Unless I have missed it I have not seen much discussion on a shooter/shooter vs spotter/shooter strategy in regards to the counter sniper teams in the trump assignation situation. It appears to me that everyone was on the gun. It looked like at least one team had 20x Steiner binos but where hand holding them as seen in the attached pic. I think the census on here is that is too much power for hand holding. I can't tell if they had arca mounts on them to tripod mount. I understand one could have been spotting on the gun through the scope. However my question is what are the thoughts on this. Clearly there are monumental screw ups on all fronts but if you where going to train teams today from lessons learned do you want 4 people on guns or defined spotter and shooter with spotter on glass only.
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Shooter/Shooter vs Spotter/Shooter more effective. Secret Service sniper teams.
- Thread starter Texaslongshot
- Start date
I would think it’s a contingency backup approach. If primary has an issue then back up is there to cover primary.
One is none and two is one.
One is none and two is one.
I don't think the one is none and two is one philosophy applies here. Historically it been a spotter/shooter is better than and more effective than dual shooters. Both guys trying to decide to range, dope (granted not needed at this range ) and make decision on shooting. Had someone on a spotter saying guy with gun on a roof, he is not law enforcement engage made a difference i don't know.
But my question remains if you are training today. Are you saying dual shooter or spotter shooter. I am training for spotter/shooter.
Good chance both are shooting and both are spotting. When a target presents itself you may as well spot with another rifle and backup if necessary.
The chance of an attack of multiple targets on a high value asset is much higher as well.
Surprising neither has a semi auto platform
The chance of an attack of multiple targets on a high value asset is much higher as well.
Surprising neither has a semi auto platform
I’m referring to the picture most circulated which I believe is the guys above. The guys with two bolt/AI chassis guns.
I hear the shot was with a KAC SR25. But I’ve heard a lot of things. I’m just surprised a team such as this doesn’t have a heavy bolt like pictured paired with a MK12 or similar. Something with the ability to accurately engage and lay suppressive fire from an elevated position
Agreed hafejd30. Any that's my point in asking questions. One team had 2 bolt guns. One team had a bolt gun and a semi auto. What was the training and team designations. One team 2 bolts the other one bolt one semi. Is this by design or just pick your favorite gun. Was the training that both are shooter.s Was the training one is a spotter on a gun.?I think these are questions worth asking.
Honestly they probably saw open fields and decided any threat couldn’t possibly come that close and wanted to be able to engage to maximum distance.
If they were just planning to leave everything outside of 75 yards uncovered they could have just ran MK18’s and not lugged those 20 lbs setups on the roof
Probably just got to select their weapon of choice based on perceived threats when scouting ahead of time.
Or wanted to up the “cool gun” factor a notch and knew they’d be on every news channel if everything came through as planned (wink wink)
When hunting meat animals, I like the shooter/shooter scenario out to 500 yards. I can spot my friends miss and take the shot. You gotta be quick though and never a head shot.
On other than meat animals, we might shoot farther away. In those cases, shooter/spotter. It’s unlikely to be able to make a hit after a miss on a moving Coyote at beyond 500. And he will be moving.
On other than meat animals, we might shoot farther away. In those cases, shooter/spotter. It’s unlikely to be able to make a hit after a miss on a moving Coyote at beyond 500. And he will be moving.
i heard the ones in the picture were M2010s but took their word for it.
sniper support might often have a gas gun.
I think, in my very limited experience, spotter/shooter is better. The only reason I don’t compete that way is lack of properly committed partner. Solid teamwork adds, in effect, another member of the crew.
Generally speaking Shooter Shooter is the better method for many reasons. Shooter Spotter was largely the original method because of the limitations of riflescope magnification. Even when variable power scopes became the norm they were generally a low range of magnification. A spotter had a higher magnification and binos at a mid power magnification. With modern optics a shooter shooter team can still work in a shooter spotter shot plan while allowing for faster follow up shots or they can work targets/ sectors individually.
I’ll add at a minimum this was intentional incompetence by the SS. Too many clear security issues. Someone, in my opinion, ensured trumps detail was severely lacking competent personnel. Maybe intentionally over time that they just HOPED someone would try. More likely at least one person local or federal was involved helped make this happened. If not worse.
I’ll add at a minimum this was intentional incompetence by the SS. Too many clear security issues. Someone, in my opinion, ensured trumps detail was severely lacking competent personnel. Maybe intentionally over time that they just HOPED someone would try. More likely at least one person local or federal was involved helped make this happened. If not worse.
It would make sense that both are observing with whatever tool is best, obviously not a scope. And if there is anything suspicious then one gets on the rifle while one becomes spotter.
But that’s only the thoughts of a halfbreed from the res.
But that’s only the thoughts of a halfbreed from the res.
Similar threads
