Joop, I understand what you are saying, however; one must remember this bullet, had pass through the pres, and twice through the gov, exitied as you say, just fell out, with out any blood or bodily fluids. The bullet can be seen with any quick search. Now I'm not doubting the Warren commissions findings at all, they square up with all the facts. I'm just saying it was "magical". Hell all you have to do is talk to members of this board, they'll tell you right quick, it is easily duplicated any day of the week and twice on sunday.
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
What is the Most Historically Significant Sniper Rifle?
- Thread starter hrfunk
- Start date
Just to demonstrate how good the 6.5mm Car bullets are (at least were, those old Western pills were tough as pine knots), the Warren Commission, with the help of a stack of real experts found the following:
The following description assumes that bullet CE 399 hit high, at the sixth cervical vertebra rather than the third thoracic vertebra: The 6.5 millimeter, 161 grain, round nose military style full metal jacket bullet, which was manufactured by the Western Cartridge Company and later stored nearly whole in the U.S. National Archives, was first theorized by the Warren Commission to have:
ballistically arced very slightly while traveling 189 ft (58 m) in a downward net angle of 19 degrees (allowing for the 3 degrees downward slope of Elm Street), after an initial supersonic rifle exit muzzle velocity of 1,850 to 2,000 feet per second (560 to 610 m/s), then entered President Kennedy's rear suit coat at about 1,700 feet per second (518 m/s),
impacted, then entered President Kennedy 2 inches (51 mm) to the right of his spine, creating a wound documented size of 4 millimeters by 7 millimeters in the rear of his upper back with a red-brown to black area of skin surrounding the wound, forming what is called an abrasion collar. This abrasion collar was caused by the bullet's scraping the margins of the skin on penetration and is characteristic of a gunshot wound of entrance. This abrasion collar was photographically documented to be larger at the lower margin half of the wound, which is strong evidence that the bullet's long-axis orientation at the instant of penetration was slightly upward in relation to the plane of the skin immediately surrounding the wound; however, the skin of Kennedy's upper back slopes inward, and the Croft photo (taken at Zapruder frame 162, shortly before Kennedy was hit) shows the President slumped forward. This would suggest that a shooting position above and to the rear of Kennedy was possible
damaged the President's first thoracic vertebra.[69] (There is debate whether the bullet itself struck the vertebra and caused this damage, or whether a pressure cavity wave created by the bullet's passage was responsible),
passed through his neck. Warren Exhibit CE 386[70] reported contusion (bruise) of the apex of the right lung in the region where it rises above the clavicle, and noted that, although the apex of the right lung and the parietal pleural membrane over it had been bruised, they were not penetrated. This is consistent with a bullet passing through the neck, immediately over the top tip of the right lung (the pressure wave causing bruising to both pleural membrane and apex of lung), but without penetrating the thoracic cavity, or the lung beneath.
After passing through the neck, the bullet exited President Kennedy's throat, at the centerline below the President's Adam's apple. Within three hours of the assassination, this neck frontal wound was described in an afternoon press conference by the Parkland trauma room #1 emergency physician, Doctor Malcolm Perry, after he attended to the frontal throat wound, as being an "entrance wound". Doctor Perry stated the neck frontal wound "appeared to be" an entrance wound three times during his press conference. However, medical researchers have found that ER doctors frequently make mistakes with regard to entrance and exit wounds, and both Perry and Dr. Carrico, the other attending ER doctor, later testified at the Warren hearing that with a full jacketed bullet the wound in the front of the throat could have been either an entrance or exit wound; the Parkland ER doctors also never examined the wound in the back and could make no comparisons with it.[71] Within nineteen hours of his press conference statement (but after the autopsy had already been completed), Doctor Perry also described via telephone to Doctor Humes, one of the three U.S. Navy Bethesda Hospital military autopsists, that the neck front wound was originally only "3 to 5 millimeters" in circular width before doctor Perry attended to the front throat wound (Humes documented Perry's "3 to 5 millimeters" wound size by writing it down during the phone conversation),
passed through both sides of his shirt collar-front in alignment with the collar button buttoned, about 7/8 inch below the center top collar button and collar button hole, in line with the throat wound, and with the threads in both bullet-slits forced outward, showing this to be an exit wound,[72]
nicked President Kennedy's tie-knot on its upper left side. Upon clearing the tie-knot the bullet had slowed to about 1,500 feet per second (457 m/s) and had started to tumble,
traveled the 25.5 inches (650 mm) between President Kennedy and Governor Connally,
impacted and entered Connally's back just below and behind his right armpit creating an 8 millimeter by 15 millimeter elliptical wound, indicating that bullet was fired from an acute angle to the entrance wound point, or that the bullet was tumbling, having hit something (presumably Kennedy); according to Connally, the impact of the bullet was very forceful. In terms of the physics of this impact, this means that the bullet imparted part of its momentum to Connally's body and therefore the bullet's momentum changed (in speed or direction or both) upon entering his body;
completely destroyed 127 millimeters (5 in) of Connally's fifth right rib bone as it smashed through his chest interior at a documented 10-degree anatomically downward angle, (post-operative x-rays document that some of the metal fragments remained in Connally's wrist for life and were buried with him many years later. There were no fragments seen in any chest x-rays)[73]
exited slightly below his right nipple, creating a 50 millimeter, sucking-air, blowout chest wound,
passed through Connally's shirt and suit coat front, seen in commission photos five inches (127 mm) to the right of the suit coat right lapel, and even with the lowest point of the right lapel,
slowed to 900 feet per second (274 m/s) (subsonic), and entered through Connally's right upper (outside) wrist, but missed his suit coat sleeve. It penetrated the doubled French cuff shirt sleeve at the wrist area but did not penetrate the cuff on exit (in 2003 Nellie Connally described in her book “From Love Field” that Connally's right hand solid-gold “Mexican peso” cufflink was struck with a bullet, and the cufflink was completely shot off during the attack. This is not evident from the physical appearance of the shirt which bears no mark, tear or hole at the cufflink area. Connally’s cufflink was apparently never found — thus never entered — into the assassination evidence),
broke his right radius wrist bone at its widest point, depositing metal fragments, (post-operative x-rays document that some of the metal fragments are still buried with him),
exited the palm (inner) side of Connally's wrist,
slowed to 400 feet per second (122 m/s) and entered the front side of his left thigh, creating a documented 10-millimeter nearly round wound,
buried itself shallowly into Connally's left thigh muscles,
then fell out at Parkland Hospital, perhaps when Connally was undressed,
landed on Connally's gurney,
was discovered by hospital engineer Darrell C. Tomlinson on one of two gurneys on the ground floor of the hospital. Although Tomlinson testified to the Warren Commission in 1964 that he was not sure on whose gurney he found the bullet,[74] he has gone on record independent of the Warren Report, stating that he found the bullet on the gurney next to the one that transported Connally to an operating room table on the second floor of the hospital.[citation needed]
--------Don't ever let someone tell you, a 2000fps bullet can get it done-as long as it's a 6.5! Oh and by the way, they are sometimes self-cleaning!
The following description assumes that bullet CE 399 hit high, at the sixth cervical vertebra rather than the third thoracic vertebra: The 6.5 millimeter, 161 grain, round nose military style full metal jacket bullet, which was manufactured by the Western Cartridge Company and later stored nearly whole in the U.S. National Archives, was first theorized by the Warren Commission to have:
ballistically arced very slightly while traveling 189 ft (58 m) in a downward net angle of 19 degrees (allowing for the 3 degrees downward slope of Elm Street), after an initial supersonic rifle exit muzzle velocity of 1,850 to 2,000 feet per second (560 to 610 m/s), then entered President Kennedy's rear suit coat at about 1,700 feet per second (518 m/s),
impacted, then entered President Kennedy 2 inches (51 mm) to the right of his spine, creating a wound documented size of 4 millimeters by 7 millimeters in the rear of his upper back with a red-brown to black area of skin surrounding the wound, forming what is called an abrasion collar. This abrasion collar was caused by the bullet's scraping the margins of the skin on penetration and is characteristic of a gunshot wound of entrance. This abrasion collar was photographically documented to be larger at the lower margin half of the wound, which is strong evidence that the bullet's long-axis orientation at the instant of penetration was slightly upward in relation to the plane of the skin immediately surrounding the wound; however, the skin of Kennedy's upper back slopes inward, and the Croft photo (taken at Zapruder frame 162, shortly before Kennedy was hit) shows the President slumped forward. This would suggest that a shooting position above and to the rear of Kennedy was possible
damaged the President's first thoracic vertebra.[69] (There is debate whether the bullet itself struck the vertebra and caused this damage, or whether a pressure cavity wave created by the bullet's passage was responsible),
passed through his neck. Warren Exhibit CE 386[70] reported contusion (bruise) of the apex of the right lung in the region where it rises above the clavicle, and noted that, although the apex of the right lung and the parietal pleural membrane over it had been bruised, they were not penetrated. This is consistent with a bullet passing through the neck, immediately over the top tip of the right lung (the pressure wave causing bruising to both pleural membrane and apex of lung), but without penetrating the thoracic cavity, or the lung beneath.
After passing through the neck, the bullet exited President Kennedy's throat, at the centerline below the President's Adam's apple. Within three hours of the assassination, this neck frontal wound was described in an afternoon press conference by the Parkland trauma room #1 emergency physician, Doctor Malcolm Perry, after he attended to the frontal throat wound, as being an "entrance wound". Doctor Perry stated the neck frontal wound "appeared to be" an entrance wound three times during his press conference. However, medical researchers have found that ER doctors frequently make mistakes with regard to entrance and exit wounds, and both Perry and Dr. Carrico, the other attending ER doctor, later testified at the Warren hearing that with a full jacketed bullet the wound in the front of the throat could have been either an entrance or exit wound; the Parkland ER doctors also never examined the wound in the back and could make no comparisons with it.[71] Within nineteen hours of his press conference statement (but after the autopsy had already been completed), Doctor Perry also described via telephone to Doctor Humes, one of the three U.S. Navy Bethesda Hospital military autopsists, that the neck front wound was originally only "3 to 5 millimeters" in circular width before doctor Perry attended to the front throat wound (Humes documented Perry's "3 to 5 millimeters" wound size by writing it down during the phone conversation),
passed through both sides of his shirt collar-front in alignment with the collar button buttoned, about 7/8 inch below the center top collar button and collar button hole, in line with the throat wound, and with the threads in both bullet-slits forced outward, showing this to be an exit wound,[72]
nicked President Kennedy's tie-knot on its upper left side. Upon clearing the tie-knot the bullet had slowed to about 1,500 feet per second (457 m/s) and had started to tumble,
traveled the 25.5 inches (650 mm) between President Kennedy and Governor Connally,
impacted and entered Connally's back just below and behind his right armpit creating an 8 millimeter by 15 millimeter elliptical wound, indicating that bullet was fired from an acute angle to the entrance wound point, or that the bullet was tumbling, having hit something (presumably Kennedy); according to Connally, the impact of the bullet was very forceful. In terms of the physics of this impact, this means that the bullet imparted part of its momentum to Connally's body and therefore the bullet's momentum changed (in speed or direction or both) upon entering his body;
completely destroyed 127 millimeters (5 in) of Connally's fifth right rib bone as it smashed through his chest interior at a documented 10-degree anatomically downward angle, (post-operative x-rays document that some of the metal fragments remained in Connally's wrist for life and were buried with him many years later. There were no fragments seen in any chest x-rays)[73]
exited slightly below his right nipple, creating a 50 millimeter, sucking-air, blowout chest wound,
passed through Connally's shirt and suit coat front, seen in commission photos five inches (127 mm) to the right of the suit coat right lapel, and even with the lowest point of the right lapel,
slowed to 900 feet per second (274 m/s) (subsonic), and entered through Connally's right upper (outside) wrist, but missed his suit coat sleeve. It penetrated the doubled French cuff shirt sleeve at the wrist area but did not penetrate the cuff on exit (in 2003 Nellie Connally described in her book “From Love Field” that Connally's right hand solid-gold “Mexican peso” cufflink was struck with a bullet, and the cufflink was completely shot off during the attack. This is not evident from the physical appearance of the shirt which bears no mark, tear or hole at the cufflink area. Connally’s cufflink was apparently never found — thus never entered — into the assassination evidence),
broke his right radius wrist bone at its widest point, depositing metal fragments, (post-operative x-rays document that some of the metal fragments are still buried with him),
exited the palm (inner) side of Connally's wrist,
slowed to 400 feet per second (122 m/s) and entered the front side of his left thigh, creating a documented 10-millimeter nearly round wound,
buried itself shallowly into Connally's left thigh muscles,
then fell out at Parkland Hospital, perhaps when Connally was undressed,
landed on Connally's gurney,
was discovered by hospital engineer Darrell C. Tomlinson on one of two gurneys on the ground floor of the hospital. Although Tomlinson testified to the Warren Commission in 1964 that he was not sure on whose gurney he found the bullet,[74] he has gone on record independent of the Warren Report, stating that he found the bullet on the gurney next to the one that transported Connally to an operating room table on the second floor of the hospital.[citation needed]
--------Don't ever let someone tell you, a 2000fps bullet can get it done-as long as it's a 6.5! Oh and by the way, they are sometimes self-cleaning!
Last edited:
Pawprint2,
My meaning of the statement was that we are all pretty much in agreement that the 6.5 Carcano used by Oswald did indeed shoot the President. The second shooter/or not issue would be, I think, a matter of a different debate.
My meaning of the statement was that we are all pretty much in agreement that the 6.5 Carcano used by Oswald did indeed shoot the President. The second shooter/or not issue would be, I think, a matter of a different debate.
A few points on the bullet found on the stretcher at Parkland, as mentioned it was not definitely IDed to be the one which did all the damage, i.e. "the magic bullet". It would be near impossible to connect this bullet to the wounds due to normal chain of evidence if this were subjected to court/legal rules of evidence. The finder was not sure. The stretchers were never definitely connected to the patients/victums. Some conspiracy types are sure it was a plant??
There is a bigger problem with the bullet in question. As mentioned, metal was removed from Connley. Some metal was never removed from his body and he was buried with it. The amount of metal removed from Connley was greater by weight, than was missing from the "magic" bullet. Then there is the amount he went to the grave with, which is hard to verify at this point. As a result, I have always been convinced that this bullet found on the stretcher was not the one that inflicted the mutiple wounds. There is no physical way a bullet can gain weight, leave behind weight, and not still be nearly as heavy as the day it was loaded when it is found. I have no clue where that particular bullet came from, but I have always been convinced that the bullet itself is a can of worms. Maybe it was from the headwound? Just not sure but some questions remain unanswered.
I can not recall all the places I got this information, could be N. Turner or C. Weck MD, or a combo but I did/do believe it reliable. I have seen every documentry and study on this I can find, most dozens of times. There are at least 3 bullets to account for and only two are accounted for best I can recall. The other hit the curb down the road and a piece of the curb concrete struck a spectator. That bullet was a miss.
I do not think the bullet found at Parkland was the "magic" bullet. One bullet apparently did the damage in question but I doubt this was it. Anyone else with some new or more reliable info on this?
There is a bigger problem with the bullet in question. As mentioned, metal was removed from Connley. Some metal was never removed from his body and he was buried with it. The amount of metal removed from Connley was greater by weight, than was missing from the "magic" bullet. Then there is the amount he went to the grave with, which is hard to verify at this point. As a result, I have always been convinced that this bullet found on the stretcher was not the one that inflicted the mutiple wounds. There is no physical way a bullet can gain weight, leave behind weight, and not still be nearly as heavy as the day it was loaded when it is found. I have no clue where that particular bullet came from, but I have always been convinced that the bullet itself is a can of worms. Maybe it was from the headwound? Just not sure but some questions remain unanswered.
I can not recall all the places I got this information, could be N. Turner or C. Weck MD, or a combo but I did/do believe it reliable. I have seen every documentry and study on this I can find, most dozens of times. There are at least 3 bullets to account for and only two are accounted for best I can recall. The other hit the curb down the road and a piece of the curb concrete struck a spectator. That bullet was a miss.
I do not think the bullet found at Parkland was the "magic" bullet. One bullet apparently did the damage in question but I doubt this was it. Anyone else with some new or more reliable info on this?
Mike,
I know there were some residual fragments left behind in Connolly, but I've never heard a specific estimate of the weights involved. Worth considering that with this style of bullet, those weights can vary considerably. The standard bullet used in even the last lots of M118 Match ammo varied by three full grains or better. Late fifties, early sixties production of mil surplus ammo probably wasn't held to even those loose standards.
This was, without a doubt, one of the most horrifically screwed up investigations in the history of American law enforcement. Nothing followed protocols, boundary issues over jurisdiction were a mess, the autopsy was botched as badly as it could have been. I'll go with Vincent Bugliosi on this one; a very simple case of homicide, straight-forward evidence, all thrown totally off track by who the victim was and the political ramifications that stemmed from that identity. One thing I can absolutely guarantee everyone right here and now; it'll never be solved to everyone's satisfaction, no matter what new evidence emerges down the road. It's become an industry with a life of its own, and a multi-million dollar industry at that.
I know there were some residual fragments left behind in Connolly, but I've never heard a specific estimate of the weights involved. Worth considering that with this style of bullet, those weights can vary considerably. The standard bullet used in even the last lots of M118 Match ammo varied by three full grains or better. Late fifties, early sixties production of mil surplus ammo probably wasn't held to even those loose standards.
This was, without a doubt, one of the most horrifically screwed up investigations in the history of American law enforcement. Nothing followed protocols, boundary issues over jurisdiction were a mess, the autopsy was botched as badly as it could have been. I'll go with Vincent Bugliosi on this one; a very simple case of homicide, straight-forward evidence, all thrown totally off track by who the victim was and the political ramifications that stemmed from that identity. One thing I can absolutely guarantee everyone right here and now; it'll never be solved to everyone's satisfaction, no matter what new evidence emerges down the road. It's become an industry with a life of its own, and a multi-million dollar industry at that.
That is not so. The Marine Model 1941 Sniper Rifle was put together and fitted with the Unertl 8X rifle scope by Marine armorer's, to the Marine Corp design. They had already been making the 03 NM rifles for competition and based them on their experience with them. It was probably the best military sniper rifle of WW11 and Korea, as the Model 70 was never accepted, even thou they used them.
I remember the shooting, and the first and second day, before they arrested Oswald, all of the media was saying that he had been shot with a 7.65 Argentine Mauser. Then, it was never mentioned again. I had been in the Airborne Infantry and that rifle made a lot of sense, but that 6.5 Carcano never did.
Please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe all the 1903 variants were simply the original M1903 design slightly modified for specific applications. As such, it was a battle rifle that was pressed into service for target competition, Sniper use, etc. While there is no doubt that Marine armorer's maintained those rifles, they did not manufacture or design them. I still think the M40 was the first purpose designed and built Sniper rifle adopted by a major military organization. I agree, bu the way, that the M1941 was probably the best Sniper rifle of WWII.
HRF
I'll agree the Springfield series sniper rifles were probably the best out there but I wouldn't say they were the most "Significant". It could have been but the American Military didn't put the effort into sniping other countries such as England, Germany, and Russia did.
The Unertl/M1941 had their problems in many of the South Pacific campaigns, what with fogging plus the 8X scopes lacked the field of view needed in the closer range jungle fighting. The commander of the ground forces on Guadalcal Canceled the Unertl contract and ordered the Army's M1903a4 with its 2.5X M73B1 (Weaver 330) instead.
To see how the Springfield series compares with other vintage sniper rifles one only has to check out the CMP forums, they are winning a huge majority of the CMP's vintage sniper matches.
The advantage I see of the 1941's over the 'A4s is the ability to remove the scope and use iron sights if need be. In future rifles the Marines gave up that advantage with M40 series, but the Army adapted it, with the M21 and M24 series of rifles. Besides in times the iron sights are an advantage, removing the scope also gives you the flexibility to load via stripper clips in rapid fire is needed. Detachable magazines fixed that, but I would like the advantage of irons in addition to glass, if the glass goes south or your range is limited.
Last edited:
As far as land being "stolen"...actually it was Finland that decided to separate itself from Russia after the Bolshevik revolution. In the process they took lands that did not belong to them. Gotta dig deeper.
Last edited:
What being a commie have to do with any of it? To progress through the ranks and careers one had to have that damn red ticket, whether he believed in it or not. So ideology aside, my vote goes to Mosin Nagant. Although never designed as a sniper rifle, it killed more Germans than anything else out there. And while the US had no sniper programs even closely comparable to the Soviet or German, the Reds were steamrolling them on the gigantic scale...while the Red Army was unprepared to face the initial German advance, its snipers were...
Last edited:
russian snipers belonged to their army_ the army was preparing himself since the '30s, when Germany started to test undercover her future tank tactics in russian territory, exchanging this facility with ,among other things, Zeiss scopes know-how concessed to Russians (Molotov/Ribbentrop non aggression Pact)_ That's happened to escape from Versailles Treaty impositions coming from the winners after WWI_
Germany, before & at the start of the WWII, plainly don't cared about any sniping or sniper's programs, having focused her future tasks differently_
If something really decisive and really killing was employed against the enemy, this were all the varieties of heavy bombings, that conditioned the Germans outside and inside the Germany, and the Allied help given to Russia under various forms, NOT the Moisins_ That without underestimating the sacrifices & sufferings of everyone, nor lacking of respect for anyone, of course _
Last edited:
Ahh...have you read the name of this thread? I answered the original question posted...and it is about RIFLES. MN was my choice, not yours, obviously.
As far as bombings go... in case you conveniently forget, the biggest front of all was the Eastern. By 1944, the Red Army was already in Budapest, millions and millions of people were already dead, the war was already going on for almost 5 years. As far as Allied help, sure, who argues with that but help alone was never a deciding factor especially knowing colossal raw material and industrial potentials of the USSR. By the way, the Allied aid caravan PQ17 was 90% destroyed by the U-Boats...just one example. Back to the rifles, Remington and Westinghouse were making Mosins as well, how about that...
Yes,sir,I've read it, well before than you, with more attention than you__
No,sir,the help alone can't count_ The spent lives count,and for sure Russian have sacrificed a huge number of theirs_
I respect your choice, but I think can be bit difficult make a truly total body count about any rifle, sniper or not,at their times_
You like it or not, extensive bombings remains the deciding factor on my book, but is my understanding that air tactics are outside of this thread_
Regards_
No,sir,the help alone can't count_ The spent lives count,and for sure Russian have sacrificed a huge number of theirs_
I respect your choice, but I think can be bit difficult make a truly total body count about any rifle, sniper or not,at their times_
You like it or not, extensive bombings remains the deciding factor on my book, but is my understanding that air tactics are outside of this thread_
Regards_
Last edited:
You may be forgetting that the Soviet SVD was adapted in 1963 and was a purpose built sniper for a major military organization. There was a huge reward offered by the US to get their hands on one. They are not a AK variant or improvement by the way, but are very different in many ways.
I have an M40 and like it but I really like my NDM-86s in 54r and 308. The 308 guns are sub-MOA capable and I have had a few sub half inch(just barely) 5 shot groups at 100 yds. Soldier of Fortune tested one with similar results. I would love to have a real Soviet SVD but they are more expensive than an M40. The 100 KBI imports, which are the only officially imported Soviet SVDs, are bringing in the $15K range and are not completely military.
I also respectfully disagree about the USMC 1903A1 sniper with 8X Unertl being the best sniper of WW2. It is accurate but lacks many qualities found in a good military sniper rifle and the USMC knew it. There are reasons the program was a one shot effort. The scope is to big, fragile, water sensitive, awkward and not the best light gathering scope. The scope must be removed to use the irons. Good target rifle but not the best sniper IMO.
Take a Soviet PEM side mount rifle in comparison. Zeiss designed optics and Soviet modified for simplicity, water and other weather resistence, range estimation, trajectory compensation, extremely tough. I have seen scopes that were dug up after 60 plus years that will still function. The Germans knew their quality and mounted them on their rifles, not to mention their use of captured rifles. Mount is very solid and easy to remove yet maintains zero. Irons are totally usable with the scope in place. Minus 50 degrees, no problem. Rifle is built somewhat like the USMC rifles with all parts were fitted and polished including the action. These are not your average refurb 91/30. The Finns loved them as well. In combat, this rifle is suited to a real world military issued sniper.
The Soviet snipers were developed and refined more than 10 years before the war broke out. The PE top mount rifles were very capable and the scopes were high quality built on Zeiss equiptment. These rifles were purpose built while the USMC Unertl equipted rifles were essentially match rifles made to fit the sniper role and the Unertls were target scopes that were available. There was no years of development or refinement for the sniper role. They were simple improvisation and use what you got and make it work, which the USMC is certainly good at.
Last edited:
The Marine M1941 was an Infantry rifle that was hand fitted by Marine Armorers and not a match rifle. All of the WW11 scopes were prone to fogging. The Russian Sniper rifles were mainly used at closer range, mostly in city fighting. The M1941 was used in WW11, Korea and early in Vietnam, which doesn't sound like a one shot thing, and most snipers could hit out to 500-600 yards with them. Not many other sniper rifles could do that, before the modern ones. The 1903-A4 was a production made rifle and functioned well, but did not have the accuracy of the M1941. By the way, I was never a Marine, always Army.
I suggest more reading on the A1 USMC rifles. The majority of the rifles were built on existing match rifles as a starting point. By one shot deal, I meant the Quantico builders produced these rifles once in 1943. The effort was not repeated.
The Russian snipers were used in many roles, including the typical 2 man sniper team, designated marksman, harasssment, countersniper and covering retreats. Russian snipers were tested in head shots to 600 meters and 300 meter head shots were very common. Accuracy minimum for sniper rifle acceptance was 10 shots inside 3 cm at 100 meters.
I was Army 5th SFGA ODA 595 myself.
The Model 1903A1 Sniper (M1941) were made up mostly from National Match Rifles, the last of these NM rifles were made in 1939 (however a few service models were used. They would fall in the 900,000 to 1,532,000 range. Most were made after 1927 and would fall in the >1,274,765 range.
There were 1,047 NM rifles in Marine inventories by early 1942. The last M1903a1 was built in 1939. The sniper rifle were mostly M1903a1s but a few 1903s were used. The Marine armors who built the sniper rifle referred to them as M1941 Sniper Rifles, (a name that stuck) but the official designation was Model 1903a1 (Sniper) USMC.
The Army's M1903a4 Sniper rifles were built from M1903a3's.
The Marines also got and used M1903a4's from the Army. They worked better in the jungles in the South Pacific.
There were 1,047 NM rifles in Marine inventories by early 1942. The last M1903a1 was built in 1939. The sniper rifle were mostly M1903a1s but a few 1903s were used. The Marine armors who built the sniper rifle referred to them as M1941 Sniper Rifles, (a name that stuck) but the official designation was Model 1903a1 (Sniper) USMC.
The Army's M1903a4 Sniper rifles were built from M1903a3's.
The Marines also got and used M1903a4's from the Army. They worked better in the jungles in the South Pacific.
Poyer could be wrong, and I can not find my NRA write up on these with Major Land and others but Poyer(The M1903 Springfield Rifle and its Variants) says that "approval was given on Jan. 6, 1943 to build 1000 Model 1903A1 .30 caliber Springfield Rifles equipted with the new Unertl 8x scope and mounts.... The rifles were assembled at the Marine Corps Philadelphia Armory," Page 75.
"The first combat use came with the Raider Battalions in the jungles of New Georgia. But after action reports disparaged the delicate scopes and mounts and pointed out that the scoped rifles were of little value in that kind of terrain. The Marine Corps Commandant...concurred and in Freb, 1944, the acquisition of further Unertl Scopes was ended. At least one hundred of the sniper rifles were transferred to the Navy for use in mine-sweeping." p43.
Best I, and John Beard and some other experts can figure, I have one of each.
I agree with much of what Kraig says, but I am pretty sure on the date of manufacture. There was a good write up on them in the Am. Rifleman, which involved major Land and written by Bruce Canfield IIRC. I can not find it right now but it is out there. I have also heard the rifle referred to as the M1943, which the experts(which does not include me), but apparently the M1941 and M1943 designations irritate many of the "experts". As I result I call them the Unertl 8X equipted USMC 1903A1 sniper, which is pretty much what Kraig is calling them.
Most of my study of them was when I was looking for one a few years back and that continued as I ended up looking at a bunch and buying the two that I have. I taked to every so called expert I could find and communicated by email and in person at major shows. That includes Lynn M., John K, John Beard, Vern O., and many others. Of course the number of put togethers and fakes are rampant. Documented examples are very uncommon.
I have fired them both at least 50-150 times each. Only once did I get a sub-MOA group and that was with Federal Gold Metal Match. US Match of many different lots and dates has yet to give a sub-MOA group. Bores are excellent and are original Star Guaged 1938 barrels. Most groups are in the 1.5 MOA-2 range. 300 yd results were very disappointing, like 12 inches, as I was looking for the best rifle to shoot in CMP vintage sniper match. The one rifle at 300 yds did not merit a 600 yd trial. A PU, the same day, gave a 2.9 and 3.1 inch five shot group at 300 yds. The scope on the PU was badly out of focus yet it kicked the butt of the USMC sniper,and having fired about 30 PUs, many of them do shoot much better.
"The first combat use came with the Raider Battalions in the jungles of New Georgia. But after action reports disparaged the delicate scopes and mounts and pointed out that the scoped rifles were of little value in that kind of terrain. The Marine Corps Commandant...concurred and in Freb, 1944, the acquisition of further Unertl Scopes was ended. At least one hundred of the sniper rifles were transferred to the Navy for use in mine-sweeping." p43.
Best I, and John Beard and some other experts can figure, I have one of each.
I agree with much of what Kraig says, but I am pretty sure on the date of manufacture. There was a good write up on them in the Am. Rifleman, which involved major Land and written by Bruce Canfield IIRC. I can not find it right now but it is out there. I have also heard the rifle referred to as the M1943, which the experts(which does not include me), but apparently the M1941 and M1943 designations irritate many of the "experts". As I result I call them the Unertl 8X equipted USMC 1903A1 sniper, which is pretty much what Kraig is calling them.
Most of my study of them was when I was looking for one a few years back and that continued as I ended up looking at a bunch and buying the two that I have. I taked to every so called expert I could find and communicated by email and in person at major shows. That includes Lynn M., John K, John Beard, Vern O., and many others. Of course the number of put togethers and fakes are rampant. Documented examples are very uncommon.
I have fired them both at least 50-150 times each. Only once did I get a sub-MOA group and that was with Federal Gold Metal Match. US Match of many different lots and dates has yet to give a sub-MOA group. Bores are excellent and are original Star Guaged 1938 barrels. Most groups are in the 1.5 MOA-2 range. 300 yd results were very disappointing, like 12 inches, as I was looking for the best rifle to shoot in CMP vintage sniper match. The one rifle at 300 yds did not merit a 600 yd trial. A PU, the same day, gave a 2.9 and 3.1 inch five shot group at 300 yds. The scope on the PU was badly out of focus yet it kicked the butt of the USMC sniper,and having fired about 30 PUs, many of them do shoot much better.
Last edited:
Finland was a Russian province for something close to 200 years, and was controlled by the Swedes for some 600 years prior to that. Following the Russian Revolution, the Bolsheviks had too much on their plate to contend with the troubles associated with didn't contest the question when the Finns pushed for independence. Shortly afterwards the Finns fought their own civil war with lines breaking along the Whites who wanted a democratic nation, and the Reds, who wanted to join in the Communist revolution and maintain close ties with the new Soviet Union. Pretty nasty one, as civil wars go, with a particularly strong White stronghold around Lapua, which became known as the Lapuan Movement. They were largely responsible for purging the Reds from that area, and remained very strongly anti-communist. At the conclusion of the civil war, the Finns were clearly concerned that the Russians would return and attempt to forcibly reunite them with the Soviet Union. This concern was the groundwork for the national munitions factory, located in the town of Lapua, as well as the SAKO armory. The Russians have a long history of interfering with the Finns internal security, including murdering one of the Lapua ballistics engineer when he was developing the D46 bullet. The Russians had enough concern about Finnish arms development that they wanted to eliminate those who were advancing such innovative designs. But the Finns have always been a very distinct and separate people, whether their territory was being ruled by Sweden or Russia. From what my Finnish friends have said, apparently the Swedes were harder on them, while the Imperial Russian rule was more a case of benign neglect. In any case, the areas from Lapland and the Karelian Isthmus which are now Russian territory, were Finnish lands; not Russian.
Interesting history, and one that doesn't really cast the Russians in a good light, no matter how you look at it.
Last edited:
I've found no reason to fault Poyer, Senich and the like, I've heard rumors there are a few mistakes in their works but I never found legit sources to dispute them. I'm sure if you do that much research and put out that much information it makes sense there may be some minor errors.
Still wont stop me from reading their works.
Along those lines check out Poyer's "Collecting the American Sniper Rifle, 1900-1945" Well worth the read and a good source.
Poyer talk's about the problems with the Unertl's in the South Pacific, I can well understand that. My father fought with the 41st ID in the SP and told me of the same problems in the jungles, that's why he liked the Carbine over the M1, for close range jungle work it worked quite well.
I wasn't in the SP obviously but I spent a bit of time fighting in the jungles of SE Asia I could understand the problems Poyer referred to.
Also the same subject mater was mentioned in W.H.B & Joseph Smith's book "The Book of Rifles" (written in 1948)
As to accuracy, I don't put a lot of stock in sub min combat rifles, that all goes out the window when you're facing the elephant in Indian Country.
That's not why I like vintage rifles, its the history and honoring those who carried these rifles in harm's way.
Still wont stop me from reading their works.
Along those lines check out Poyer's "Collecting the American Sniper Rifle, 1900-1945" Well worth the read and a good source.
Poyer talk's about the problems with the Unertl's in the South Pacific, I can well understand that. My father fought with the 41st ID in the SP and told me of the same problems in the jungles, that's why he liked the Carbine over the M1, for close range jungle work it worked quite well.
I wasn't in the SP obviously but I spent a bit of time fighting in the jungles of SE Asia I could understand the problems Poyer referred to.
Also the same subject mater was mentioned in W.H.B & Joseph Smith's book "The Book of Rifles" (written in 1948)
As to accuracy, I don't put a lot of stock in sub min combat rifles, that all goes out the window when you're facing the elephant in Indian Country.
That's not why I like vintage rifles, its the history and honoring those who carried these rifles in harm's way.
Photographs of the so-called "pristine" bullet have been in the public record since the publication of the Warren Report. Viewed from the side the bullet looks like it might be undamaged. However when the bullet was photographed from end it can be seen to be badly flattened along the long dimension.
A very painstaking reconstruction of the assassination using the actual limo or one just like was done on TV a few years ago. i believe that the pristine bullet was capable of making all the wounds ascribed to it. The experiment conducted on TV proved it possible. The problem with some of the halfbaked theories like the "gunman-in-storm-drain" is that the bullet would have to have gone through the windshield. It didn't.
Regards,
Jim
Mike if I may chime in here.
The use of the 8X Unertl scope was originally proposed by USMC Captain George Van Orden assisted by Master Gunner Calvin Lloyd on a .30 Caliber version of the WINCHESTER MODEL 70. It was the Model 70 that was approved as the MC M1941 (See Clark Campbell "The '03 Springfield Era", 2003). The Marines actually took delivery of 373 Models 70s in May of 1942 some of which hung around and were used as snipers in Vietnam
The USMC brass balked at adopting a new rifle for two reasons. 1. There was no requirement for them since there were sniper slots in the table of organization. 2. The rifle did not appear to be sufficiently rugged for combat and lacked a few minor details like sling swivels.
So the compromise that was worked out was to use 1903 national match rifles and special target rifles on hand in USMC inventory. The conversion work was performed at the Philadelphia Navy Yard by USMC Armorers.
As you mentioned, the rifles went into service in mid to late 1943. Based on negative reports from the front the commandant ordered, in Feb 1944 that the remaining portion of the Unertl contract be cancelled. However, he further directed that rifles continue to be issued until such time as depot stocks were exhausted. Action was also to be taken to acquire M1903A4 rifles from the Army and an initial was quantity of 1000 pieces was reportedly available.
These is an extensive file of USMC sniper program correspondence available from Springfield Research Service. Most of the important documents are summarized or reproduced in full in either Campbell. 2003 or in Peter Senichs "The Marine Corp Scout Sniper In WW2 and Korea". The books do a better job of stitching the material together than is possible looking at the originals, many of which are all but illegible.
At no time in the file of USMC documents is the term "M1941" used to describe the rifle. It is referred to as "Rifle, U.S. Cal. .30 M1903A1 Snipers Equipment with Telescope, Sighting Unertl 8X". M1941 is certainly less of a mouthful and may have been used colloquially in the ranks but in fact it refers to the Winchester and is an error.
There is one document that is particularly interesting though. It is a letter from Col Julian Smith USMC to the Commandant USMC in 1940. Col Smith recommends that the Corps take a page from the Germans in WW1 and adopt a sniper rifle with a compact, rigidly mounted, hunting scope. He goes on to say that US forces in WW1 had been saddled with the M1903 mounting a target scope (Winchester A5) which proved to be too delicate for combat. If Smith ever saw the Army's Warner Swazey rig he didn't mention it
. But he did go on to recommend The Weaver 330C or 440C, The Lyman Alaskan and I believe the Noske. While the Unertl equipped M1903A1's are sexy and highly collectable very few of them were ever built (just a few hundred), thay had a lot of drawbacks for a combat rifle and has far as historical significance is concerned have to be considered something of a technical dead end. The USMC for its part went on to the A4, the M1C and the MC M1952. In the early days of Vietnam they were still using left overs from WW2 until the Remington 700/Redfield combination was adopted.
Regards,
Jim
Last edited:
Jim, Thank you much for your very informative information. I do know several folks that will get ill with someone who calls these rifles the M1941 or M1943. They are a thing of beauty and accurate.
On the majic bullet, I know of a couple of the reconstuction shots done with the Carcano and I agree that a single shot could have done the job. I also agree the photos we have seen of the bullet in question show it has significantly changed and is not pristine. My point on the bullet found is that nobody is sure Connley nor Kennedy were ever near the stretcher where the bullet was found. Additionally, we do know the weight of the bullet as found and we know Connley had quite a bit of bullet material removed plus some left bullet material was left in his body. There are Xrays showing the bullet material as well. My question is not that a single bullet did the damage, but was it the bullet we have.
On the majic bullet, I know of a couple of the reconstuction shots done with the Carcano and I agree that a single shot could have done the job. I also agree the photos we have seen of the bullet in question show it has significantly changed and is not pristine. My point on the bullet found is that nobody is sure Connley nor Kennedy were ever near the stretcher where the bullet was found. Additionally, we do know the weight of the bullet as found and we know Connley had quite a bit of bullet material removed plus some left bullet material was left in his body. There are Xrays showing the bullet material as well. My question is not that a single bullet did the damage, but was it the bullet we have.
I would consider the 1903A4 as Historically Important for the following reason: It’s length of service. The 1903A4 started life as the 1903 and was used by marksmen to great effect at Belleau Wood during WW I. The rifle was used throughout WW II, Korea and during Vietnam. The 1903A4 is an iconic American Sniper Rifle, and besides it’s my favorite to shoot- despite the 2.5 magnification on the scope.
I think MB might have a point.......In the CMP Vintage Sniper Matches the 1903 series seems to be winning a majority of the matches out shooting other military sniper rifles built prior to 1955.
Can't blame the rifle if our military didn't take sniping seriously.
Can't blame the rifle if our military didn't take sniping seriously.
i know its not got a long history, but what about the barret m82a1? it truly changed what people thought possible with a man portable shoulder fired weapon. i believe that it brought about a real and tangible change in the modern battlefield. could be wrong but just my .02
The "Most significant cartridge" thread got me thinking about this thread again.
While we've taken two routes on this issue, we've covered some pretty incredible ground. One being, which rifle, used system-wide, was the most effective. And two, which event with a rifle used as a tool was the biggest single event.
It pretty much came down to a consensus that the 6.5 Carcano rifle used to shoot Kennedy was the number one choice of the second group. In the first group, it didn't even register on the scale.
Which leads me to think. What if sniping isn't really about the accuracy or quality of your rifle? Simply that you can get into a place where what you have will have to work, within it's range. That the ability to dissect and disseminate information to an individual capable of pulling the trigger on given notice when sent to a difficult place is more important? Not that the rifle need be one shade above a club, but instead, the sniper need be the most carefully sharpened tool? He, who could pull the trigger on any weapon capable of doing the job. Not the ordinary soldier who, for some reason, might miss the most carefully chosen, or precipitous opportunity to carry out a mission.
I'd hate to see this thread go away
While we've taken two routes on this issue, we've covered some pretty incredible ground. One being, which rifle, used system-wide, was the most effective. And two, which event with a rifle used as a tool was the biggest single event.
It pretty much came down to a consensus that the 6.5 Carcano rifle used to shoot Kennedy was the number one choice of the second group. In the first group, it didn't even register on the scale.
Which leads me to think. What if sniping isn't really about the accuracy or quality of your rifle? Simply that you can get into a place where what you have will have to work, within it's range. That the ability to dissect and disseminate information to an individual capable of pulling the trigger on given notice when sent to a difficult place is more important? Not that the rifle need be one shade above a club, but instead, the sniper need be the most carefully sharpened tool? He, who could pull the trigger on any weapon capable of doing the job. Not the ordinary soldier who, for some reason, might miss the most carefully chosen, or precipitous opportunity to carry out a mission.
I'd hate to see this thread go away
You Sir, have hit the nail on the head, its not about the rifle at all, its about the shooter of that rifle, and it doesn't necessarily mean the shooter has to be a good shooter. Lee Harvy Oswald is a prefect example.
The rifle he use was junk, and he was not an exceptional shot, its the circumstances, putting him in a certain spot at the proper time with his target, well within range of the rifle and his abilities.
Too many people seem to equate snipers as only military/LE, leaving out the criminal sniper. Nor is long distance a requirement for sniping.
Down at the core of my shooting values is the idea that an accomplished marksman can wring out the full accuracy potential of one's firearm, primarily because they are experienced with that firearm in all likely conditions.
But we are talking about sniper weapons in this instance, and I firmly believe that requires the firearms to have enhanced capability over the more conventional service weapon.
For that reason, I consider something like the Carcano 'out', and something like the SVD 'in'.
A sniper weapon doesn't need BR-like accuracy, and a generous portion of the service weapon's 'hardness' will better suit the task. Where surgical accuracy is mandated, the sniper's innate judgment combines with the weapon's capability to compose the shot in a responsible manner. For judgment to provide valuable guidance, desirable options must be available.
But a reliable 2MOA or better minimum accuracy standard is a must. Where some small degree of inaccuracy in the basic service weapon may even be a mildly positive attribute, for massed fire and providing a base of fire for 'fire and maneuver' group infantry tactics; this native inaccuracy must be kept to a practical minimum where the sniper's enhanced cognitive capacity is to be employed.
Greg
But we are talking about sniper weapons in this instance, and I firmly believe that requires the firearms to have enhanced capability over the more conventional service weapon.
For that reason, I consider something like the Carcano 'out', and something like the SVD 'in'.
A sniper weapon doesn't need BR-like accuracy, and a generous portion of the service weapon's 'hardness' will better suit the task. Where surgical accuracy is mandated, the sniper's innate judgment combines with the weapon's capability to compose the shot in a responsible manner. For judgment to provide valuable guidance, desirable options must be available.
But a reliable 2MOA or better minimum accuracy standard is a must. Where some small degree of inaccuracy in the basic service weapon may even be a mildly positive attribute, for massed fire and providing a base of fire for 'fire and maneuver' group infantry tactics; this native inaccuracy must be kept to a practical minimum where the sniper's enhanced cognitive capacity is to be employed.
Greg
Last edited:
Good points Greg. I have shot about 50 WW2 snipers and the good ones are 1.5 MOAish with good ammo. That degree of accuracy came up very often in a rifle or two from practically every major power of WW2.
The point that the shooter, knowing his rifle, its capability and the rifles capability in all conditions with ammo available are very major elements in use of an effective sniper rifle. Simo of Finland proved that more than any single individual in sniper history IMO with over 500 confirmed kills in less than a year using an open sight Finn Mosin, probably an M28 or 28/30 or combo thereof. He was not called the white death without reason. He was also a stalker, human hunter, extreme marksman as was Carlos.
in my opinion, in the case of Mr. Haya, we need add another extremely important factor: he was deeply motivated, in a special fashion, different from all others "colleagues" of all the sides_ I say that without debating about the personal commitment/valor/sacrifices,etc. of anyone of them_
That is an excellent point. I'd nominate the Enfield Number 4 Mark 1"T". That rifle served the British forces for years, and did so quite well. Dave Fortier (from Soldier of Fortune) even did a little write-up on this rifle. It incorporated things like a free-floated barred (not found on other WWII era sniper rifles), an extremely robust, and capable scope, and was hand-tuned to be a step above the basic rifle issued at that time. Having owned and shot one, I can say it was a great rifle for what it was designed for: hunting men, not shooting a bulls-eye. The above references the training requirements of the men using this rifle, and British snipers were also highly trained, like their German and Russian counterparts during WWII. Did it kill as many Germans as the Russian PU rifles? Probably not, but then again, the British didn't field the VAST number of 'marksmen' the Russians did either. The #4, MK1T is one of only TWO rifles I've owned and regret, deeply, having sold. I could not even begin to afford one nowadays, sadly. I think it had a lot of things that were 'cutting edge' for its time, especially in comparison with other sniper rifles of the era.
Must be remembered that the British have the good sense to introduce the first military rifles with stocks of different lenghts, and that the Enfields were the best engineered,at their time, to allow to the shooter to fire in fast sequence without losing his eyesight and face-stock contact when activating the bolt, even shooting w.irons_
Add to that an impressive variety of .303 anti-personnel ammos, well tested in their colonial experiences_
(maybe I'm wrong, but I think the Schmidt-Rubins of the same era have free-floated barrels,too)_
Add to that an impressive variety of .303 anti-personnel ammos, well tested in their colonial experiences_
(maybe I'm wrong, but I think the Schmidt-Rubins of the same era have free-floated barrels,too)_
I have fired them both at least 50-150 times each. Only once did I get a sub-MOA group and that was with Federal Gold Metal Match. US Match of many different lots and dates has yet to give a sub-MOA group. Bores are excellent and are original Star Guaged 1938 barrels. Most groups are in the 1.5 MOA-2 range. 300 yd results were very disappointing said:
German Mauser 98. It may not have been the best but it is what all bolt action sniper rifles are based off of.
No,perhaps it wasn't "the best", but for me it was "the best compromise" between overall dimensions,issued optics,ammo,weight & reliability, being that it wasn't born from his beginnin'as sniper rifle_
I consider really fascinating the Ajack scoped M39, but I'm prone to think about it more as a custom-builded rifle, thinkin'about all the modifications needed on the donor rifles, and the limited number of scoped M39 really issued, and no, I plainly don't like rimmed or belted rifle brass ...
as ever,that's only my happily near-sighted opinion_
The Finn M39 was free floated. The sniper version was made in 43 and used a Soviet type top mount(VKT made what was a close copy of the mount) and a PE or PEM Soviet scope. It is amazing that replicas of these have not been used more in CMP matches.
On the PUs going up against the 03A1s with Unertls, a board member here, and his partner won their CMP vintage sniper match with PUs and there was at least one Unertl rifle in the shoot. Many of us are getting sub-MOA groups pretty often with match ammo and handloads. As with most good WW2 snipers it is more reasonable to expect 1.5 MOA and be happy if you get better and work on it if you get worse.
A big debate on "what is the best sniper rifle of WW2" on another forum, there were some strong arguments for the Enfields. The scopes had clicks, windage adjustment and were good return to zero when adjusted. The rifles were built with care by H&H. I need a better example myself. This is another rifle that should be seen more at CMP VSMs.
On the PUs going up against the 03A1s with Unertls, a board member here, and his partner won their CMP vintage sniper match with PUs and there was at least one Unertl rifle in the shoot. Many of us are getting sub-MOA groups pretty often with match ammo and handloads. As with most good WW2 snipers it is more reasonable to expect 1.5 MOA and be happy if you get better and work on it if you get worse.
A big debate on "what is the best sniper rifle of WW2" on another forum, there were some strong arguments for the Enfields. The scopes had clicks, windage adjustment and were good return to zero when adjusted. The rifles were built with care by H&H. I need a better example myself. This is another rifle that should be seen more at CMP VSMs.
following an article of Vic Thomas,the first M39 were scoped w.a finnish Phisica scope:M39PH (less than 150)_
the SOV models were less than 200 (PE and PEM), with around 150 VKT marked mounts (1942-'44)
500 german scopes were obtained/mounted mod.39/43(1944)
50 m39 w.a finnish copy of the Ajack were ready before the end of their war (1944)(ohttp://www.mosinnagant.net/finland/finnish_mosin_nagantm39.aspnly)
hope can be of some interest
the SOV models were less than 200 (PE and PEM), with around 150 VKT marked mounts (1942-'44)
500 german scopes were obtained/mounted mod.39/43(1944)
50 m39 w.a finnish copy of the Ajack were ready before the end of their war (1944)(ohttp://www.mosinnagant.net/finland/finnish_mosin_nagantm39.aspnly)
hope can be of some interest
He was shot in the dark by a Confederate sentry, probably by a 58 caliber Springfield. Dumb mistake.
Good info Wile. I do not have that article by Vic. I have seen pictures of his SOV with VKT mount and PEM scope. I bought one of Vic's a Finn PEMs and he is a friend.
Last edited:
Similar threads
