INFANTRY: Long Range Sniping and Thin Air

[EvanL]

www.strategypage.com

INFANTRY: Long Range Sniping and Thin Air


June 3, 2004: When the .50 caliber (12.7mm) sniper rifle was introduced in the 1980s, it was expected that records for the longest range sniper shot would regularly be broken. That finally happened, in Afghanistan on March 2-1, 2002. A team of Canadian snipers (Master Corporal Graham Ragsdale, Master Corporal Arron Perry and Corporal Dennis Eason of Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry), using the .50 caliber MacMillan Tac-50 sniper rifle, got at least one kill at 2,400 meters. There were several others at ranges nearly as long.

The previous record had been 2,250 meters, set by U.S. Marine Gunnery Sgt. Carlos Hathcock in Duc Pho, South Vietnam in 1967. The Hathcock shot was also made with a .50 caliber weapon, but this was not the modern .50 caliber sniper rifle, but a standard M-1 .50 caliber machine-gun with a scope on it. The previous records, many with poor documentation, with 7.62mm caliber sniper rifles, rarely exceeded a thousand meters. Technically, the 12.7mm sniper rifle is only accurate enough for consistent hits at up to about 1,800 meters.

The Canadians, and all modern snipers, use custom built rifles and ammo for their work. Hathcock had another disadvantage, he was firing in hot and humid Vietnam, while the Canadians were firing in the thin (at 11,000 feet) and cold air of Afghanistan. The hot, humid lowland air provides more resistance, and distortion, for a bullet. With that in mind, Hathcock always insisted that the shot was as much luck as skill. The Canadian shots were all skill, as they killed nearly two dozen Taliban and al Qaeda fighters at ranges of around 2,000 meters.

Before the specially made .50 caliber sniper rifles came along, the standard sniper rifle was 7.62mm (.30 caliber), with a standard effective range of 800 meters (although shots out to 1,000 meters were not unknown). The .50 caliber sniper rifle doubled those ranges, and then some. U.S. troops in Iraq are using .50 caliber sniper rifles, but are not getting as much opportunity to make really long distance shots because most of the operations are in flat areas.

[Uncle Sam]

Canadian snipers are very good at what they do. Much respect for them.

[scm77]

woot woot Got Some! woot

[Ian H]

What sort of range is .338 good out to?

[dacanadianbomb]

Isnt it against some sort of war pact or treaty to use .50 against human targets ?

[scm77]

My guess would be no. What good is a .50 calibre machine gun if you can shoot at people.

[ShotOver]

Err, an anti-material machine gun?

Just like the Barret M82 is an Anti Material weapon. Not an anti-personel weapon.

[ExtraT]

Err, an anti-material machine gun?


Tell me, and what do you think happens to the people inside that "material" when .50 cal bullets penetrate it's armor?

[ZaakM433]

The .338 Lapua has a longer effective range than the .50 I believe, correct me if im wrong...

The .50 machine guns mainly used for engaging mounted targets or vehicles, but to say that you cant use them on dismounted infantry is rediculous and impossible in the real world. Why do people think its wrong to kill a person with a .50 when they would be just as dead if they were shot 3 times in the chest with a m16?

[Upfrontreporting]

As far as I have been tought it's perfectly ok to shoot people with .50 cal, although certain types are not allowed to use on humans (can't remember which types though)


regards

[Identity31690]

I think the Geneva convention said you couldn't use AP .50 cal or other special bullets against human targets. Only ball ammunition is allowed.

[Upfrontreporting]

Yep, that's it.

[ZaakM433]

who are you shooting with the .50 cal! its not perfectly ok to run around town shooting people with the .50 cal! :slap:

[Upfrontreporting]

oh really :D

well in military scenario it would be appropriate to use .50 cal. ;)

[ZaakM433]

theres something cold and unfeeling about those smiley faces :)

[Falco]

[quote="ZaakM433"]The .338 Lapua has a longer effective range than the .50 I believe, correct me if im wrong...
[quote]

http://www.sfu.ca/casr/101-c3repl.htm

This is an article about the replacement trials for the C3 sniper rifle by a .338 luapa based system. The accuracy tests were condicted at 800m and at 1250m. So I guess you could conclude that the .50 rifle has a longer range than the .338 rifle.

[VorpalDoom]

actually, all forms of bullets are allowed except hollow points... its not uncommon for M82s to fire IAP rounds... Incidneary AP, and at people? of course. if you can rip someone in half from 1000 yards away, then thats great. If 50 cals weren't allowed, i would wonder how 20mm, 25mm, 30mm, and 40mm rounds are allowed, which are mounted, but still large cal "bullets" Also, AP rounds are hardly used against people, because they go through a person like the bullet goes through air. When AP rounds were first used in small arms in major combat, soldiers complained that it took 4 to 6 bullets to drop someone... which is more pain for them, which is less humaine.
I still don't understand the hollow point restrictions of the geneva convention. It makes no sense. Thats partily why M16s have 3 round burst, kuz it takse 2 or 3 ball 556 rounds to drop someone, where, if they were hp, it would only take one.

[Kilgor]

Is that part of the convention ever followed ?

Its pretty stupid anyway, we all saw the result of apache 30mm vs enemy dudes = damm big mess.

[Helly]

I think the Geneva convention said you couldn't use AP .50 cal or other special bullets against human targets. Only ball ammunition is allowed.

None of the Geneva Conventions (yup, conventions) govern the rules of warfare (and therefore the type of weapon or ammo that can or cannot be used). The 3rd Geneva Convention only deals with the treatment of prisoner of wars, nothing more.

The 1st deals with the treatment of sick and wounded soldiers. The 2nd deals with the treatment of injured sailors/shipwreck victimes. The 4th one deals with the treatment of civilians during wartime.

What you're looking for is the 4th Hague Convention, which deals with the "The Laws and Customs of War on Land". Again, there's nothing there that says it's illegal to use .50 cal ammo against human targets. The 4th Hague Convention doesn't even has an entry for "hollow point" (exact wording) bullets. We'll get to this later.

What the 4th Hague Convention prohibits is the use of "arms, projectiles, or material calculated to cause unnecessary suffering". The misconception is that it prohibits weapons that does too much damage. The truth is, what it prohibits is weapons that cause grievous wounds but does not kill outright, thereby causing prolonged agony to the victim. A .50 cal to the head (or chest, for that matter) does not cause unnecessary suffering. In most cases, the victim wouldn't even know he's hit 'coz he's already dead.

It does prohibit the use of soft-nosed "dum-dum" bullets (British invention, so-called because it was made at the Dum-Dum arsenal). They're expanding bullets (remember, they're soft-nosed), with effects kinda similar to hollow points. There's a very small open point at the end of the bullet, but nothing like the large hollows found in "real" hollow point bullets. Whether the prohibition of dum-dum bullets automatically means modern hollow points are outlawed in the battlefield is an issue that always causes never-ending arguments though, so I'm not going there. ;)

[Helly]

The .338 Lapua has a longer effective range than the .50 I believe, correct me if im wrong...


http://www.sfu.ca/casr/101-c3repl.htm

This is an article about the replacement trials for the C3 sniper rifle by a .338 luapa based system. The accuracy tests were condicted at 800m and at 1250m. So I guess you could conclude that the .50 rifle has a longer range than the .338 rifle.

You're both right. Something about maximum range and maximum effective range. ;)

The .50 cal has a longer maximum range, but it's inherently less accurate than the .338 Lapua, which is a caliber designed from the ground up for sniping. Unless the shooter is using match-grade .50 cal ammo, the .338 Lapua is more accurate, and therefore more "effective" in the anti-personnel role, at ranges up to 1,600 meters or so. Of course, a .338 Lapua can reach farther, but accuracy is seriously compromised for even longer ranges.

For highly-tuned .50 cal sniper rifles (similar to those used by the Canadian forces) using match-grade ammo, max effective range is said to be in the 1,800 meter range.

I'd say this though: for consistent hits at long ranges (>1,500 meters), a sniper is only as good as his spotter (and rifle/ammo combination, of course). This was demonstrated with the 2,400 meter hit in Afghanistan by the Canadians which took 3 rounds (if I remember correctly) and constant adjustments called out by the spotter. The shooter later said that the spotter did all the work. :)

[ZaakM433]

thanks for pointing that out for me Helly...

I would also like to point out that the shape and size of the .338 Lapua keeps the round at supersonic speeds further than the .50 caliber round. Perhaps Ill post some links later... If i cant find them (to many favorites) ;)

[GazB]

The purpose of the .338 Lapua magnums and similar rounds is to extend effective sniping ranges from the 800m max range of most 30 cal bullets to about 1,200m. It is also to provide a weapon that is not as large, heavy or cumbersome as a 50 cal rifle but which can be used at extended ranges.

Most 50 cal weapons that are designed as sniper rifles (or AMRs) are designed to be effective at longer ranges but are often used against more varied targets, like pieces of equipment, weapons, like missiles, or radars etc.

The longest range weapon I have seen is a South African rifle that uses a dual calibre dual role setup. It has two barrel either of which can be fitted for either a 20mm calibre round that relies on HE power for target effect out to about 1,500m or the Russian 14.5mm anti tank rifle round that is claimed to be usable out to 2,500m. The latter round is rather larger and rather more powerful than either the Russian or US 50 cal rounds and has a higher velocity and a flatter trajectory and heavier projectile.

BTW I would think that even in the thinner air of the Afghan mountains engaging targets at the ranges the Canadians and now no doubt the Americans are doing is an impressive feat. It would be very hard to estimate the constantly changing wind currents high in the mountains and heat shimmer and extreme cold are two huge obstacles to long range shooting. (The Soviets loved ZU-23 twin barrel towed 23mm cannon and Recoiless rifles like the SPG-9 for long range engagements from bases).