Comments on: Sniper story

By: OM

OM — Tue, 13 Sep 2016 21:34:24 +0000

Parker:

Oh, the wide open spaces of WY. Worked there in the late 70’s and trained there in 2012. Had some interesting times there, some good times too; running the trails just outside the fence around “town” and spooking Pronghorn antelope was not unusual.

By: parker

parker — Tue, 13 Sep 2016 21:09:37 +0000

OM,

That is a very good discussion of what is involved in making long range, precision shots. Long range snipers have a spotter along side them. He measures wind and trajectory to enable the shooter to know where to adjust sights and where to hold. Amatuers like me, shooting at medium range targets have through experience learned how to judge wind speed and adjust sights.

BTW, it is difficult to find places to shoot beyond 300 or 400 yards. The range where I am a member has berms at 400 yards. Fortunately, I have a friend in Wyoming who has his own range that allows me to try my hand at 600 yards. My eyesight is still 20/20 but it is a challenge to shoot 12 inch groups at that distance.

By: Jenk

Jenk — Tue, 13 Sep 2016 21:04:29 +0000

Somebody was smoking–until his fellow jihadis put out what was left of the dirtbag. See, it isn’t just the US military that burns crap in the field….

By: Richard Aubrey

Richard Aubrey — Tue, 13 Sep 2016 20:25:22 +0000

When I was in, the zippo had an igniter in the nozzle that you initiated just before unloading the product which passed over the igniter.
Maybe the sniper waited for the igniter to start.
In addition, smashing metal into and through metal may create a spark. Or somebody was smoking.

By: OM

OM — Tue, 13 Sep 2016 17:03:13 +0000

Junior and Waidmann:

If you are really interested:

https://www.forgottenweapons.com/us-m2m2a1-flamethrower/

Ian also discusses the rifle bullet (non-tracer) blow up the tank scenario if memory serves me.

By: junior

junior — Tue, 13 Sep 2016 16:44:20 +0000

Waidmann –

Flamethrowers are notoriously volatile, and vulnerable to exploding when the tank is penetrated by a bullet. The wearer also tends to be a popular target on a real battlefield because infantrymen are terrified of the things (with good reason), and will prioritize the guy with a flamethrower as a target.

As a result, using one on the battlefield, or even standing close to the guy who’s carrying it, tends to be an unpopular battlefield duty.

By: Daniel in Brookline

Daniel in Brookline — Tue, 13 Sep 2016 16:34:40 +0000

Now that’s what I call good shooting!

By: Trimegistus

Trimegistus — Tue, 13 Sep 2016 15:04:09 +0000

The Left has decided that this war must be lost. Therefore there can be no heroism. No movies, no parades. Obama (assuming he even bothered to read the intel briefing about this) probably thought it was too bad that a Muslim community organizer was murdered by a white man.

By: Waidmann

Waidmann — Tue, 13 Sep 2016 14:04:24 +0000

I’m a little shaky regarding the science here. I thought firing a round though a gas tank would not cause it to explode. Something about the improper gas/air mixture.

Now, granted, napalm (or whatever is used in flamethrowers) isn’t gasoline, but will it actually ignite upon an impact like this one? Without a spark of some sore?

It’s a great story, and I hope it’s true, but I’d like a little more details before I believe it totally.

Waidmann

By: OM

OM — Tue, 13 Sep 2016 13:52:25 +0000

Parker:

Reading both linked stories illustrates your point regarding the 50 cal. Browning; long range precision and energy on target (but at the cost of a heavier firearm).

In the first case long range precision was called for in the second case long range precision was needed but it was also necessary to penetrate walls (masonry or concrete?) to kill the targets. In the second case armor piercing rounds were used and 30 were fired on the target using a semi-auto Barett.

In the first case a .338 Lapua magnum rifle might have done the job too, but a 50 cal Browning serviced the target quite adequately. Time to leave my armchair for the next QB assignment!