User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 11:23:47 AM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There are more than a few 6.5 caliber holes in dead bad guys over the last few years. Units that allow actual end users to have input on what they use at work... Even some JAG approved 6.5 rounds floating around... Yes, 6.5s are in service in some places. I suspect that the replacement for M118LR will be another 175 grain loading with less temperature sensitivity. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 11:26:13 AM EDT
[#2]
I don't get their resistance to any form of change.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 11:29:22 AM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Which is why I don't bother bringing up the 6.5C or 260, even if they're the first things to come to mind. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: They were not hitting reliably within the current engagement zone, why introduce more equipment for missing at even greater ranges? Actually, stepping up to a 300 WM would probably solve a lot of problems that they are experiencing at longer ranges. Based solely on the provided UKD hit percentages, yes, and for the same reason civilian shooters use other cartridges when points count. Ideally, a 6.5 CM would be perfect, but the Marine Corps would never adopt a "new" cartridge, so that leaves 300 WM, which is already in the inventory. Which is why I don't bother bringing up the 6.5C or 260, even if they're the first things to come to mind. I know, right?  |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 12:05:10 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yes, 6.5s are in service in some places. I suspect that the replacement for M118LR will be another 175 grain loading with less temperature sensitivity. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: There are more than a few 6.5 caliber holes in dead bad guys over the last few years. Units that allow actual end users to have input on what they use at work... Even some JAG approved 6.5 rounds floating around... Yes, 6.5s are in service in some places. I suspect that the replacement for M118LR will be another 175 grain loading with less temperature sensitivity. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 12:06:56 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They current have a 74% success rates against unknown distance targets within 500m during realistic training environments, when they move out to the 800s they are suppose to provide precisions fires to the rate goes down significantly. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
They were not hitting reliably within the current engagement zone, why introduce more equipment for missing at even greater ranges? Perhaps they were not hitting, in part, because of the rainbow trajectory of 7.62 and the fact that wind calls that are off by an amount imperceptible to humans can cause a miss beyond 600 yards using the M-40 series rifles? The M-40 is a relic. The round has so many inherent ballistic flaws, it would be laughable if it were presented today. It is more than a little obvious when everyone in DOD who has flexible procurement dumps 7.62... There is a reason that a bunch of 6.5 Surgeons got bought a few years back, then the M 2010 (not that this went well thanks to Remington), and now the PSR is somewhat working (Again..fuck you Remington). They current have a 74% success rates against unknown distance targets within 500m during realistic training environments, when they move out to the 800s they are suppose to provide precisions fires to the rate goes down significantly. Is most of that is due to budget constraints? IIRC Rictus spoke highly of the Mk12 w/ mk262. 5.56 has to be cheaper than .308. I don't know how many of those are still in service, but could they accurize some m16a4s, train out to 600m w/ 5.56, retain the M40 for 800m, and adopt a .338 lapua if they feel that they need an ELR option? With laser range finders are ranging errors really a concern? I'd figure most problems would be with wind estimation and a more wind sensitive cartridge, like 5.56, would make a good training aid. Do you feel 5.56 would be up to that task and would hit rates improve across the board with more trigger time at those kinds of intermediate ranges? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 12:57:17 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I see not much has changed in the Corps in the past 100 years. When grandpa was in the Scout Snipers in the early 40s he used a K98. In the early 40s, all Marine Scout/Sniper platoons were in the Pacific, or training to go there. Granted, there were a few Marines in the OSS in Europe. The standard USMC sniper rifle then was the Springfield. How would he have gotten and used a K98? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 1:03:25 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
In the early 40s, all Marine Scout/Sniper platoons were in the Pacific, or training to go there. Granted, there were a few Marines in the OSS in Europe. The standard USMC sniper rifle then was the Springfield. How would he have gotten and used a K98? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I see not much has changed in the Corps in the past 100 years. When grandpa was in the Scout Snipers in the early 40s he used a K98. In the early 40s, all Marine Scout/Sniper platoons were in the Pacific, or training to go there. Granted, there were a few Marines in the OSS in Europe. The standard USMC sniper rifle then was the Springfield. How would he have gotten and used a K98? Well grandma didn't like to much talk about him, I guess it made her sad. But I'm certain he was in Europe during the war. I found all of his Scout Sniper flags and armband, and various insignia in the trunk in the closet. Also a picture of him and his K98. After getting wounded early in the war he was in charge of guarding a POW camp somewhere. Grandma told me never to tell anyone about that because the "You Den" were looking for him. I'm not sure what that means or if thats the even the right word, her accent was pretty thick. Anyway, damn proud of Grandpa. He was an American hero to me. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 1:11:45 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I see not much has changed in the Corps in the past 100 years. When grandpa was in the Scout Snipers in the early 40s he used a K98. Was he in the Wehrmacht? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 1:13:19 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Well grandma didn't like to much talk about him, I guess it made her sad. But I'm certain he was in Europe during the war. I found all of his Scout Sniper flags and armband, and various insignia in the trunk in the closet. Also a picture of him and his K98. After getting wounded early in the war he was in charge of guarding a POW camp somewhere. Grandma told me never to tell anyone about that because the "You Den" were looking for him. I'm not sure what that means or if thats the even the right word, her accent was pretty thick. Anyway, damn proud of Grandpa. He was an American hero to me. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: I see not much has changed in the Corps in the past 100 years. When grandpa was in the Scout Snipers in the early 40s he used a K98. In the early 40s, all Marine Scout/Sniper platoons were in the Pacific, or training to go there. Granted, there were a few Marines in the OSS in Europe. The standard USMC sniper rifle then was the Springfield. How would he have gotten and used a K98? Well grandma didn't like to much talk about him, I guess it made her sad. But I'm certain he was in Europe during the war. I found all of his Scout Sniper flags and armband, and various insignia in the trunk in the closet. Also a picture of him and his K98. After getting wounded early in the war he was in charge of guarding a POW camp somewhere. Grandma told me never to tell anyone about that because the "You Den" were looking for him. I'm not sure what that means or if thats the even the right word, her accent was pretty thick. Anyway, damn proud of Grandpa. He was an American hero to me. Ok, you're fooling with us.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 1:18:52 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Ok, you're fooling with us.
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I see not much has changed in the Corps in the past 100 years. When grandpa was in the Scout Snipers in the early 40s he used a K98. In the early 40s, all Marine Scout/Sniper platoons were in the Pacific, or training to go there. Granted, there were a few Marines in the OSS in Europe. The standard USMC sniper rifle then was the Springfield. How would he have gotten and used a K98? Well grandma didn't like to much talk about him, I guess it made her sad. But I'm certain he was in Europe during the war. I found all of his Scout Sniper flags and armband, and various insignia in the trunk in the closet. Also a picture of him and his K98. After getting wounded early in the war he was in charge of guarding a POW camp somewhere. Grandma told me never to tell anyone about that because the "You Den" were looking for him. I'm not sure what that means or if thats the even the right word, her accent was pretty thick. Anyway, damn proud of Grandpa. He was an American hero to me. Ok, you're fooling with us.
Why don't you show some damn respect for people like my Grandpa who fought for your freedom? Me I support our troops. Especially the Scout Snipers. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 1:19:56 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Well grandma didn't like to much talk about him, I guess it made her sad. But I'm certain he was in Europe during the war. I found all of his Scout Sniper flags and armband, and various insignia in the trunk in the closet. Also a picture of him and his K98. After getting wounded early in the war he was in charge of guarding a POW camp somewhere. Grandma told me never to tell anyone about that because the "You Den" were looking for him. I'm not sure what that means or if thats the even the right word, her accent was pretty thick. Anyway, damn proud of Grandpa. He was an American hero to me. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I see not much has changed in the Corps in the past 100 years. When grandpa was in the Scout Snipers in the early 40s he used a K98. In the early 40s, all Marine Scout/Sniper platoons were in the Pacific, or training to go there. Granted, there were a few Marines in the OSS in Europe. The standard USMC sniper rifle then was the Springfield. How would he have gotten and used a K98? Well grandma didn't like to much talk about him, I guess it made her sad. But I'm certain he was in Europe during the war. I found all of his Scout Sniper flags and armband, and various insignia in the trunk in the closet. Also a picture of him and his K98. After getting wounded early in the war he was in charge of guarding a POW camp somewhere. Grandma told me never to tell anyone about that because the "You Den" were looking for him. I'm not sure what that means or if thats the even the right word, her accent was pretty thick. Anyway, damn proud of Grandpa. He was an American hero to me. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 1:35:04 PM EDT
[#12]
lulz at people taking diesel seriously.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 1:45:46 PM EDT
[#13]
Meh, give em all SASR's. That way there's no new calibers to set the logistics weenies a shriekin'.
Plus you get Raufus rounds.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-NCJFI7T6Zc
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 2:05:36 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: lulz at people taking diesel seriously. I found a picture of his opa:  |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/1/2015 2:11:50 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Is most of that is due to budget constraints? IIRC Rictus spoke highly of the Mk12 w/ mk262. 5.56 has to be cheaper than .308. I don't know how many of those are still in service, but could they accurize some m16a4s, train out to 600m w/ 5.56, retain the M40 for 800m, and adopt a .338 lapua if they feel that they need an ELR option? With laser range finders are ranging errors really a concern? I'd figure most problems would be with wind estimation and a more wind sensitive cartridge, like 5.56, would make a good training aid. Do you feel 5.56 would be up to that task and would hit rates improve across the board with more trigger time at those kinds of intermediate ranges? I can't speak to USMC budget constraints, but I have dealt with some very silly budget arguments with regard to maintaining am extant system in the face of new procurement. Still, it wasn't the same situation. As for the Mk12, I and many others felt it was an ideal solution to integrating precision marksmanship with maneuver units. Sure, the Mk12 could have been tweaked a bit and I personally think that underpowering the standard optics was the biggest problem, but the positives were there. I found it to be adequate to 800m (775m for damn sure) and external ballistics with the AA53 were on par with M118LR, a touch flatter shooting and needing about 30% more Windage than M118LR, on average. I did have the opportunity to school a USMC sniper who was rather disapproving of the concept by getting two traces in the air at the same time for two hits on a maiden at 1000m, and I shoot my own half-assed clone to 1k yards with a touch over 10 mils elevation. In the field, I can work with windage and its going to be tricky with either 308 or 5.56mm. Range estimation is my nemesis. Any LRF suitable to a DM's role won't be a reliable solution, as they just don't work as well as many seem to think. There are other dark horse issues, as well. However, once you get into the genre of dedicated long range precision rifles in calibers like 338LM, you're in a different environment where things like the Viper and MkVII are more practical, with integration and maneuver taken out of the picture to a large degree. As for training with one and employing another, I just don't see any benefit and wouldn't bother to fight the budget over it. Employ only 308, train with it. JMHO, as that's what it's going to be by all outward appearances. IME, training is the missing link where precision marksmanship fails. There are lots of guys with a school under their belts and a bit of sustainment training to keep them kind of fresh, but there are relatively few real shooters in the precision community. The latter can do the work with smaller calibers. There just aren't enough of them to fill slots. Not even close. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 12:57:33 AM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yes, 6.5s are in service in some places. I suspect that the replacement for M118LR will be another 175 grain loading with less temperature sensitivity. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
There are more than a few 6.5 caliber holes in dead bad guys over the last few years. Units that allow actual end users to have input on what they use at work... Even some JAG approved 6.5 rounds floating around... Yes, 6.5s are in service in some places. I suspect that the replacement for M118LR will be another 175 grain loading with less temperature sensitivity. Yeah, maybe they can call it MK 316
I am not holding out hope. I was handed M852 with a manufacture date older than me not too long ago... |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 12:58:13 AM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
FedDC, do the USSS counter snipers still use 7mm? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
There are more than a few 6.5 caliber holes in dead bad guys over the last few years. Units that allow actual end users to have input on what they use at work... Even some JAG approved 6.5 rounds floating around... Yes, 6.5s are in service in some places. I suspect that the replacement for M118LR will be another 175 grain loading with less temperature sensitivity. Don't know, haven't ever worked with any. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 9:10:50 AM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yeah, maybe they can call it MK 316
I am not holding out hope. I was handed M852 with a manufacture date older than me not too long ago... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
There are more than a few 6.5 caliber holes in dead bad guys over the last few years. Units that allow actual end users to have input on what they use at work... Even some JAG approved 6.5 rounds floating around... Yes, 6.5s are in service in some places. I suspect that the replacement for M118LR will be another 175 grain loading with less temperature sensitivity. Yeah, maybe they can call it MK 316
I am not holding out hope. I was handed M852 with a manufacture date older than me not too long ago... I'm waiting for the LR to dwindle and for the 316 to take over the shelves. I don't think we're going to see anything else any time soon. I haven't seen M852 in forever. I've shot M118SB since the last time I had any M852. I was issued some M8 API which was 1948 manufacture in AFG. That made it a little older than me. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 9:37:03 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
1000yd shots with any round will always be a low percentage deal. It would seem if a sniper has eyes on a HVT at 1000yds then something much more lethal than a single rifle bullet would be a better option. I don't really understand the utility of a bolt gun in 7.62/308? The semi give up very little in real usable precision inside the effective range of the 308 and bring a lot with the follow up shots. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
In the general sense, if you can eye something, you can kill with precision now. Back in the day, the sniper was your only PGM outside of a TOW. But now, you have a billion precision options out there. 1000yd shots with any round will always be a low percentage deal. It would seem if a sniper has eyes on a HVT at 1000yds then something much more lethal than a single rifle bullet would be a better option. I don't really understand the utility of a bolt gun in 7.62/308? The semi give up very little in real usable precision inside the effective range of the 308 and bring a lot with the follow up shots. The military takes into account colateral damage these days. So dropping a JDAM or using a hellfire may not always be the best option. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 10:31:56 AM EDT
[#20]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 10:34:01 AM EDT
[#21]
They can probably buy everyone in the USMC a new sniper rifle and train them for the price of a single F-35. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 10:37:10 AM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They can probably buy everyone in the USMC a new sniper rifle and train them for the price of a single F-35. No shit. I also understand why they don't go with the .338 LP magnum shit is like 12 dollars a trigger pull. I don't know what the max effective range on a point target is for 6.5C or 6.8SPC but it seams it would be more cost effective. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 10:49:36 AM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
A flatter flying round would help them hit better within the engagement zone they are already working in. Not to mention better terminal ballistics and barrier penetration on target. Fine, a .260 would help with that and only cost new barrels and ammo. I suspect that the issue is not the gun but rather budget that the military is having to stretch like a Armstrong doll. New platforms in any guise is out of the question for the foreseeable future. Remember in history Rome's legions were the best equipped and dressed............in the end they had wooden armor and cheap swords for their conscripts and forign fighters... America is approaching that same type of status.
From this....... 
to ultimately this..... 
While this isn't totally accurate (depending on which historian you read) it does follow a juxtaposition to it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 11:13:56 AM EDT
[#24]
Since MK248 Mod 1 has been available since 2009ish, I could see that as the most likely candidate for a step up.
Ideally, the Marines could retain their short action guns, and use MK316 Mod 0 (is there Mod 1 yet?), and add some 300wm guns to their inventory. More tools in the tool shed. I'm not a sniper guy, but it seems like the 300wm would help bridge the gap between the M40s and the SASR. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 12:07:27 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Since MK248 Mod 1 has been available since 2009ish, I could see that as the most likely candidate for a step up. Ideally, the Marines could retain their short action guns, and use MK316 Mod 0 (is there Mod 1 yet?), and add some 300wm guns to their inventory. More tools in the tool shed. I'm not a sniper guy, but it seems like the 300wm would help bridge the gap between the M40s and the SASR. Did they ever start issuing it out? Last I heard, it was not issued widely due to some 2010s having problems with it? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 12:13:12 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Did they ever start issuing it out? Last I heard, it was not issued widely due to some 2010s having problems with it? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Since MK248 Mod 1 has been available since 2009ish, I could see that as the most likely candidate for a step up. Ideally, the Marines could retain their short action guns, and use MK316 Mod 0 (is there Mod 1 yet?), and add some 300wm guns to their inventory. More tools in the tool shed. I'm not a sniper guy, but it seems like the 300wm would help bridge the gap between the M40s and the SASR. Did they ever start issuing it out? Last I heard, it was not issued widely due to some 2010s having problems with it? It's around, but I'm still seeing 191 show up. I never warmed up to the 300WM, though. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 12:19:50 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Did they ever start issuing it out? Last I heard, it was not issued widely due to some 2010s having problems with it? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Since MK248 Mod 1 has been available since 2009ish, I could see that as the most likely candidate for a step up. Ideally, the Marines could retain their short action guns, and use MK316 Mod 0 (is there Mod 1 yet?), and add some 300wm guns to their inventory. More tools in the tool shed. I'm not a sniper guy, but it seems like the 300wm would help bridge the gap between the M40s and the SASR. Did they ever start issuing it out? Last I heard, it was not issued widely due to some 2010s having problems with it? I wouldn't know. All those optimized loads Crane pushed out in 2009 started showing up when I was in Afghanistan in 2010. We didn't have any 300wm weapons. ETA: I got out in 2011. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 12:35:49 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The military takes into account colateral damage these days. So dropping a JDAM or using a hellfire may not always be the best option. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
In the general sense, if you can eye something, you can kill with precision now. Back in the day, the sniper was your only PGM outside of a TOW. But now, you have a billion precision options out there. 1000yd shots with any round will always be a low percentage deal. It would seem if a sniper has eyes on a HVT at 1000yds then something much more lethal than a single rifle bullet would be a better option. I don't really understand the utility of a bolt gun in 7.62/308? The semi give up very little in real usable precision inside the effective range of the 308 and bring a lot with the follow up shots. The military takes into account colateral damage these days. So dropping a JDAM or using a hellfire may not always be the best option. There is never any option that is "always" the best option. A single rifle bullet from over 1000yds just seems like it would very rarely the best option. Quoted:
Range estimation is my nemesis. Any LRF suitable to a DM's role won't be a reliable solution, as they just don't work as well as many seem to think. What is wrong with the latest eyesafe commercial LRFs? I would think the Zeiss, Leica, or Swaro bino/LRFs would be really useful for the DM or sniper. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 1:00:30 PM EDT
[#29]
What does it matter. All of these 'commanders' are going to have them cache sweeping along the euphrates anyway.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 1:20:22 PM EDT
[#30]
I have long thought a 6.5mm semi and .338 bolt would cover our needs for all the Forces but I know logistically that would never happen.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 1:24:50 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What is wrong with the latest eyesafe commercial LRFs? I would think the Zeiss, Leica, or Swaro bino/LRFs would be really useful for the DM or sniper. They aren't reliable. That could mean that they're reliant upon batteries, but that's a small issue. Light and atmospheric conditions affect them, things like bright light, darkness and particulates. Reflectivity of objects and targets is an issue. As often as not, you'll end up bracketing a target to range it and then you're not shooting a hard number in terms of data. They're not incredible easy to aim and return a number for something that isn't a target, which can be really tricky when playing angles or working with standoff for concealment. They often don't read at all when distances are far enough to become really important. In some venues they can be detected by standard enemy equipment. They're a great tool, but not a total solution. We generally hit targets with a LRF after completing UKD shoots and the results are telling, as they often come back blank or spit out numbers that don't quite match the data for scored hits. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 1:25:27 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I have long thought a 6.5mm semi and .338 bolt would cover our needs for all the Forces but I know logistically that would never happen. Agreed on both counts. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 1:33:53 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They aren't reliable. That could mean that they're reliant upon batteries, but that's a small issue. Light and atmospheric conditions affect them, things like bright light, darkness and particulates. Reflectivity of objects and targets is an issue. As often as not, you'll end up bracketing a target to range it and then you're not shooting a hard number in terms of data. They're not incredible easy to aim and return a number for something that isn't a target, which can be really tricky when playing angles or working with standoff for concealment. They often don't read at all when distances are far enough to become really important. In some venues they can be detected by standard enemy equipment. They're a great tool, but not a total solution. We generally hit targets with a LRF after completing UKD shoots and the results are telling, as they often come back blank or spit out numbers that don't quite match the data for scored hits. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
What is wrong with the latest eyesafe commercial LRFs? I would think the Zeiss, Leica, or Swaro bino/LRFs would be really useful for the DM or sniper. They aren't reliable. That could mean that they're reliant upon batteries, but that's a small issue. Light and atmospheric conditions affect them, things like bright light, darkness and particulates. Reflectivity of objects and targets is an issue. As often as not, you'll end up bracketing a target to range it and then you're not shooting a hard number in terms of data. They're not incredible easy to aim and return a number for something that isn't a target, which can be really tricky when playing angles or working with standoff for concealment. They often don't read at all when distances are far enough to become really important. In some venues they can be detected by standard enemy equipment. They're a great tool, but not a total solution. We generally hit targets with a LRF after completing UKD shoots and the results are telling, as they often come back blank or spit out numbers that don't quite match the data for scored hits. We are starting source selection for a new common LRF this winter You are spot on, on attmopsheric effects and why we have FOs triple lase prior to map spotting and putting the grid into PSSSOF. But often data does not reflect range to target; I don't know if they still train how to strip out non-standard conditions from firing solutions to determine what in the big bullet world known as position constants; you would often see several hundred meters in difference between real distance and data range to the target when you got in the high 20 km to target range. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 1:50:29 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's around, but I'm still seeing 191 show up. I never warmed up to the 300WM, though. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Since MK248 Mod 1 has been available since 2009ish, I could see that as the most likely candidate for a step up. Ideally, the Marines could retain their short action guns, and use MK316 Mod 0 (is there Mod 1 yet?), and add some 300wm guns to their inventory. More tools in the tool shed. I'm not a sniper guy, but it seems like the 300wm would help bridge the gap between the M40s and the SASR. Did they ever start issuing it out? Last I heard, it was not issued widely due to some 2010s having problems with it? It's around, but I'm still seeing 191 show up. I never warmed up to the 300WM, though. Agreed. I have a MK 13 Mod 6 and I'm not that impressed. It works but as I spend more time on larger rounds, I appreciate the AI rifles more and more. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 2:07:47 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Perhaps they were not hitting, in part, because of the rainbow trajectory of 7.62 and the fact that wind calls that are off by an amount imperceptible to humans can cause a miss beyond 600 yards using the M-40 series rifles? The M-40 is a relic. The round has so many inherent ballistic flaws, it would be laughable if it were presented today. It is more than a little obvious when everyone in DOD who has flexible procurement dumps 7.62... There is a reason that a bunch of 6.5 Surgeons got bought a few years back, then the M 2010 (not that this went well thanks to Remington), and now the PSR is somewhat working (Again..fuck you Remington). Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
They were not hitting reliably within the current engagement zone, why introduce more equipment for missing at even greater ranges? Perhaps they were not hitting, in part, because of the rainbow trajectory of 7.62 and the fact that wind calls that are off by an amount imperceptible to humans can cause a miss beyond 600 yards using the M-40 series rifles? The M-40 is a relic. The round has so many inherent ballistic flaws, it would be laughable if it were presented today. It is more than a little obvious when everyone in DOD who has flexible procurement dumps 7.62... There is a reason that a bunch of 6.5 Surgeons got bought a few years back, then the M 2010 (not that this went well thanks to Remington), and now the PSR is somewhat working (Again..fuck you Remington). What NATO round would you suggest? If not, what's the availability of the mall ninja round you'd suggest instead? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 2:16:45 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What NATO round would you suggest? If not, what's the availability of the mall ninja round you'd suggest instead? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
They were not hitting reliably within the current engagement zone, why introduce more equipment for missing at even greater ranges? Perhaps they were not hitting, in part, because of the rainbow trajectory of 7.62 and the fact that wind calls that are off by an amount imperceptible to humans can cause a miss beyond 600 yards using the M-40 series rifles? The M-40 is a relic. The round has so many inherent ballistic flaws, it would be laughable if it were presented today. It is more than a little obvious when everyone in DOD who has flexible procurement dumps 7.62... There is a reason that a bunch of 6.5 Surgeons got bought a few years back, then the M 2010 (not that this went well thanks to Remington), and now the PSR is somewhat working (Again..fuck you Remington). What NATO round would you suggest? If not, what's the availability of the mall ninja round you'd suggest instead? Why does it have to be a NATO round? Why not go with some of the more flatter flying rounds? If 7.62 isn't working find something that will work. 300 WM seems like a viable option. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 2:32:39 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
We are starting source selection for a new common LRF this winter You are spot on, on attmopsheric effects and why we have FOs triple lase prior to map spotting and putting the grid into PSSSOF. But often data does not reflect range to target; I don't know if they still train how to strip out non-standard conditions from firing solutions to determine what in the big bullet world known as position constants; you would often see several hundred meters in difference between real distance and data range to the target when you got in the high 20 km to target range. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What is wrong with the latest eyesafe commercial LRFs? I would think the Zeiss, Leica, or Swaro bino/LRFs would be really useful for the DM or sniper. They aren't reliable. That could mean that they're reliant upon batteries, but that's a small issue. Light and atmospheric conditions affect them, things like bright light, darkness and particulates. Reflectivity of objects and targets is an issue. As often as not, you'll end up bracketing a target to range it and then you're not shooting a hard number in terms of data. They're not incredible easy to aim and return a number for something that isn't a target, which can be really tricky when playing angles or working with standoff for concealment. They often don't read at all when distances are far enough to become really important. In some venues they can be detected by standard enemy equipment. They're a great tool, but not a total solution. We generally hit targets with a LRF after completing UKD shoots and the results are telling, as they often come back blank or spit out numbers that don't quite match the data for scored hits. We are starting source selection for a new common LRF this winter You are spot on, on attmopsheric effects and why we have FOs triple lase prior to map spotting and putting the grid into PSSSOF. But often data does not reflect range to target; I don't know if they still train how to strip out non-standard conditions from firing solutions to determine what in the big bullet world known as position constants; you would often see several hundred meters in difference between real distance and data range to the target when you got in the high 20 km to target range. The same problems and you're not even talking pocket models. Who woulda thought? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 2:34:03 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Agreed. I have a MK 13 Mod 6 and I'm not that impressed. It works but as I spend more time on larger rounds, I appreciate the AI rifles more and more. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Since MK248 Mod 1 has been available since 2009ish, I could see that as the most likely candidate for a step up. Ideally, the Marines could retain their short action guns, and use MK316 Mod 0 (is there Mod 1 yet?), and add some 300wm guns to their inventory. More tools in the tool shed. I'm not a sniper guy, but it seems like the 300wm would help bridge the gap between the M40s and the SASR. Did they ever start issuing it out? Last I heard, it was not issued widely due to some 2010s having problems with it? It's around, but I'm still seeing 191 show up. I never warmed up to the 300WM, though. Agreed. I have a MK 13 Mod 6 and I'm not that impressed. It works but as I spend more time on larger rounds, I appreciate the AI rifles more and more. I permanently loaned out my Mk13 on the last big trip. I don't believe it was ever carried by that fellow. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 2:41:01 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What NATO round would you suggest? If not, what's the availability of the mall ninja round you'd suggest instead? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
They were not hitting reliably within the current engagement zone, why introduce more equipment for missing at even greater ranges? Perhaps they were not hitting, in part, because of the rainbow trajectory of 7.62 and the fact that wind calls that are off by an amount imperceptible to humans can cause a miss beyond 600 yards using the M-40 series rifles? The M-40 is a relic. The round has so many inherent ballistic flaws, it would be laughable if it were presented today. It is more than a little obvious when everyone in DOD who has flexible procurement dumps 7.62... There is a reason that a bunch of 6.5 Surgeons got bought a few years back, then the M 2010 (not that this went well thanks to Remington), and now the PSR is somewhat working (Again..fuck you Remington). What NATO round would you suggest? If not, what's the availability of the mall ninja round you'd suggest instead? As asked already, why a NATO cartridge? We're not talking about GPMGs and individual weaponsweapons. And 300WM is already in the system. As for the 6.5s, they're far from mall ninja equipment and pretty standard with competitors, hobbyists and some select professional folks, producing external ballistic performance similar to the 300WM in rifles designed for the 7.62x51mm, but with a bit less weight and recoil than the 7.62. The real issue is logistical requirements pushing against the weight of the larger organization, which probably isn't a hill worth dying on. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 2:45:39 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Well, the Marines should simply put an end to this search for more deadly weapons and concentrate on what their new mission is. To have a more transgender, cisgender and queer-friendly Corps. That's what their new mission is. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: With the loss of so many top marines I suspect the "guns are icky" group of officers are now in charge. They probably don't want another "American Sniper" among them. According to a former SGM from Regiment the upper echelon of all of the services is occupied by the "guns are icky" crowd. Well, the Marines should simply put an end to this search for more deadly weapons and concentrate on what their new mission is. To have a more transgender, cisgender and queer-friendly Corps. That's what their new mission is. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 2:48:36 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Well, the Marines are famous for being able to destroy anything. Maybe they can smash the Heterocage. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
With the loss of so many top marines I suspect the "guns are icky" group of officers are now in charge. They probably don't want another "American Sniper" among them. According to a former SGM from Regiment the upper echelon of all of the services is occupied by the "guns are icky" crowd. Well, the Marines should simply put an end to this search for more deadly weapons and concentrate on what their new mission is. To have a more transgender, cisgender and queer-friendly Corps. That's what their new mission is. They'll probably get it pregnant, and then it will claim most of their budget for whatever foul offspring comes of the union betwixt Marine and Heterocage.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 2:58:01 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They'll probably get it pregnant, and then it will claim most of their budget for whatever foul offspring comes of the union betwixt Marine and Heterocage. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
With the loss of so many top marines I suspect the "guns are icky" group of officers are now in charge. They probably don't want another "American Sniper" among them. According to a former SGM from Regiment the upper echelon of all of the services is occupied by the "guns are icky" crowd. Well, the Marines should simply put an end to this search for more deadly weapons and concentrate on what their new mission is. To have a more transgender, cisgender and queer-friendly Corps. That's what their new mission is. They'll probably get it pregnant, and then it will claim most of their budget for whatever foul offspring comes of the union betwixt Marine and Heterocage. Stay in your lane and leave the social engineering to the proper pay grades.
Elevation 4.1...center. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 2:59:58 PM EDT
[#43]
Some of the comments from users and the complaints from usmc are silly given that the average range of engagement is under 500 yards. I personally think changing calibers would be laughable. If they REALLY have to do it just go 6.5 Lapua. Without saying it, they're pretty much demanding .300 win mag or .338 lapua.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 3:00:34 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I see not much has changed in the Corps in the past 100 years. When grandpa was in the Scout Snipers in the early 40s he used a K98. Lolwut. Not sure if serious. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 3:23:12 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What is wrong with the latest eyesafe commercial LRFs? I would think the Zeiss, Leica, or Swaro bino/LRFs would be really useful for the DM or sniper. Ever try to lase a man-sized target at 600m+ without a tripod? Super not awesome, even assuming he is fully exposed. I always wonder if im getting Parkinson's when I try. Im a big fan of using .2 mil stadia in rifle optics and an LRF as a dual confirmation type deal with ranging. Both separately can be fairly problematic. A second focal plane spotting scope with horus reticle and a notebook has been my easiest means of ranging found. Once you get into 20x+ the first focals are pretty much useless to me. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 3:24:38 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What NATO round would you suggest? If not, what's the availability of the mall ninja round you'd suggest instead? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
They were not hitting reliably within the current engagement zone, why introduce more equipment for missing at even greater ranges? Perhaps they were not hitting, in part, because of the rainbow trajectory of 7.62 and the fact that wind calls that are off by an amount imperceptible to humans can cause a miss beyond 600 yards using the M-40 series rifles? The M-40 is a relic. The round has so many inherent ballistic flaws, it would be laughable if it were presented today. It is more than a little obvious when everyone in DOD who has flexible procurement dumps 7.62... There is a reason that a bunch of 6.5 Surgeons got bought a few years back, then the M 2010 (not that this went well thanks to Remington), and now the PSR is somewhat working (Again..fuck you Remington). What NATO round would you suggest? If not, what's the availability of the mall ninja round you'd suggest instead? The 338 that Barnes is loading for the PSR Program would be a good start. There is no reason to carry a bolt gun in 7.62. Gas guns for spotters in something 6.5 and 338 for the shooter. There has been 338 in the DOD system for years and it is issued to multiple NATO nations. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 3:50:22 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Ever try to lase a man-sized target at 600m+ without a tripod? Super not awesome, even assuming he is fully exposed. I always wonder if im getting Parkinson's when I try. Im a big fan of using .2 mil stadia in rifle optics and an LRF as a dual confirmation type deal with ranging. Both separately can be fairly problematic. A second focal plane spotting scope with horus reticle and a notebook has been my easiest means of ranging found. Once you get into 20x+ the first focals are pretty much useless to me. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
What is wrong with the latest eyesafe commercial LRFs? I would think the Zeiss, Leica, or Swaro bino/LRFs would be really useful for the DM or sniper. Ever try to lase a man-sized target at 600m+ without a tripod? Super not awesome, even assuming he is fully exposed. I always wonder if im getting Parkinson's when I try. Im a big fan of using .2 mil stadia in rifle optics and an LRF as a dual confirmation type deal with ranging. Both separately can be fairly problematic. A second focal plane spotting scope with horus reticle and a notebook has been my easiest means of ranging found. Once you get into 20x+ the first focals are pretty much useless to me. The .2 mil stadia are an excellent tool, just more cumbersome than shooting a laser when a laser works. I assume you're speaking specifically of long shots and appropriate calibers when referencing optics. I live at 3x to 6x, so FFP is an absolute must, with 15-18x on the high end being plenty for target detection and identification, leaving FOV as my main concern. Not quite the same as working with 338 and consistent 800m+ engagements. Of course, the best scenario is wrangling a CTR and GPSing the hell out of the target in the process for reference with other available data, but such preparation and permissive environments are quite the luxury. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 3:51:19 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The same problems and you're not even talking pocket models. Who woulda thought? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What is wrong with the latest eyesafe commercial LRFs? I would think the Zeiss, Leica, or Swaro bino/LRFs would be really useful for the DM or sniper. They aren't reliable. That could mean that they're reliant upon batteries, but that's a small issue. Light and atmospheric conditions affect them, things like bright light, darkness and particulates. Reflectivity of objects and targets is an issue. As often as not, you'll end up bracketing a target to range it and then you're not shooting a hard number in terms of data. They're not incredible easy to aim and return a number for something that isn't a target, which can be really tricky when playing angles or working with standoff for concealment. They often don't read at all when distances are far enough to become really important. In some venues they can be detected by standard enemy equipment. They're a great tool, but not a total solution. We generally hit targets with a LRF after completing UKD shoots and the results are telling, as they often come back blank or spit out numbers that don't quite match the data for scored hits. We are starting source selection for a new common LRF this winter You are spot on, on attmopsheric effects and why we have FOs triple lase prior to map spotting and putting the grid into PSSSOF. But often data does not reflect range to target; I don't know if they still train how to strip out non-standard conditions from firing solutions to determine what in the big bullet world known as position constants; you would often see several hundred meters in difference between real distance and data range to the target when you got in the high 20 km to target range. The same problems and you're not even talking pocket models. Who woulda thought? Sure you can have issues with LRFs but as RON posted the Marine Corps is not trying to decide if to buy a new LRF but which one to select. I assume this is an unit suitable for artillary and JTAC usage. I would way rather be stuck with the ballistics of the 7.62/308 and have a light reliable LRF (I have a Zeiss LRF/bino) than take the incremental ballistic gain from something like a 6.5X47 or Creedmoor and no LRF. Being a civilian I get to have both.
There is a reason why many LR competitions have stages where LRFs are forbidden, it makes it harder to hit the target. Current gen Zeiss, Swaro, and Leica LRF/bino combos are amazing and would probably help out the Marine snipers more than SOCOMs new whizbang chassis gun, unless the enemy has active countermeasures. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 3:53:16 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Ever try to lase a man-sized target at 600m+ without a tripod? Super not awesome, even assuming he is fully exposed. I always wonder if im getting Parkinson's when I try. Im a big fan of using .2 mil stadia in rifle optics and an LRF as a dual confirmation type deal with ranging. Both separately can be fairly problematic. A second focal plane spotting scope with horus reticle and a notebook has been my easiest means of ranging found. Once you get into 20x+ the first focals are pretty much useless to me. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
What is wrong with the latest eyesafe commercial LRFs? I would think the Zeiss, Leica, or Swaro bino/LRFs would be really useful for the DM or sniper. Ever try to lase a man-sized target at 600m+ without a tripod? Super not awesome, even assuming he is fully exposed. I always wonder if im getting Parkinson's when I try. Im a big fan of using .2 mil stadia in rifle optics and an LRF as a dual confirmation type deal with ranging. Both separately can be fairly problematic. A second focal plane spotting scope with horus reticle and a notebook has been my easiest means of ranging found. Once you get into 20x+ the first focals are pretty much useless to me. One might say I have a bunch of experience using LRFs for hunting. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/2/2015 3:58:52 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Sure you can have issues with LRFs but as RON posted the Marine Corps is not trying to decide if to buy a new LRF which one to select. I assume this is an unit suitable for artillary and JTAC usage. I would way rather be stuck with the ballistics of the 7.62/308 and have a light reliable LRF (I have a Zeiss LRF/bino) than take the incremental ballistic gain from something like a 6.5X47 or Creedmoor and no LRF. Being a civilian I get to have both.
There is a reason why many LR competitions have stages where LRFs are forbidden, it make it harder to hit the target. Current gen Zeiss, Swaro, and Leica LRF/bino combos are amazing and would probably help out the Marine snipers more than SOCOMs new whizbang chassis gun, unless the enemy has active countermeasures. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What is wrong with the latest eyesafe commercial LRFs? I would think the Zeiss, Leica, or Swaro bino/LRFs would be really useful for the DM or sniper. They aren't reliable. That could mean that they're reliant upon batteries, but that's a small issue. Light and atmospheric conditions affect them, things like bright light, darkness and particulates. Reflectivity of objects and targets is an issue. As often as not, you'll end up bracketing a target to range it and then you're not shooting a hard number in terms of data. They're not incredible easy to aim and return a number for something that isn't a target, which can be really tricky when playing angles or working with standoff for concealment. They often don't read at all when distances are far enough to become really important. In some venues they can be detected by standard enemy equipment. They're a great tool, but not a total solution. We generally hit targets with a LRF after completing UKD shoots and the results are telling, as they often come back blank or spit out numbers that don't quite match the data for scored hits. We are starting source selection for a new common LRF this winter You are spot on, on attmopsheric effects and why we have FOs triple lase prior to map spotting and putting the grid into PSSSOF. But often data does not reflect range to target; I don't know if they still train how to strip out non-standard conditions from firing solutions to determine what in the big bullet world known as position constants; you would often see several hundred meters in difference between real distance and data range to the target when you got in the high 20 km to target range. The same problems and you're not even talking pocket models. Who woulda thought? Sure you can have issues with LRFs but as RON posted the Marine Corps is not trying to decide if to buy a new LRF which one to select. I assume this is an unit suitable for artillary and JTAC usage. I would way rather be stuck with the ballistics of the 7.62/308 and have a light reliable LRF (I have a Zeiss LRF/bino) than take the incremental ballistic gain from something like a 6.5X47 or Creedmoor and no LRF. Being a civilian I get to have both.
There is a reason why many LR competitions have stages where LRFs are forbidden, it make it harder to hit the target. Current gen Zeiss, Swaro, and Leica LRF/bino combos are amazing and would probably help out the Marine snipers more than SOCOMs new whizbang chassis gun, unless the enemy has active countermeasures. Perhaps you missed my intentionally suppressed, and perhaps ineffectively suppressed, support for the 6.5s, which I use almost universally when off the clock. You may have also missed my support for the general employment of LRFs. As for competitive shooting, yeah, I've done some of that. You're way into the realm of comparing apples and oranges. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
.jpg)
