Advanced Marksmanship Shooting Skills: Sniper vs Competition Shooters

[sinister]

Sinister, seriously thanks for the links. I wasn't commenting in my particular situation as much as trying to give some insight to organizations that not only fail to support guys, but outright obstruct their attempts to improve. I was once at a course made up of cops entirely there on their own dime. One guy stood up at the intro and asked that nobody remember he was there because he feared being disciplined by his agency for attending non sanctioned training.

Which is one of the reasons there is always a High Law Enforcement Shooter at the National Matches and many NRA Competitions.

It never hurts to come home as the High Cop from any competition.

= = = = =

http://riflemansjournal.blogspot.com/2010/03/history-morris-fisher.html

Marine Corps Musician (Violin) and Olympic Gold Medalist Sergeant Morris Fisher with Major General John A. LeJeune, Commandant of the Marine Corps. Fisher is holding a 300 meter target and his target rifle. September 27, 1923.

 

[ptrlcop]

The Rifleman's Journal: History: Morris Fisher

Marine Corps Musician (Violin) and Olympic Gold Medalist Sergeant Morris Fisher with Major General John A. LeJeune, Commandant of the Marine Corps. Fisher is holding a 300 meter target and his target rifle. September 27, 1923.

[/QUOTE]

That's cool shit! I recently read "A Rifleman Went to War" for the first time and am currently working through several other books from that era. Interestingly, it was commented that some National Guard units required members to PAY to be in the unit and the funds purchased ammo and such for training. I'm loving learning about that era.

 

[DanSavage]

Which is one of the reasons there is always a High Law Enforcement Shooter at the National Matches and many NRA Competitions.

It never hurts to come home as the High Cop from any competition.

= = = = =

The Rifleman's Journal: History: Morris Fisher

Marine Corps Musician (Violin) and Olympic Gold Medalist Sergeant Morris Fisher with Major General John A. LeJeune, Commandant of the Marine Corps. Fisher is holding a 300 meter target and his target rifle. September 27, 1923.

There equipment was no where near as good as it is today, but considering he got about what looks to be 300 shots in the MOA area, that is impressive.

I think any given sniper could be just as good as F-class match shooters, given that the sniper puts forth the same time and regimens into f-class practices. Some do and some probably don't. I'd think the sniper would have an advantage with first round hits and cold bore shots.

 

[ksthomas]

Just to give you an idea, as of this date, there are 7715 distinguished rifle badges won. Sounds like a lot until you consider the program started in 1884.

CMP Club & Competition Tracker | Distinguished Shooters

Don't know if it's still true since the M16s have made a lot more shooters Distinguished, and NASA has been cut back severely by our fearless leader, but there used to be more living US astronauts than there were Distinguished Riflemen. Traditionally been a small club, and a fairly elite group. There's always been some considerable crossover between the competitive arena and some of the top snipers as well, which has been pointed out already. I knew Van Aalst, have shot with Lance, Emil, St.Johns and the rest of the AMU crew for many years, and most of them have combat experience behind them. Ranger BN combat patches are the norm with many of the AMU crews these days, and they know their stuff backwards and forwards. Time on the range has only helped their combat effectiveness, and they'd all make very dangerous opponents across the battlefield. Carlos Hathcock was a champion competitive shooter, and an absolute spook in the field, and that's a combination that made him legendary for both his fieldcraft AND shooting ability. His old boss, Jim Land has been involved in the NRA and CMP competitions field for many, many years. In fact, his signature is on my Distinguished Award. So yeah, there's some serious crossover here. Saying that the two are exclusive of one another, or in any way "compete" with each other, is nonsense. They can, in most situations, compliment the other, and make for a better and more well rounded shooter in either arena.

 

[MilDot1960]

Don't know if it's still true since the M16s have made a lot more shooters Distinguished, and NASA has been cut back severely by our fearless leader, but there used to be more living US astronauts than there were Distinguished Riflemen. Traditionally been a small club, and a fairly elite group. There's always been some considerable crossover between the competitive arena and some of the top snipers as well, which has been pointed out already. I knew Van Aalst, have shot with Lance, Emil, St.Johns and the rest of the AMU crew for many years, and most of them have combat experience behind them. Ranger BN combat patches are the norm with many of the AMU crews these days, and they know their stuff backwards and forwards. Time on the range has only helped their combat effectiveness, and they'd all make very dangerous opponents across the battlefield. Carlos Hathcock was a champion competitive shooter, and an absolute spook in the field, and that's a combination that made him legendary for both his fieldcraft AND shooting ability. His old boss, Jim Land has been involved in the NRA and CMP competitions field for many, many years. In fact, his signature is on my Distinguished Award. So yeah, there's some serious crossover here. Saying that the two are exclusive of one another, or in any way "compete" with each other, is nonsense. They can, in most situations, compliment the other, and make for a better and more well rounded shooter in either arena.

Yes Sir, That makes one heck of alot of sence and People forget that Carlos won the Wimbledon Cup before he went off to do what he done Best, and all his years as a hunter along with his service as well, Its no wonder he is a Legend.

Theres not enough videos of him out there, He had such away with words that I could listern to him for hours,

Thanks for your input, John

 

[kamakauzy]

I think this is a reasonable observation. While there are differences in the two programs (hi power vs. sniper) the common element in the former is the volume of quality practice.

I think the primary lesson to take away is that you should train hard, and don't let your skills slip.

 

[sinister]

MARINE CORPS BASE QUANTICO, Va. -- Staff Sergeant Joel Micholick, U.S. Army Marksmanship Unit (formerly of the 3rd Ranger Battalion Sniper Platoon and a former USAMU Summer Shooter), fires his service rifle during the 50th Interservice Rifle Championship July 26. Micholick set a new match record in the 1,000 yard aggregate with the service rifle, a record that had been standing since 1984. (Photo by Michael Molinaro, USAMU PAO)

 

[MilDot1960]

I think this is a reasonable observation. While there are differences in the two programs (hi power vs. sniper) the common element in the former is the volume of quality practice.

I think the primary lesson to take away is that you should train hard, and don't let your skills slip.

That is very true, When I shot in comps I only ever use std Ball ammo and when I would practice I had targets that made it nearly impossible to hit them, But the more I did it the better I got and it worked fast too, I still do it the hard way even now,

John

 

[ksthomas]

And, while some may not be aware of this, the standard National Match Course (the 500 point NMC) we still shoot today originally started out as the regular military qualification course that ALL soldiers were put through. That WAS your qualification course. Back then, the military did virtually all their training on KD ranges, with none of the pop up type stuff we do today. It was the study by Gen. S.L.A. Marshall after WWII and again after Korea, that the military realized they had a problem. The NMC will teach you how to shoot, but it's not good preparation for combat, and it doesn't teach a soldier to kill. Pop ups do, but at the cost of greatly diminished marksmanship skills. Based on Marshall's study of the number of US troops who failed to engage enemy soldiers in combat, they made a huge switch and replaced most of the KD stuff with pop ups. Later, they virtually eliminated KD altogether, and went to pop up reactive targets completely. Personally, I think this was a mistake, but it's also a done deal. Today, we have guys who pass BCT, AIT, qualify regularly and eventually get out of the military without ever having seen a KD range, or done any shooting past 300M (Army, anyway, Marines have always taken marksmanship more seriously).

If you want to get a good rundown on the switch from the old KD ranges and the NMC to the new (and still present) pop up targets, read "On Killing" by Lt. Col. Dave Grossman. It's a great read anyway for anyone who carries a gun or goes in harm's way, and will give you a lot of insight into the thought process behind the military decisions that lead to this. Good stuff.

 

[Sterling Shooter]

I did not know there were so many folks who have earned a Distinguished Rifleman badge, according to Kraig, over 7000. I thought there were less than 2500 to date that had earned the distinction.

 

[sinister]

7000 -- across all five armed services and civilians.

For those who don't know, each is engraved on the back with the bearer's name and date of award. Civilian badges are numbered. They may have gone above 2,000 civilians by now.

I believe Tyler Rico was the youngest civilian Distinguished Rifleman at 15.

 

[Graham]

Distinguished Rifleman is an achievement.

For competitive shooters, one's record is always important.

But, like a world-class chef is only as good as his last dish, a Sniper is only as good as his last shot.

 

[Sterling Shooter]

MARINE CORPS BASE QUANTICO, Va. -- Staff Sergeant Joel Micholick, U.S. Army Marksmanship Unit (formerly of the 3rd Ranger Battalion Sniper Platoon and a former USAMU Summer Shooter), fires his service rifle during the 50th Interservice Rifle Championship July 26. Micholick set a new match record in the 1,000 yard aggregate with the service rifle, a record that had been standing since 1984. (Photo by Michael Molinaro, USAMU PAO)

I've had the pleasure to assist Joel, Todd Pace and Lance Hopper on a few SDM training events. They made an impression on me as being as great at teaching as they are at shooting. Really great guys.

 

[2Shots]

Some of the best shooters in our sport are exmilitary. They built the skills it takes to win competitions onto the fundamentals and practices they acquired in the military. I have also witnessed these guys work together as a team, they are awesome to watch. I don't think it's fair to compare the two, me walking around all day then shooting a course of fire for a minute can't be compared to the job of a military sniper. The time he spends getting in and out of a location and observing for hours and probably never taking a shot is way different. I really enjoy long range shooting so I compete, and I practice. If you give the military guys the time to practice, good equipment, and modern handloads that we use in a different caliber, you will probably have to take a back seat, they'll kick you're butt! Plus they are usually a lot younger, tough to beat young eyes and agility!

 

[MilDot1960]

Some of the best shooters in our sport are exmilitary. They built the skills it takes to win competitions onto the fundamentals and practices they acquired in the military. I have also witnessed these guys work together as a team, they are awesome to watch. I don't think it's fair to compare the two, me walking around all day then shooting a course of fire for a minute can't be compared to the job of a military sniper. The time he spends getting in and out of a location and observing for hours and probably never taking a shot is way different. I really enjoy long range shooting so I compete, and I practice. If you give the military guys the time to practice, good equipment, and modern handloads that we use in a different caliber, you will probably have to take a back seat, they'll kick you're butt! Plus they are usually a lot younger, tough to beat young eyes and agility!

Actually you are right, But It was a Viet Nam Vet that wiped everyone's clock, back in the 90s he was incredible I use to shoot there just so I could watch him, and in a Extremely short Time he Had me doing the same, It was like he waved a magic wand over my Rifle.
People running the club use to swap his Ammo or change the rules and they still could not beat him, And the last Time I saw him he put 3 rounds in the 2" Marker disc and they were only 1 1/4" apart and that was at 800yds needless to say the whole lot were'nt bigger than 3 1/2"-4". There were No Apps or Kestrels back then and we shot in some terrible weather, Yep I did hold my own with him in the end (ONLYJUST) But he could do it day in and day out were I had to concentrate every second.

But my Point is unless you are a Vet or a Sniper Like He was dont Go 20 Bucks a Shot with these Guys because you will Loose ya Gas Money Home

Thank you To Every Vet for your Service and for what you have taught us all near and far.

Blessin's John

 

[tullius]

Distinguished Rifleman is an achievement.

For competitive shooters, one's record is always important.

But, like a world-class chef is only as good as his last dish, a Sniper is only as good as his last shot.

There is no dichotomy. The marksman is only as good as his last shot. In regards to the overall question of shooting skills (sniper vs. competitive shooter): it's not an either/or, it's a both - and. The best do both. Shooting is just shooting.

 

[kraigWY]

There is no dichotomy. The marksman is only as good as his last shot

The Distinguished program is not about the last shot, or the last match. It's about legs, or a series of matches where you earn points toward your DR Badge.

 

[tullius]

Well aware I'm shooting for leg points at an EIC match this weekend.


With a nod to Lanny, I need to correct my previous statement:

The marksman (or, especially, the sniper), is only as good as his NEXT shot.

 

[Strykervet]

Not surprised either. We taught SDM's NM shooting first using irons to 600m in various positions keeping dope and running actual NM matches with all the gear on the KD ranges. It significantly made them better shooters, easier to train --it's really the way to go. It didn't make them "range commandos", they weren't suiting up and adjusting slings in combat. But they weren't missing as much either, and I'd rather have a guy watching my back that can make more of the people shooting at me disappear than just put rounds downrange. Anyone can do that, and anyone will put in that situation. I've said it before and I'll say it again, that learning NM shooting was the single biggest factor in making me a better shooter all around, period. It was the"most bang for the buck" as it were.

The best route to go would be to take marksmanship training out of the hands of drill sergeants and hand that over to a cadre of NM instructors instead. They'll be better shooters right off the bat, and they'll learn all the combat shit at their units anyway.

But it ain't gonna happen any time soon because that make sense, and army doesn't play around with silly shit like things that make sense.

 

[ksthomas]

Strykervet,

Spot on. Back in the late 1980's, I used to do a lot of HP/NM competition in the So Cal area, Pendleton, 29 Palms, etc.. One of the regular fixtures there was Lt.Cmdr R.J. Thomas (no relation), who at the time was XO of SEAL Team Two out of Coronado. He was always accompanied by several of his new guys, and I don't think any of them really wanted to take up Highpower competition. R.J. could be very persuasive when he wanted to be. Speaking to him one day on the line, he made it clear that all the SEAL training they had, all the boot camp training for qualification, didn't teach them how to "shoot." That's what HP competition, and the KD ranges were for. He wanted to make sure all his guys got some serious exposure to this. R.J was something of a legend in the teams, and much of that was based on his shooting skills. He was nominated for the MOH (downgraded to a Navy Cross) for an incident in RVN that he survived largely on his marksmanship, literally leaving scattered piles of dead NVA around him by the time it was finished. Yes, it matters. What I don't get is the division of "sport" and "combat" shooting thoughts here; at their core, they're one in the same. Differences in application, yes, but guy who really knows how to shoot AND knows his tactics is going to be better off than a guy who just really knows his tactics. Guys like RJ Thomas, GySgt Hathcock, and several of our current AMU guys are the best examples of those field operators who have also mastered the "art" of shooting in competition. And it makes them all the more effective for that mastery. In my mind, it's no difference than a really good boxer, who may be one of the very best. If you drop him into an MMA fight, he's in trouble. Ditto for a judo or karate expert. The best, in the real world, is the guy who has mastered several different forms of fighting, and can pick and choose as the fluid situation dictates. He has the tools in his toolbox to do the job right, whatever it may call for. I've also taught a number of SDM courses with the AMU crew, and the goal of these classes are to give the guys more tools to call on when they need them.

Pop ups and qualification course teach a soldier how to kill; not how to shoot. Highpower competition teaches a guy how to shoot; not to kill. Combine those two in the correct proportions, and you have a formidable soldier. That's what it's all about.

 

[MilDot1960]

Strykervet,

Spot on. Back in the late 1980's, I used to do a lot of HP/NM competition in the So Cal area, Pendleton, 29 Palms, etc.. One of the regular fixtures there was Lt.Cmdr R.J. Thomas (no relation), who at the time was XO of SEAL Team Two out of Coronado. He was always accompanied by several of his new guys, and I don't think any of them really wanted to take up Highpower competition. R.J. could be very persuasive when he wanted to be. Speaking to him one day on the line, he made it clear that all the SEAL training they had, all the boot camp training for qualification, didn't teach them how to "shoot." That's what HP competition, and the KD ranges were for. He wanted to make sure all his guys got some serious exposure to this. R.J was something of a legend in the teams, and much of that was based on his shooting skills. He was nominated for the MOH (downgraded to a Navy Cross) for an incident in RVN that he survived largely on his marksmanship, literally leaving scattered piles of dead NVA around him by the time it was finished. Yes, it matters. What I don't get is the division of "sport" and "combat" shooting thoughts here; at their core, they're one in the same. Differences in application, yes, but guy who really knows how to shoot AND knows his tactics is going to be better off than a guy who just really knows his tactics. Guys like RJ Thomas, GySgt Hathcock, and several of our current AMU guys are the best examples of those field operators who have also mastered the "art" of shooting in competition. And it makes them all the more effective for that mastery. In my mind, it's no difference than a really good boxer, who may be one of the very best. If you drop him into an MMA fight, he's in trouble. Ditto for a judo or karate expert. The best, in the real world, is the guy who has mastered several different forms of fighting, and can pick and choose as the fluid situation dictates. He has the tools in his toolbox to do the job right, whatever it may call for. I've also taught a number of SDM courses with the AMU crew, and the goal of these classes are to give the guys more tools to call on when they need them.

Pop ups and qualification course teach a soldier how to kill; not how to shoot. Highpower competition teaches a guy how to shoot; not to kill. Combine those two in the correct proportions, and you have a formidable soldier. That's what it's all about.

+110%, Thats what I based my learning on, and was Trained by Guy who did 2 tours in Viet Nam as A Sniper, He taught me that my Rifle was part of me and NOT Something that I was holding in my Hand. It is important to learn every aspect of shooting weather it be combat or Marksmanship because they are Like Hands, One Wash'es the Other and the Two become One,

Blessin's John

 

[sinister]

Robert J. Thomas
Home of record: Fallon Nevada

Navy Cross

Awarded for actions during the Vietnam War

The President of the United States of America takes pleasure in presenting the Navy Cross to Radarman Second Class Robert J. Thomas (NSN: 6887315), United States Navy, for extraordinary heroism on 23 March 1969 while serving with Sea-Air-Land Team TWO (SEAL-2), Detachment ALFA, Seventh Platoon, during combat operations against communist aggressor forces in the Republic of Vietnam. Embarked in a Seawolf helicopter on a visual reconnaissance and strike mission on Da Dung Mountain near the Cambodian border when the aircraft was struck by enemy ground fire and crashed in an exposed rice paddy, Petty Officer Thomas was thrown from the wreckage, sustaining multiple injuries.

Fighting off the stunning effects of shock, he immediately moved to the aid of the helicopter crewmen who were still in the burning aircraft. Despite the intense flames and the heavy gunfire from both the mountain and a nearby tree line, Petty Officer Thomas managed to remove one of the crewmen to safety and, with the aid of another man who had been dropped onto the site by an accompanying helicopter, succeeded in freeing the trapped pilot from the flaming cockpit. Petty Officer Thomas then made a gallant attempt to rescue the two remaining men trapped beneath the twisted metal, discontinuing his efforts only when driven back by the exploding bullets and rockets of the burning helicopter.

After moving the two previously rescued men to a greater distance from the crash site, Petty Officer Thomas realized that Viet Cong troops were steadily advancing on his position. He selflessly threw himself upon the body of one of the wounded men and began returning the enemy fire. His deadly accuracy accounted for at least one enemy dead and held the aggressors at bay until an Army rescue helicopter landed. By his valiant efforts and selfless devotion to duty while under hostile fire, Petty Officer Thomas upheld the highest traditions of the United States Naval Service.

General Orders: Authority: Navy Department Board of Decorations and Medals
Action Date: March 23, 1969
Service: Navy
Rank: Radarman Second Class
Company: Sea-Air-Land Team 2 (SEAL-2)
Regiment: Detachment ALPHA

=====

"Finding only a Colt 1911A1 .45 caliber pistol, Thomas covered the unconscious pilot with his own body. As the enemy soldiers closed to about 100 yards, he began firing with the pistol. "I hit the closest man with my third shot. The others ducked for cover." For over 30 minutes, Navy SEAL RJ Thomas held off a well-armed attacking enemy, killing as many as ten men with only his pistol. "Eventually, I realized that I was running out of ammunition. I knew that only bad things would await a captured Navy SEAL."

A Navy SEAL Team was returning from a mission over North Vietnam in a chopper when it got hit pretty bad. The pilot and one crew member were killed and the copilot was wounded.

The only firearms left were M1911s. The remaining crew member was carrying an M1911 and had a few boxes of ammo. As more enemy small arms fire started coming in, the copilot and crew member also noted that the VC were coming out of the jungle and approaching them, shooting as they came. The crew member took out his .45 and took careful aim as he shot at each attacking VC. About 30 minutes later it was all over. Between reloading magazines and radioing for rescue the copilot was pretty busy but a rescue chopper finally arrived on the scene.

As the rescue chopper came in and landed, its crew noticed a lot of dead VC laying around. The downed helo’s remaining crew were picked up and on their way out they counted 37 dead VC. Their distances from the downed helo were from 3 to about 150 yards, all shot by the crew member with his M1911.

Petty Officer R.J. Thomas, a member of the US Navy Rifle and Pistol Team, had fired about 80 .45 rounds.

Petty Officer Thomas was recommended for the Medal of Honor but by the time the recommendation got all the way up through the chain of command the recognition was down-graded to the Navy Cross.

This incident has been cited as the only known of example of top-level combat marksmanship since SGT Alvin York’s escapades in WWI.

Submitted by Mark Eberhard-CEO & President
LtCol. USMCR (Ret.)
American Marksman Group

 

[ksthomas]

There's some pretty funny stories about R.J., too, including one that Jeff Cooper once repeated in one of his columns, about a touring Soviet Admiral who challenged anyone to a Pistol Match with the Service Pistol, using some of our standard sidearms. They rounded up R.J. who showed up with a couple of S&W 41s and a pair of M1911s. They shot a couple of standard 900 pt matches, one set with the 41s and the other with the .45s. R.J. said that the Russian was a damned good pistol shot, and he (R.J.) only beat him by a few points with the rimfires. He absolutely sucked with the M1911, and R.J. whupped his Russian ass soundly. Through an interpreter, the Russian began making some complaints, which translated to the effect that this was NOT the standard American service pistol, the M9! Through the interpreter, R.J. explained to him that, "True, Admiral, but this is MY standard service pistol and the same one my men carry." As the Russian listened to the translation, his eyes narrowed a bit, and a brow furrowed. Looking back at R.J., he said, "Ah . . . Spetsnaz!"

"Da, tovarich . . . Spetsnaz."

 

[ksthomas]

Incidentally, over on NationalMatch.com (primarily a competitive high power site), there's an article called "Why Johnny Can't Shoot" that R.J. wrote about ten years back when he was writing for Defense Watch magazine. It's a pinned thread under the "clubhouse" forum, and is a pretty neat summation of R.J.'s thoughts on how competitive marksmanship ties into the warrior's world, and why it's such an indispensable skill to cultivate. Good piece.

 

[kraigWY]

Back in the late 1980's, I used to do a lot of HP/NM competition in the So Cal area, Pendleton, 29 Palms, etc..

KsThomas, we must have covered the same ground during the same period. I shot most of the Nov. Regionals/1000 yard Matches at 29 Palms during the 80s.

 

[ksthomas]

Kraig,

Sounds like we did! My "home" range would have been West End Gun Club near Lytle Creek, but I shot The Stumps, Pendleton, China Lake and a couple others pretty regularly in that time frame. Got out of the army in '81, returned to CA, switched over to shooting Match Rifle from Service, and finally left the state for good in '90 when Sierra moved to MO. I'm sure you also would have bumped into R.J. and his crew, especially at 29 Palms and Pendleton from time to time. Hard guy to miss, even on a noisy firing line.

 

[Super Bee 950]

A lot of talk about service rifle, but shooting service pistol and Bullseye pistol will make you a much better Rifle shooter. My scores have gone up!

 

[kraigWY]

Super Bee makes a good point. He is 100% correct, bulleye pistol requires more concentration, more attention to details and fundamentals, exceeded only by shooting international pistol.

I've always believed its easier to make a rifle shooter out of a pistol shooter then it is to make an pistol shooter out of a rifle shooter.

 

[ArcticLight]

I shot as a DM in the Army, we just d id n't have the time, funds etc to train as much as we needed.
Strange that we did for the combat pistol team I spent 4 years on.

But years later I got into Highpower shooting and LR and spent hours a week d ry firing at a dot on my wall.

Difference? Training time, period.

Doesn't matter if it's s hooting, Karate, or flying my r/c drones. If you practice something often enough you will become proficient at it.

One of the quotes I teach my students is a study I read, that it takes 2106 repetitions of something for it to be muscle memory.

Think about that when you are dry firing.

 

[NevadaZielmeister]

You know this thread is really great. The white paper, published back in 1999 is available here: http://www.arl.army.mil/arlreports/1999/ARL-TR-2065.pdf

It would appear that they took a bunch of military snipers and had them compete at a Rifle Shooting Match. I wonder what it would have been like to take the Competitive Rifle Shooters and send them to theatre. I BET YOU that the Rifle Competitors would have down far worse than the snipers did in the Rifle Competitions.

I totally agree with a lot of the comments. The stress that a sniper encounters on the battlefield is far greater than the time limit the competitor feels. Also, actually shooting someone is not easy, I would not have a clue how that feels and never hope I have to feel that. My hats off to any soldier in the field, especially the snipers. I hope that some of the snipers reading this thread feel a bit of pride and understand that guys like me are sending respect your guys' way. I hope this thread does make anyone feel ridiculed.

Meanwhile, I have been learning about long range shooting now for about 10 years. It has been tough to shoot at long ranges, but it is rewarding. I would never consider myself anywhere near the ability of a real sniper, ever.

One last note on the white paper, it is interesting to see that the higher the caliber, the worse the accuracy.

 

[sinister]

It would appear that they took a bunch of military snipers and had them compete at a Rifle Shooting Match. I wonder what it would have been like to take the Competitive Rifle Shooters and send them to theatre. I BET YOU that the Rifle Competitors would have down far worse than the snipers did in the Rifle Competitions.

You'd lose.

The Army Rifle Team sent trainers to Vietnam to train snipers and establish sniper schools in-theater. SSG Arpail J. Gapol racked up quite a record, as did many others. Chapter VI: Tactical Refinements And Innovations

From Sharpening the Combat Edge by LTG Julian Ewell:

Sniper Program

In the Spring of 1969 our most successful ambush tactic was the sniper mode. Our sniper program was initiated in the States and was set in motion as result of a visit to Fort Benning in January 1968. The Army Marksmanship Unit cooperated with us to the fullest extent, and funds were made available to increase the accuracy of fifty-five M-14 rifles and to provide sniper-scopes. The idea was to get an outstanding training team from the Marksmanship Unit to train our soldiers in Vietnam in sniper tactics.

The Army Marksmanship Unit team led by Major Willis L. Powell and consisting of seven non-commissioned officers arrived in Vietnam in June 1968. Upon arrival in the country they revamped the M-16 training methods at our division training establishment, the Reliable Academy. Subsequently they supervised the construction of a 500 yard range at Dong Tam and periodically accompanied ambush patrols to assimilate the delta tactics. Progress was slow. Brigadier General James S. Timothy was given the task of getting the sniper program off the ground in early August. This gave it the needed boost. Eventually the more accurate M-14 rifles arrived as well as special national match ammunition. Our first hand picked group of volunteers from each battalion graduated in early November 1968 and the first sniper kill was registered on 19 November 1968 north of Binh Phuoc in Long An Province. The second group of snipers graduated in early December, giving us a full complement of 72 snipers, six per battalion and four per brigade. Notwithstanding all the personal attention that had been given to the sniper program, the early performance was ragged with only eight kills in November and eleven in December. This was clearly a dismal performance, considering the large number of men and the effort that had gone into the program.

Marine legends Ed Land and Carlos Hathcock were competitors before they formed the Marine sniper schools.

 

[ksthomas]

Again, it's that combination of fieldcraft combined with the extra level of shooting skills that elevates really top notch snipers like Hathcock. Those who spend the time on KD ranges will learn to read the wind far better, know their equipment far better, and perhaps most importantly, will come to realistically know their own capabilities and shortcomings. There's likely going to be a world of difference between the guy who finishes first in his sniper class, but has never spent time (before sniper school) on a KD range, and the guy who finished middle of the pack in the same course, but has spent thousands of hours shooting across the course. It's the second guy, who finished middle of the pack, who's like to be the better shooter, by far.

If you want a really good take on this, read "Shots Fired In Anger" by Lt.Col. John George. Col. George was an avid competitive shooter, both smallbore and highpower in his early years, went through the NRA qualification programs, shot on his local high school team (!) as a teenager and in college. When the Second World War began, he wound up in the South Pacific with an army infantry unit. The perspectives that he provides are the combat observations of a true shooter, and absolutely fascinating reading. He was involved in some sniper ops, some training for advanced marksmanship and (as I recall) some field intel work. His observations about the Japanese combat units are concise, very revealing and thorough, covering both strong points and weak. But his commentary on US weapons and training are the real capper, and he makes some very good points. Returning from the war, Col. George resumed his competitive shooting and continued to be an active fixture on HP ranges for many years afterwards.

 

[Sandman0077]

There's likely going to be a world of difference between the guy who finishes first in his sniper class, but has never spent time (before sniper school) on a KD range, and the guy who finished middle of the pack in the same course, but has spent thousands of hours shooting across the course. It's the second guy, who finished middle of the pack, who's like to be the better shooter, by far.

I would trust the guy who can shoot unknown distances accurately more than someone who shoots only known distances all the time. Not a lot of skill goes into spinning your dials to a preset elevation.

Sure, the more experience the better, but to say that someone who shoots worse than another is the better shooter is ridiculous. Obviously not if they didn't perform better. There is a reason why non-civilian shooters usually shoot better at sniper school. It's because they have a clean slate and are taught proper execution of long distance shooting.

 

[MosesTheTank]

The publication that got this thread going had to do with marksmanship. That was the comparison. Certainly the real world of combat is quite different, but that was not the point. Since we are all drawing from personal experiences about individuals, and not averages of large data sets, I will point out that no matter your training, civilian or military, there is little comparison on an individual scale, especially when you want to call out a single skill. I competed in the first Eco-Challenge and we had a team comprised of a group of Rangers, 2 of whom are still my friends, 1 of whom was an Army survival instructor, and they were smart, lifelong outdoors men, and in incredible physical condition. Their race turned into a survival situation and they had to bail. Of course that also happened to a number of teams, but the leaders in the race were people who trained for for that type of high speed, small team, challenge year in and year out. Rangers don't do that.

Non-civilian shooters fare better than civilians at sniper school? My former boss (BUDS class 154) spent his entire childhood perfecting his skills with a large variety of weapons and went on to become a SEAL sniper. Having had the kind of instruction and trigger time he had there was little chance he was going to fail when being selected for sniper school, and once in he excelled in every way. At 18 years old he had more training than most will have in their lifetime. When you say "civilian shooter", what does that even mean? All the yahoos that crowd my local range, or the top practical shooters we are always deferring to here on the Hide, or maybe a few of the 3 gunners I shoot with who are good enough to have their equipment covered in the decals of their sponsors? Calling out that this or that shooter and comparing them to one of the greats is not fair. Almost all great shooters get where they are because of talent and motivation. And there are very few of them, so I hate to compare them to the norm. I played sports at a fairly high level. The ones that went on to be big names in the show were freaks of nature. If we were to stand around and use them as our basis of comparison (which a lot of blowhards at work tend to do while Monday morning quarter backing) we would all suck really, really bad. As a matter of fact, your average major league athlete would suck by that comparison.

One of those Rangers from the Eco-Challenge spent a lot of years chasing his DM badge, but work and life often got in the way. At retirement I think he had 28 points and was resigned to maybe never getting it. Another guy we shoot with got his badge after 6 years of trying, soup to nuts. This guy shot almost every day, could afford all the ammo and travel he wanted, and had plenty of time with 2 DMs to drill him to death. Dumb comparison.

Another of those Rangers had had the unfortunate experience of hopeless entanglement 3 TIMES in his military career (a case of getting your chute mixed up with someone else's). No one was hurt in any of those incidents. Of course there was tons of paper work to fill out, and in all 3 cases he was found to not only be faultless, but handled the situation with such calm and skill that he was asked to instruct on how to handle these situations. A nearby sky diving center has civilians with thousands of jumps that don't have even an ounce of his skill, or mental acuity. Comparing the 2 is kind of dumb and pointless, unless you are just having fun and trading stories.

Are the fastest sprinters all great wide receivers? NO. Are winners of long drive contests the top PGA pros? NO. Do you have to run fast to be an NFL wide receiver? Of course you do. And you have to make drives on the PGA tour. But there is also a lot of other shit you have to do, and do it well.

Great shooters are great shooters. Great endurance athletes are just that. Great snipers are great snipers. These are all different things. Sometimes these guys are the same thing, most often not. To keep stacking them up against one another is just not fair, and doesn't really advance the conversation.

 

[Sandman0077]

Non-civilian shooters = Individuals who do not shoot in their civilian lives.

Like I said, experience is definitely a plus, but yes, *most of the time* people who don't shoot normally perform better in sniper school because they don't have any bad habits they've picked up and can learn the proper methods being taught and execute them.

On the flip side, the good 'ol boys from back country can stalk better because they've had to sneak up on animals during a hunt. It can go either way. I'm not arguing that no experience is better, but in the scope of the lessons being taught at sniper school, the fresh minds excel while the 'experienced' shooters sit back and wonder why they aren't doing as well.

It's probably because they are doing it the way daddy taught them and not the way the instructors are teaching them.

 

[ksthomas]

Not a competition between the two at all, despite the comparison that was made in the title of this thread. Certainly not what I was pointing out at all. I'm saying that the two complement one another, and it's not an "either/or" situation. As to the notion that firing on KD ranges simply equates to "spinning dials", think again. With the equipment we have available to us today, there's virtually no such thing as an "unknown distance." What there is, is wind, mirage, wind patterns and cycles, light variations (if we're dealing with irons, anyway) and the flat out ability to deliver a well aimed, well executed shot, call that shot, and have it arrive on call. I've seen lots of guys graduate sniper schools who never did any other work on KD ranges, who couldn't do some aspects of this, and that tends to make for a less well rounded sniper.

Not precisely on point, but in the same vein here, the first sniper class on Ft. Campbell since the VN war, graduated exactly zero snipers. Not one. And it was based entirely on shooting skill, or lack thereof. All of the guys who were sent by the various units were "Experts" on their qualifications. Problem was, they couldn't shoot. The 5th AMU, who was teaching the course, stressed shooting skill (putting it mildly) to those same units before the second group arrived for the next class. The first thing done, was to have every student lay down and fire a number of groups on a KD range, just to ensure that they could shoot to begin with. There were a couple that were sent back to their units immediately, and the remainder of the class had a very good rate of successful candidates at the end of the course.

Don't separate the two, or assume it's a choice of one or the other. The best in the field should (and in my experience, generally do) have some background in the competitive end of things, as well as the tactical.

 

[MilDot1960]

Not a competition between the two at all, despite the comparison that was made in the title of this thread. Certainly not what I was pointing out at all. I'm saying that the two complement one another, and it's not an "either/or" situation. As to the notion that firing on KD ranges simply equates to "spinning dials", think again. With the equipment we have available to us today, there's virtually no such thing as an "unknown distance." What there is, is wind, mirage, wind patterns and cycles, light variations (if we're dealing with irons, anyway) and the flat out ability to deliver a well aimed, well executed shot, call that shot, and have it arrive on call. I've seen lots of guys graduate sniper schools who never did any other work on KD ranges, who couldn't do some aspects of this, and that tends to make for a less well rounded sniper.

Not precisely on point, but in the same vein here, the first sniper class on Ft. Campbell since the VN war, graduated exactly zero snipers. Not one. And it was based entirely on shooting skill, or lack thereof. All of the guys who were sent by the various units were "Experts" on their qualifications. Problem was, they couldn't shoot. The 5th AMU, who was teaching the course, stressed shooting skill (putting it mildly) to those same units before the second group arrived for the next class. The first thing done, was to have every student lay down and fire a number of groups on a KD range, just to ensure that they could shoot to begin with. There were a couple that were sent back to their units immediately, and the remainder of the class had a very good rate of successful candidates at the end of the course.

Don't separate the two, or assume it's a choice of one or the other. The best in the field should (and in my experience, generally do) have some background in the competitive end of things, as well as the tactical.

Thats right, The two can (might Be) the same just with a differant Goal OR??? Give A Competition shooter to A USMC SS Instructor and send him into a new direction.

I think the differance is The Mind Set IE The Marine SS is given a Purpose But if you put that same mind set into the Shooter he could cross over and become the same. Just like the Marine does before he inlists.

John

 

[Sandman0077]

Still doesn't negate the fact that a shooter (sniper or competitive) who can consistently shoot unknown distances without anything more than mil dots and a calculator is the more reliable shooter.

What good is shooting known distance all day and not practicing the basics? The shooters who sit at a bench and shoot all day using range finders, wind meters, and their dope books to help set their dials isn't on the same level to me as a shooter who can pick up a rifle and get a first round hit without all that tech.

 

[ksthomas]

Sandman, you're seriously missing the point here; shooting on the KD ranges IS practicing the basics. It's about sight alignment, position, trigger control and follow through. Those ARE the basics. The additional processes of range determination, wind doping, etc., is into a slightly different field, and is something of a extension of the basics. The next phase, if you want to call it that. Point is, you need both to fire a successful shot, unknown range in the field or on a KD range. Muff any portion of this, and you've blown the shot in either venue. Range it perfectly with your mildot, dope the wind correctly and then jerk the trigger; you missed. Execute a perfect trigger break, from a solid position, and fail to properly align your sights; you missed. Basics . . . properly executed, nothing more. If you think that "all that tech" helps you in any way during an offhand string, think again. That's all about position, sight alignment and most of all, trigger control. If you think that a first round sighter that punches a solid 10 or an X is some sort of fluke, think again. And if you're not aware of it, for CMP matches (which are essentially nothing more than the original military rifle qualification courses) don't allow sighters. That's the point; you have to be able to look at conditions, decide what the wind is worth, decide how the light is going to affect your sight picture, consider any other external factors which are going to come into play, and then perfectly execute a good shot. Basics, nothing more. This is what the Distinguished Rifleman's Badge is all about, as is the President's Hundred tab. Those two are tangible evidence, proof, that that individual has mastered those skills, and can call upon them on demand.

 

[RHunter]

I think the biggest difference I have seen between LR shooters and most snipers is discipline. The younger snipers I have met on ranges think they are Gods gift to shooting and reek of arrogance. They are just "average" shooters in my book.

I did have the opportunity to shoot with a couple Seals that were training down in Key West and came up north to do a bit of recreational shooting, these were guys in their mid to late 30's and were great shots. Difference here was they were good without bragging about it. They simply knew how to get the job done and were very well disciplined.

My point is, I think it is a matter of discipline to be the best you can be and if you lack the discipline required to be a good shooter, it does not matter what you are aiming your gun at, human or paper.

 

[MilDot1960]

Still doesn't negate the fact that a shooter (sniper or competitive) who can consistently shoot unknown distances without anything more than mil dots and a calculator is the more reliable shooter.

What good is shooting known distance all day and not practicing the basics? The shooters who sit at a bench and shoot all day using range finders, wind meters, and their dope books to help set their dials isn't on the same level to me as a shooter who can pick up a rifle and get a first round hit without all that tech.

From my point of view I always practice ranging with my scope or my Binos although I have a Laser and I make sure any optics I buy can be used for Ranging, I like the fact they dont need batteries and I can get extremely close with them within 1.5 yds+/- and I double check them with the mildot master and my slope doper also I have some quick charts Too, Although I never officialy trained as a sniper I was taught alot by One,

So when I end up in the Retirement Village coz Im too pooped to pop I can always go in my wheel chair and Attack that Afghan Ol Farts Home and let out One Hell of a Rebel Yell, lol

John

 

[Sandman0077]

Sandman, you're seriously missing the point here; shooting on the KD ranges IS practicing the basics. It's about sight alignment, position, trigger control and follow through. Those ARE the basics. The additional processes of range determination, wind doping, etc., is into a slightly different field, and is something of a extension of the basics. The next phase, if you want to call it that. Point is, you need both to fire a successful shot, unknown range in the field or on a KD range. Muff any portion of this, and you've blown the shot in either venue. Range it perfectly with your mildot, dope the wind correctly and then jerk the trigger; you missed. Execute a perfect trigger break, from a solid position, and fail to properly align your sights; you missed. Basics . . . properly executed, nothing more. If you think that "all that tech" helps you in any way during an offhand string, think again. That's all about position, sight alignment and most of all, trigger control. If you think that a first round sighter that punches a solid 10 or an X is some sort of fluke, think again. And if you're not aware of it, for CMP matches (which are essentially nothing more than the original military rifle qualification courses) don't allow sighters. That's the point; you have to be able to look at conditions, decide what the wind is worth, decide how the light is going to affect your sight picture, consider any other external factors which are going to come into play, and then perfectly execute a good shot. Basics, nothing more. This is what the Distinguished Rifleman's Badge is all about, as is the President's Hundred tab. Those two are tangible evidence, proof, that that individual has mastered those skills, and can call upon them on demand.

Instead of 'basics' I should have used a different word. What I was getting at is that yes, while the basics are the same either way, there is a difference between the civilian who uses a bunch of tech and a combat sniper who uses only mil dots and wind calls.

Yes its nice to have all the tech that you can get nowadays, but its better to know how to get the job done without it. That's my point.

 

[MilDot1960]

Instead of 'basics' I should have used a different word. What I was getting at is that yes, while the basics are the same either way, there is a difference between the civilian who uses a bunch of tech and a combat sniper who uses only mil dots and wind calls.

Yes its nice to have all the tech that you can get nowadays, but its better to know how to get the job done without it. That's my point.

I think the worst thing I did with my shooting was go high tech after so many years of doing it old school and my advise to anyone who comes here would be to learn to do it manually first and then worry about buying all the toys because then you have a back up plan, Because if you dont and you buy all the toys alot of folks wont bother with the manual side of things,

My toys messed me up for A while til I put them away and went back to basic's.

John

 

[ksthomas]

Sandman,

What is all the "tech" you think we use, anyway? I've been in both worlds, and I can assure you, military snipers use FAR more "tech" stuff than competitive shooters ever thought of using. A data book? A good sniper keeps these, too. You talk about miling a target to get the range, and fail to mention anything about weather conditions. I've personally seen zeros change by a full MOA and more during the course of a match, due to rain coming through and the drop in the barometric pressure on scene. The range hasn't changed, but your POI sure as hell has. If you think this just applies to competitive shooters, think again. A good sniper, or a competitive shooter will have data on this, and will make the correct adjustments for it. The "qualified sniper school graduate" who hasn't been back on the range for anything other than his regular quals . . . probably won't. Again, it's all a matter of using the basics, and doing the groundwork properly. That's your foundation for EVERYTHING that follows.

 

[sinister]

Excellence (in either discipline) is defined by the ability to hit the target effectively. In competition it's about winning. In sniping it's about winning -- and surviving.

The average military sniper will be shooting at an E-type or IPSC silhouette in training. A hit anywhere on steel is a hit -- but not necessarily a kill.

Hit the target anywhere, hear the "Bong," done.

In competition the defining difference is how close you can get ALL (or the majority) of your shots into a smaller, defined, objective 10 and X-ring.

 

[ksthomas]

Depends on the competition. In the case of Infantry Trophy, we shoot at silhouette targets (E and D, depending on range) as you advance from 600 yards. The match is intended to simulate an infantry squad in attack. Target exposure is 50 seconds at each yard line. As a swing shooter (my usual position), I had to engage two targets. I normally expected to put 15 rounds on each of those two, from 600 yards. I was pulling for one of the AMU shooters (Sgt Lew Tippie) a couple years back, and watched as he put 42 rounds on his target in that same 50 second time frame. And all this, with iron sights, unsupported by anything but a sling.

 

[sinister]

Not disagreeing. "Rattle Battle" (the Infantry Trophy Team Match) is all about excellence as well. The goal is still to get as many hard hits on target as possible in the shortest time. Swing shooters have to make fast hits (and if a rifle goes down the Squad and B Team leader have to direct inside gunners to swing or help out as well).

The squad leader still makes the wind call ("ALL GUNS, SIX LEFT!"). That comes from time on the gun or scope.

The winning team will be the one that gets the highest number of hits. Even at Perry the highest-scoring teams are usually squadded on the same run-down (i.e., Army, Marines, Virginia, All-Guard, etc.).

 

[ksthomas]

That match goes quite a way back, if you're familiar with its history. Originally fired with '03 Springfields, and the swing shooters firing BARs. At one point, I understand that they (the DCM at Perry) would issue BARs to civilian teams for the National Matches. Lt.Col Dave Liwanag wanted to reinstitute this when he was the OIC at USAMU, and update it for active duty teams; M249s issued to the swing guys, with M4s for the remaining squad members. Oh, yeah, that match would ROCK!

 

[Sandman0077]

Sandman,

What is all the "tech" you think we use, anyway? I've been in both worlds, and I can assure you, military snipers use FAR more "tech" stuff than competitive shooters ever thought of using. A data book? A good sniper keeps these, too. You talk about miling a target to get the range, and fail to mention anything about weather conditions. I've personally seen zeros change by a full MOA and more during the course of a match, due to rain coming through and the drop in the barometric pressure on scene. The range hasn't changed, but your POI sure as hell has. If you think this just applies to competitive shooters, think again. A good sniper, or a competitive shooter will have data on this, and will make the correct adjustments for it. The "qualified sniper school graduate" who hasn't been back on the range for anything other than his regular quals . . . probably won't. Again, it's all a matter of using the basics, and doing the groundwork properly. That's your foundation for EVERYTHING that follows.

Doing things 'manually' is what I was getting at (Thanks for MilDot for using the correct wording).

As a B4 we trained the manual way more than anything. Using Ballistic calculators and wind meters and all that is nice, but to be able to use your own judgement is the better skill in my book. When I see LR shooters they are usually sitting at a table, checking their wind meters, confirming with a range finder, etc. Solely using these items all the time doesn't make a shooter the better shot. What happens when all your batteries die? You have to be able to call wind and estimate range on the fly.

If you do this during a comp, then that's great. If you don't, then you are relying to heavily on your ability to use a computer, not your rifle.

 

[MilDot1960]

I understand your intent of moving away/being able to shoot unaided. But I would ask, how many LRF's total are carried amongst a sniper team? Also, for all the equipment a sniper team carries...what's the amount of batteries you carry to keep equipment running?

Commercial LRF's that range out to 600yds-1000yds is getting cheaper all the time. A small backup LRF would be easy to carry. If you got batteries for comm gear, NVG's, weapon lights, and all the other toy's a sniper team can have....saying that using a LRF is bad because it runs on batteries is a weak argument coming from a military shooter.

I would assume then you regurlarly run the old Redfield aperture sights on the M24 since the M3alpha's have glass lenses that can break.



There's a difference between doing it smarter and doing it harder.

In that situation I would cheat and use my LRF because it will put me on target if speed was everything, I can Swag the wind and SD etc But thats the thing with Our LRFs compared to the Military ones we get all the Gravy built in with Hunting LRFs, Its just useless if your on the Barrett or the M200.

John