't at Bunker Hill!

[Windcatcher]

Sure the wind fluctuates. The questions are:

1. what is dv/dt? dt would be very small, on the order of a second or two (at most).

2. what is dv/ds (where s is the trajectory). I doubt it would be zero, but it could be small, depending on a lot of factors (mostly topography and terrain, I'd imagine).

I don't think he could unambiguously know that he would need a 17m deflection, but he might know it's 17m +/- 1m...

[Lancey Howard]

I don't think he could unambiguously know that he would need a 17m deflection, but he might know it's 17m +/- 1m...

Right. +/- 1m
And two guys nailed their targets in the chest from half a friggin' mile?
Sorry. Strains credibility.

[Myrddin]

Does this seem like a reasonable shot to take? You have a little "hands on" experience in this department.

[Lancey Howard]

I remember the rifle range at Parris Island like it was yesterday. (It was 23 years ago.) The 200 yard, then the 300 yard, then the 500 yard shots. Standing, sitting, prone. Taking a few shots so we could adjust our "dope". Those 500 yard shots with the M-16 from the prone position were hard enough in relatively calm weather, but I can't imagine shooting nearly 900 yards on a windy day with no practice shots to set the dope.

I know these snipers are good, but sheesh.

[Squantos]

Sure....about an 800 + meter shot on an 18 inch torso with a Malcomb Cooper designed Accuracy International Rifle in 7.62 (or I suspect .300 win mag caliber on the L96 variants may have been toted along to the big sandbox) would have been a fairly easy shot for a properly trained designated marksman let alone a trained sniper..

Aside from mirage that would have been a real bitch at that range in the heat of day with a crosswind ......I have 13 year old kids making the same shot on Coyotes from a bench.

Of course the Coyotes ain't shooting back either........:o)........Stay safe !!

[Ajnin]

The 7.62 calibre round from Matt’s L96 sniper rifle was aimed 56ft to the left to allow for the wind, and 35ft high to allow for the distance.

This doesn't sound plausable to me. A .270 drops about 10 inches at 400 meters. I would guess that it would drop between 24 and 36 inches at 800 meters. Even with the slower moving 7.62, a sniper still should not have had to aim 35 ft above the target even in high winds. When I was in the Marine Corps I shot from 500 meters in high winds quite frequently and I don't think that I ever adjusted past 12 inches left or right.

[the_doc]

Yeah, I know that faily-long-range snipers will sight eight or ten feet high (based on range tables which are stored on their personal computers nowadays!).

This usually isn't a 7.62 mm round, of course, but one which is chosen for a combination of flat trajectory and killing power at great distance. But sighting 35 feet high doesn't seem correct at 800 yards with a 7.62 NATO round!

The sighting computers which some high tech snipers carry also have correction tables for wind speed and direction. As I understand it, they even correct for barometric pressure and humidity when they are going for a really long kill. (For the longest shots, there is also a correction required for the spin of the bullet, which tends to make the bullet veer as it spins through the atmosphere.)

[Jimmy Valentine]

Reminds me of the old telephone company advertisement..."Reach out and touch someone."

Regards,

[Happygal]

Ivan, you see this? Nice job. Wonder did the Welshman target sheep like that growing up! ;-)

[SauronOfMordor]

This doesn't sound plausable to me. A .270 drops about 10 inches at 400 meters. I would guess that it would drop between 24 and 36 inches at 800 meters. Even with the slower moving 7.62, a sniper still should not have had to aim 35 ft above the target even in high winds.

Keep in mind that the Brit Army has gone metric. How much you want to bet that what the sniper said was "I aimed 35 high and 56 left", the reporter dubbed in "feet" and the sniper meant "centimeters" ?

[KeyWest]

I am with you unless the reporter got what was happening wrong. After normal corrections for range it may have been a 17 cm, not meter, correction to the already set corrections, which seems to make more sense.

[fightinJAG]

The Brits truly have been magnificent. I want them always by our side in future conflicts.

This Royal Marine's hometown is Betws-y-Coed, Wales. I visited there once and it is a beautiful, quaint, idyllic town. Like many snipers, Matt probably is a farm boy who grew up handling a gun.

[Redleg Duke]

The Bush Administration has successfully played the media all along. They fed them the lines that the media wanted to hear and used the media to misdirect the enemy, both foreign and Democratic...er...domestic.

[Redleg Duke]

"Is this article believable when it claims a windage correction of 56 feet for a mere 800-yard shot?"

I dunno, doc, guess you'll have to ask the target.