-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Texas man hits 1 MOA target at 2.07 miles
- Thread starter distancebusters
- Start date
Congratulations! Billy and Gerald, After reading this thread I am disappointed in some of the replies that have generated. I have read comments stating BS to snake oil, but you gentlemen are the pioneering true Extreme Long Distance Shooting past conceived distances. It wasn't to very long ago people thought Flight was impossible and we now can put people on the moon. I am sure the philosophy/mind set then also was "no practical applications". Thank you gentlemen for thinking outside the box, getting out and doing something that brings anarchy to the norm, and along the way, having fun doing it.
I am sure they didn't factor the Coriolis effect, their software did it for them. Without it, your calculations would take so long the result would not apply.
I too think some of the responses were a little harsh. That said, they aren't pioneering anything. I can't seem to find it right now, but I read an article once about guys shooting at extreme ranges going back 30 years. They had custom mounts made, and had a big giant rock they would shoot at. I wish I could remember more specifics, or find the article... but the point is that extreme range shooting has been done many times before by many groups of people. The same conclusion has been reached by each group, every time.
Last edited:
"but I fail to see any real world applications".....I would take exception with this. I certainly understand that the need for Snipers is quite different than what these pioneers are doing but on the other hand any distance that allows for a first shot hit HAD to be preceded by many failed attempts that provided information that would help successive attempts. If 10 years from now, some special forces type takes a rag head at 3500 yards, it may be with optics, powders, new cartridges, etc. from those that seem to be "spray and pray" for your world.
Hell, the mantra may become 2 shots , 1 kill at those distances where you may get a followup with the distances involved and the progression in great silencers. I hope to soon be adding to the data and experiences of those that preceded me. It is also nice to see so many "crazies" lately ready to join in the fun!
Hell, the mantra may become 2 shots , 1 kill at those distances where you may get a followup with the distances involved and the progression in great silencers. I hope to soon be adding to the data and experiences of those that preceded me. It is also nice to see so many "crazies" lately ready to join in the fun!
That's the same thing they told the Wright brothers. And Ernest Rutherford. And Christiaan Barnard. And Bill Gates.
Once one man has figured out a way to do a thing, it's just a matter of time and resources until the rest of us figure out how to make it commonplace.
Even if it becomes commonplace, CoryT analysis and reasoning is still spot on...
In order to even see the target you have to deliberately hold a minute high/low and a minute left/right. That puts the target in the middle of the two-minute hash marks on your crosshairs (sort of like aiming through a square "peep sight"). It's not a "good" target presentation but it's better than having the target hide behind the crosshairs.
Orkan thanks for running the numbers this is impressive. Can't wait for PNTC to have a 1 Mile target for me throw my Creedmoor at let alone a 2 mile target.
I don't see that analogy having any bearing. Saying something can't be done is entirely different from saying it is not practical. Nearly anything is possible. Now what is probable, is an entirely different matter.
What CoryT and I are saying here is simply that this shot is not probable even in the best of conditions, with the current equipment available to us. To my knowledge, there is no man alive that can resolve a wind call to less than 0.5mph across 3600yds. To make this shot probable on a 1moa target, that is exactly what kind of skillset would be required, if all other things were done absolutely perfectly.
Lets talk velocity differential for a second. In my above firing solution, it called for U41.9 mils. If I drop the velocity by 20fps, it calls for 42.6 mils. It's quite difficult getting an ES below 20fps! A 5fps drop calls for U42.1 mils. So 5fps will give you 0.3mils of variance. Granted as long as you are in your node, some of this effect is cancelled out to some degree, but at extreme long range all of this will come into play.
Not sure why practical considerations are so important since 99% of you don't make a living as a sniper and therefore shoot for enjoyment. This is no less practical than the thousands of hours of effort that people spend every year trying to get .25 in groups into the .0s or .1s in 100 yard bench rest. Yet the long range community has benefitted from their efforts.
Quite true! The tone of my comments are aimed at illuminating just how difficult this type of shot is, even with the best equipment available. I would not discourage anyone from giving it a try! Though some of the comments in this thread would seem to indicate that this type of thing hasn't been done before, and that is of course untrue. Some other comments would indicate that if you practice enough, you can become quite proficient at this distance. That too is not entirely accurate.
If we had a piece of hardware that would show us exactly what the wind is doing along the entire flight path of the bullet, and a ballistic computer that would allow for input of that varying curve, then that situation would change drastically. As it stands, in anything but the most perfect wind condition, shots like this will likely remain elusive without sighters.
So, I guess we just shouldn't try....all the while keeping our noses in the air because it has no real world application...WOW! Just WOW! You "no real world application" people keep your blinders on. I will continue to encourage those who push the limits. It has a value.
Another case in point, back in my day in the service ('81-85) 1000 yds. was a pipe dream for most. Only a small group of people routinely hit at those ranges. I often heard the exact same phrase, "has no real world practical value". I see it being a lot more routine today than way back when. That's progress. Made by people who push the limits. As far as what I said before it still goes. I wouldn't spend the vast majority of my ammo allotment on extreme training. But, with thought and observation, you can teach yourself to make those shots possible. But, you AREN'T going to do it without observing and thinking about what needs to occur to make them. That in itself becomes the "real world practicality".
IMO, getting first round hits at 2000+ m on torso sized targets, on demand, is where the hobby world that "pushes the limits" would truly have something to expand the current tactical capabilities.
For this to happen, though, we need a portable, real time dowrange wind measurement, at several points in the trajectory. THAT will be a breakthrough.
For this to happen, though, we need a portable, real time dowrange wind measurement, at several points in the trajectory. THAT will be a breakthrough.
Sandwarrior, I don't think anyone is saying not to try. Point in fact I'm saying the opposite. I think everyone should try. It will illuminate a lot!
How much time have you spent going for first round hits on IPSC sized targets beyond 2000yds?
All you naysayers need to go back to shooting 308 Win, 168gr FGMM, with a 10X scope with a mildot reticle and moa turrets....and no laser rangefinder.
How dare anyone even try to advance the state of the art......for fuck sake.
How dare anyone even try to advance the state of the art......for fuck sake.
The real world applications for this are two fold. The first being that it's fun to push the envelope as far as we can and a lot of us shoot simply because it's fun and we enjoy it. The second is that it does have real world implications as far as pushing the envelope both with equipment, and it show's others that it is possible. Once more people believe that its possible more will try. Once that happens shots like this will become more common place. It will not happen over night, but neither did my 80" flat screen t.v., I'd be mad as hell on football sunday if I didn't have it.
To the guys who made that shot all I can say is simply amazing. You give the rest of us something to strive for and believe in, even if we are still just looking for our first 1,000 yard first round hit.
Those that dare not to try will never achieve anything daring or special. If you don't think this is an amazing feat of marksmanship, then set up your own target and see how many shots it takes you to do the same. Please publish an honest report here on the Hide to see how you did.
To the guys who made that shot all I can say is simply amazing. You give the rest of us something to strive for and believe in, even if we are still just looking for our first 1,000 yard first round hit.
Those that dare not to try will never achieve anything daring or special. If you don't think this is an amazing feat of marksmanship, then set up your own target and see how many shots it takes you to do the same. Please publish an honest report here on the Hide to see how you did.
What may become possible in the future as a result of todays experiments is not the issue. Clearly this kind of work needs to be done to expand the envelope, we get to see what is required and start to think about ways to solve the problems in a way that will someday BECOME practical.
However, as of right now, today, we cannot make shots at ranges > 3000 yards in any practical sense. To do that, we need technology that does not currently exist. The people who are working on these shots are helping to define that technology, and I certainly wish them the best.
I have firing tables for my Vickers Mk1 that go out to 4500 yards. As of today, if we want to engage a target at 3500 yards with rifle bullets, I'd say that Vickers gun and it's clinometer would seem to be every bit as practical as the .375CT used in this demonstration, but I doubt most of the readers here would see it that way. I might shoot more rounds, but I'm pretty much going to get hits, and I don't even need line of sight to do it. Indirect fire with medium machine guns has been obsolete for some time now though. A decent 82mm crew would have dealt with that target on the first day.
So, while we might get there someday, as of today it's just an interesting exercise in just how far beyond the limits one might go with lots of time and money.
However, as of right now, today, we cannot make shots at ranges > 3000 yards in any practical sense. To do that, we need technology that does not currently exist. The people who are working on these shots are helping to define that technology, and I certainly wish them the best.
I have firing tables for my Vickers Mk1 that go out to 4500 yards. As of today, if we want to engage a target at 3500 yards with rifle bullets, I'd say that Vickers gun and it's clinometer would seem to be every bit as practical as the .375CT used in this demonstration, but I doubt most of the readers here would see it that way. I might shoot more rounds, but I'm pretty much going to get hits, and I don't even need line of sight to do it. Indirect fire with medium machine guns has been obsolete for some time now though. A decent 82mm crew would have dealt with that target on the first day.
So, while we might get there someday, as of today it's just an interesting exercise in just how far beyond the limits one might go with lots of time and money.
Do I get partial credit for having hits at 3120yds? How about 2728yds? How about 2500? I've spent a lot of time with 375CT past a mile trying to achieve first round hits. Probably more time than most. It is not easy, and it is not cheap. I did learn a great deal in the process, and still do learn a bit from time to time. However, the one thing that was illuminated early on, is the simple fact that CoryT is absolutely correct. I say fact, because it is indeed a fact, learned at great cost by those whom have pursued the same path before me, and very likely after me. My own endeavors in this arena were for the very reasons given throughout this thread pertaining to experience and pursuit of knowledge. It certainly wasn't for the notoriety.
Pay special attention to CoryT's first two paragraphs. It doesn't sound like either he or myself are trying to take anything away from shooters launching as far as their powder will carry them. However, these efforts do not change the facts of the situation. Lets bring it home, shall we? I can lay pretty near any of you behind my 375CT once I get it dialed in on a 2500yd target on a day with reasonable conditions, and many of you would likely have about the same hit percentage as I would. This doesn't necessarily change as you approach 3000yds. Sure, 3650 is farther, but I don't much expect that it would change much there either. I proposed some very real data and posed some very simple corrections regarding a half mile per hour wind shift, and it seems to have gone completely unnoticed, while CoryT and likely myself are made out to be as bad as holocaust deniers. Yet neither one of us is suggesting that people not do this kind of shooting. Just to reitterate that point, I'll ask a pointed question: How many people do you know that can accurately read wind to 0.5mph across 1000yds? Across 2000yds? Across 3000yds? If that's not difficult enough in itself, there is the wind elevation factor. The air above ground level is often moving at a different speed, and possibly different direction, than the air at ground level. The linear bullet path of the computations I listed earlier in this thread for the pressures given at Raton shows 460ft of linear drop. The air is very frequently doing something quite different a couple hundred feet above ground level. There currently is no device that I am aware of that will allow us to measure wind to the accuracy required to compute an accurate firing solution for a target at 3600yds, or even much closer.
What is being portrayed and recognized as skill in this thread, is failing to acknowledge the sighters required to tattle-tale on the wind in order to achieve hits at this distance. Once dialed in with sighters tattling on the wind and mirage... banging out some groups isn't all together that difficult.
The real issue here obviously stems from a difference of by what description you have for "practical." I call practical, where you have better than a 90% chance of a first round hit in all but the worst conditions. That's just my description, however. Some would say practical is a 20% first round hit or less. Even by that last description, you would be hard pressed to call 3600yds on a 1MOA target practical.
The way I look at it, the more people that are doing this, the better. That will create a market for the new technology CoryT is talking about. Once we have a more analytical way to read wind between our firing position and the target along the bullets flight path, and input that wind data into a more capable ballistic computer than we have today, then we'll have what we need to turn this shot into a practical probability. Though this unfortunate fact shouldn't discourage anyone from trying.
Orkan,
So, by your definition, I'll agree, practicality is subjective. In different scenarios, even your numbers you give might be low for someone else. Across the board I see them as being quite reasonable.
I call it practical because as you move through the learning process of shooting uber-long range, you learn something. Things you might not have ever even paid attention to if you hadn't tried. And to me that is the practicality. Being able to at least recognize what is going on downrange at that distance to even get hits. Let alone practice and crunching numbers and getting the occasional first round hit.
As I stated before, (maybe with some clarity this time) it is not something I would spend more than 10% of a given ammo allotment for practice on. Instead, it would be something that if the other 90% had been used successfully in the areas I felt I needed the most work on would I then allow that last 10% to be used for super long range shooting.
So, by your definition, I'll agree, practicality is subjective. In different scenarios, even your numbers you give might be low for someone else. Across the board I see them as being quite reasonable.
I call it practical because as you move through the learning process of shooting uber-long range, you learn something. Things you might not have ever even paid attention to if you hadn't tried. And to me that is the practicality. Being able to at least recognize what is going on downrange at that distance to even get hits. Let alone practice and crunching numbers and getting the occasional first round hit.
As I stated before, (maybe with some clarity this time) it is not something I would spend more than 10% of a given ammo allotment for practice on. Instead, it would be something that if the other 90% had been used successfully in the areas I felt I needed the most work on would I then allow that last 10% to be used for super long range shooting.
Doesn't sound like you "get it" at all to me. Anyone taking a hostile tone, as you just have, after reading my posts is clearly misunderstanding what is being said. You'd do well to ratchet down.
There is another guy in Texas that shot a 338 Norma out to 3670y with 3rd and fifth round hits. I'm not sure if he gets on here anymore but he shoots on the PRS on Team Leupold.
With that caliber, that is impressive.
With that caliber, that is impressive.
Damn. I shot 96's with a high X count yesterday and today at 600yds. on Rodriguez Range. Why do I read these posts? I'm loggin' off. But first I'll check out the motivational thread... That's good shooting.
That's good shooting.
Uh....I just meant that I felt good about my scores at 600. These fellers are off the charts. If I could take a stab at those distances, you betcha! I must admit that I'm not too familiar with many of the platforms that members are using, I'm still in the stone age shooting over a post, but I think a lot here are operating at a whole different level. How do you take the wind into account? Deep thoughts from my shallow mind....good luck and good shooting!
Doug
Doug
That was great shooting in my book! Given the equip, and range to do so, I would be trying everyday until I was broke. That shits just cool!
I'm not sure if you are the business owner but I want to just give you some friendly advise from another business owner:
You would do well to ratchet down, yourself. You are putting a label on you and the company you are representing here. No one wants to do business with a guy that talks down to people in a forum discussion.
Just my two cents about it.
If you'd have seen his post before he edited it, you'd understand my post. ... and my response was quite mild compared to what was deserved. As for my businesses, our customers come to us because they don't want to be fed a bunch of BS. They appreciate someone that will shoot them straight based on personal experience. So if someone doesn't want to do business with us because we won't stand for personal attacks, I'm perfectly fine with that. Lots of other dealers out there.
As for the rest of my posts in this thread, those that have spent time at extreme ELR distances can easily give plenty of weight to what has been said. At no point was I "talking down" to anyone by offering a bit of perspective based on the numbers.I think Orkans comments are spot on, and I didn't think he was knocking the OP, or that he was knocking long distance shooting. I thought his comments where simply putting things in perspective. First and second round hits are hard to get at those longer ranges. Our current tools makes 1st rounds hits at that distance part luck, and part skill.
Although the long range shooting isn't reliable, I am enjoying it, and am learning from it. I will be back at it the first weekend, that weather permits.
I frequent the DTA thread where Orkan posts a lot, and his input has always been helpful. It's obvious that he has solid experience, and I'm happy he shares it here on the board. I've seen him help a lot of folks out with questions, even ones that won't lead to a sale.
Although the long range shooting isn't reliable, I am enjoying it, and am learning from it. I will be back at it the first weekend, that weather permits.
I frequent the DTA thread where Orkan posts a lot, and his input has always been helpful. It's obvious that he has solid experience, and I'm happy he shares it here on the board. I've seen him help a lot of folks out with questions, even ones that won't lead to a sale.
Interesting thread, good shooting; gotta call BS on the quote. Carter's sucks, their RSOs are idiots and their supply of bullets (not loaded ammunition) is as terrible as most other reloading shops. I will say this for them: they sure know how to gouge the public: pay by the gun - more for a tactical gun than for a deer rifle - only shoot their targets, if you have a problem paying their prices, they'll gladly tell you to get the fuck out.
Enjoy Carter's, I won't bump into you there.
Nice shot, Billy.
LOL Im surprised no one jumped on this earlier. They dialed less wind than a perfectly calm day?? Maybe this is the reason they waited so many days to shoot at distance...maybe they didn't wait at all!! More than likely they shot every day and couldn't find where the *&^&% they were shooting!! I don't know any shooter anywhere who goes out to break a record, shoots at 500 yards and calls it a day. BS.
Of course that's conjecture and probably not true...but the 2moa of wind, if accurate, is the primary reason they hit the target, because as mentioned earlier, a staggering wind gust of 1mph will result in a miss. Any application where a 1mph of wind results in a miss is not practical. Super cool and lucky, but not practical.
Guess Im just lost on how this is either "accurate" or "effective"
And agreeing with ORKAN and others, by all means try ultra long range. It is really fun and educational. I have done it and love how attentive you have to be to even get in the time zone of the target.
Regards,
DT
Actually, according to Ballistic AE, with Muzzel velocity at 3500FPS, and 7000 FT Elevation, at 27.30 HG for atmosphere, 1104FPS@4000 YDS
So, It isn't that far fetched.
Similar threads
