History's Sniper show

[bwaites]

I was lucky and caught the show, and I read this thread when it was first posted, and I held my hand from writing then.

I had heard the background on almost every one of the shots but the Canadian Sniper shot.

I respect each and every one of the shots made, regardless of whether more than one shot had to be made at the target.

I am proud of the Canadians who stood shoulder to shoulder with our guys, while their politicians at home bad mouthed our country and our president, and often continue to do so. I have never heard one of our guys who was on the ground with the Canadians speak of them in any way but with respect, and I respect the way our guys feel!

There is no luck involved in any of these shots. There are only the known conditions and the response to them.

Luck is what happens when you flip a coin, or roll a pair of dice, or close your eyes and bet on the spin of the roulette wheel. It is completely beyond your control, and nothing you do can influence it.

There was no "luck" involved in any of these shots. The sniper took what he had been taught, he judged the conditions, he adjusted his aim, and he shot. If the conditions were such that the bullet did not arrive where he intended, he reassessed and adjusted his aim, and shot again. He had control of his actions and his adjustments. That is NOT LUCK!

Or as one of my instructors taught me, "Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity!"

I salute our soldiers, I salute those who stand with our soldiers, and I wish all of them a safe tour and rapid return to their loved ones!

Merry Christmas to all!

Bill

 

[goodgrouper]

I was lucky and caught the show, and I read this thread when it was first posted, and I held my hand from writing then.

I had heard the background on almost every one of the shots but the Canadian Sniper shot.

I respect each and every one of the shots made, regardless of whether more than one shot had to be made at the target.

I am proud of the Canadians who stood shoulder to shoulder with our guys, while their politicians at home bad mouthed our country and our president, and often continue to do so. I have never heard one of our guys who was on the ground with the Canadians speak of them in any way but with respect, and I respect the way our guys feel!

There is no luck involved in any of these shots. There are only the known conditions and the response to them.

Luck is what happens when you flip a coin, or roll a pair of dice, or close your eyes and bet on the spin of the roulette wheel. It is completely beyond your control, and nothing you do can influence it.

There was no "luck" involved in any of these shots. The sniper took what he had been taught, he judged the conditions, he adjusted his aim, and he shot. If the conditions were such that the bullet did not arrive where he intended, he reassessed and adjusted his aim, and shot again. He had control of his actions and his adjustments. That is NOT LUCK!

Or as one of my instructors taught me, "Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity!"

I salute our soldiers, I salute those who stand with our soldiers, and I wish all of them a safe tour and rapid return to their loved ones!

Merry Christmas to all!

Bill

Wow Bill. I just can't understand how you can't see the luck involved in these shots! I mean a guy literally admitted that he simply aimed a shot in the general direction of a bay window to scare a guy back into the building and ended up hitting the guy center mass way beyond the intended range of the round he was firing! That would be like me saying, "oh I just aimed my 30-30 rifle at a clearing the elk was standing in 1000 yards away to see if I could scare it back into the forest and I ended up drilling the animal right in the heart dropping it dead in it's tracks". Do you know how FLAMED I would get for saying something like that on a hunting forum!!!! So why is it "skill" if it is done to a human being by someone who admits he probably couldn't repeat that shot if he tried! That is luck with a capital "L"!

 

[bwaites]

Wow Bill. I just can't understand how you can't see the luck involved in these shots! I mean a guy literally admitted that he simply aimed a shot in the general direction of a bay window to scare a guy back into the building and ended up hitting the guy center mass way beyond the intended range of the round he was firing! That would be like me saying, "oh I just aimed my 30-30 rifle at a clearing the elk was standing in 1000 yards away to see if I could scare it back into the forest and I ended up drilling the animal right in the heart dropping it dead in it's tracks". Do you know how FLAMED I would get for saying something like that on a hunting forum!!!! So why is it "skill" if it is done to a human being by someone who admits he probably couldn't repeat that shot if he tried! That is luck with a capital "L"!

The definition of "luck" does not fit ANY of these shots, lets look at a few of those definitions and see if they apply, however, Ie.:

1 ) Events that are beyond control and seem subject to chance.

Were any of these incidents beyond control? NO. The sniper had control over at least 4 things involved; his calculations, his rifle, his ammunition, and his decision to make the shot.

2) The seemingly chance happening of events that affect someone; fortune; fate.

Once again, the only way the sniper was "lucky" was that a target appeared while he was there. (A chance happening of events.) Fortune and Fate, by their definitions, are unaffected by the decisions or actions the individual takes, that is why it is called "Fate".

3) Success that you have by chance, and not caused by anything you do.

Once again, the sniper caused something to happen, and had control of multiple factors involved.

And finally, my favorite:

4) An unknown and unpredictable phenomenon that causes an event to result one way rather than another.

But even that doesn't fit any of the stories, because in each case, the results were predictable, given that the sniper had control over at least 4 of the variables involved.

As for the snipers being quoted as saying they were lucky. Well, of all the snipers or long range shooters I have met, they all ascribe a certain amount of "luck" to their shots.

They'll say the wind died at the right time, or the clouds came out at the right time or they got lucky and the rain stopped at the right time. Any one of those things is "lucky" because it is beyond the snipers control. But the fact that he used his skill, his knowledge, and his weapon to accomplish a task, well, that isn't lucky.

Goodgrouper, the situation you describe is "lucky", because under those circumstances no input on your part, other than pulling the trigger, is involved. Under those circumstances, pulling the trigger is akin to simply rolling the dice, or spinning the roulette wheel.

That was not the case with these shots, with the exception of the circumstances you mention regarding the bay window. I evidently missed a portion of the show, because I didn't see that scenario.

Bill

 

[MSU Marksman]

The definition of "luck" does not fit ANY of these shots, lets look at a few of those definitions and see if they apply, however, Ie.:

1 ) Events that are beyond control and seem subject to chance.

Were any of these incidents beyond control? NO. The sniper had control over at least 4 things involved; his calculations, his rifle, his ammunition, and his decision to make the shot.

2) The seemingly chance happening of events that affect someone; fortune; fate.

Once again, the only way the sniper was "lucky" was that a target appeared while he was there. (A chance happening of events.) Fortune and Fate, by their definitions, are unaffected by the decisions or actions the individual takes, that is why it is called "Fate".

3) Success that you have by chance, and not caused by anything you do.

Once again, the sniper caused something to happen, and had control of multiple factors involved.

And finally, my favorite:

4) An unknown and unpredictable phenomenon that causes an event to result one way rather than another.

But even that doesn't fit any of the stories, because in each case, the results were predictable, given that the sniper had control over at least 4 of the variables involved.

As for the snipers being quoted as saying they were lucky. Well, of all the snipers or long range shooters I have met, they all ascribe a certain amount of "luck" to their shots.

They'll say the wind died at the right time, or the clouds came out at the right time or they got lucky and the rain stopped at the right time. Any one of those things is "lucky" because it is beyond the snipers control. But the fact that he used his skill, his knowledge, and his weapon to accomplish a task, well, that isn't lucky.

Goodgrouper, the situation you describe is "lucky", because under those circumstances no input on your part, other than pulling the trigger, is involved. Under those circumstances, pulling the trigger is akin to simply rolling the dice, or spinning the roulette wheel.

That was not the case with these shots, with the exception of the circumstances you mention regarding the bay window. I evidently missed a portion of the show, because I didn't see that scenario.

Bill

Bill-

If that were the case, then they would all be kills on the first shot. In the case of the Canadian sniper, he did NOT have control over the movements of his targets, the winds, the burn rates of powder, the manufacturing tolerances of any of the components involved, etc.. etc ..

The one thing he had was the training to put himself in the position of pulling the trigger. Everything else was well outside his control, therefore making the shot luck. Heck, he was using the mildots at a 4 over and 4 right hold at 2640 yards. There's no sort of practice that could produce consistent minute of taliban shooting that would make that shot anything better than luck.

Granted he improved his probability by firing more than one shot.

 

[bwaites]

I guess the biggest problem I have with calling any of these shots "lucky" is the preparation and skill involved.

Was it luck when Shawn Carlock dumped his deer at 1166 yards on the second shot?

Was it luck when Travis Reggear dropped his at 1931 yards?

Both of those were done with rifles with considerably less downrange power than the .50 used by the Canadians.

Please show me how to tell the difference between "luck" and the intersection of opportunity and preparation.

Bill

 

[bwaites]

Bill-

If that were the case, then they would all be kills on the first shot. In the case of the Canadian sniper, he did NOT have control over the movements of his targets, the winds, the burn rates of powder, the manufacturing tolerances of any of the components involved, etc.. etc ..

The one thing he had was the training to put himself in the position of pulling the trigger. Everything else was well outside his control, therefore making the shot luck. Heck, he was using the mildots at a 4 over and 4 right hold at 2640 yards. There's no sort of practice that could produce consistent minute of taliban shooting that would make that shot anything better than luck.

Granted he improved his probability by firing more than one shot.

Using that definition of "luck" then every F class shooter is lucky if he hits an X on anything but the first shot, and every shot.

The fact that he could adjust for all those variables AND make the shot takes it out of the realm of "luck", because by definition, luck happens when there is no control of ANY of the variables!

It's the skill, knowledge, and training to adjust to those sometimes unknown variables and STILL MAKE THE SHOT, that takes it out of the realm of "luck".

Bill

 

[mikebob]

I watched the show and thought it was interesting.

The sniper covering the alley made the show for me. Those shots had to be tough compensating that fast.

 

[Buffalobob]

Here is a link to an article written by a man who served under me in RVN. It gives a description of the skill sets a Special Forces sniper is expected to have. This is a lot different skill set than bench rest shooting or elk hunting.

The article is on page 30.

http://www.soc.mil/swcs/swmag/08May.pdf


This is why I always make fun of the "fair chase" animal hunters. If you want fair chase then hunt people who have guns.

 

[edge]

There was a story on this website within the last year of a hunter shooting an Elk at long range. If I recall it took 3 shots to bring it down.

I never heard the word LUCK used, and there certainly was very little likelihood of any Elk shooting back!

edge.

 

[RockyMtnMT]

I have to say the shots that the Canadians made, were nothing less than amazing.

Anyone that is in the camp that these shots were luck, take the same circumstances and try to make the shot. I could be very wrong but, I'm not sure that any of the peanut gallery here could carry enough ammo to duplicate the shot. Let it be known that I consider myself as one that could not make the shot.

My hat is off to those men, they deserve the acclaim that they get.

Steve

 

[RockyMtnMT]

Hind sight says that I should have kept my mouth shut. Although I will let my statement stand.

Steve

 

[RBetts]

The Canadian shot sequence is not nearly as impressive as Hathcocks shot at 2500yds. He called the first shot and dumped the bicycle. When the person got up to fight it made his answer justified and he dumped him with the second shot. That was with a ma duece and a butterfly trigger. The Canadien had a benchrest quality barrel (Lija) trued action of inherent accuracy and some really dumb targets.
The rest of the show was what has been stated by the guys that have been there done that. They used their training and the equipment to adjust to parameters that were beyond realm of training or equipments capability and met the challenges they faced. 1600 meters with a 308 is through the window. Meaning that the bullet went through the sound barrier and stayed on target. The only luck involved was that the bullet was a good one and did not destabilize and come off course. Regardless that rifle was at that time most likely a MOA rifle. Not some .1 smoke stick you see on a bench.

 

[bwaites]

The Canadian shot sequence is not nearly as impressive as Hathcocks shot at 2500yds. He called the first shot and dumped the bicycle. When the person got up to fight it made his answer justified and he dumped him with the second shot. That was with a ma duece and a butterfly trigger. The Canadien had a benchrest quality barrel (Lija) trued action of inherent accuracy and some really dumb targets.
The rest of the show was what has been stated by the guys that have been there done that. They used their training and the equipment to adjust to parameters that were beyond realm of training or equipments capability and met the challenges they faced. 1600 meters with a 308 is through the window. Meaning that the bullet went through the sound barrier and stayed on target. The only luck involved was that the bullet was a good one and did not destabilize and come off course. Regardless that rifle was at that time most likely a MOA rifle. Not some .1 smoke stick you see on a bench.

I'll certainly agree about Hatchcocks shot, although he did have experience on that particular MaDeuce and at that particular distance. They had worked out the ranges from the gun to the various spots where they might make shots.

The fact he did it with a "weapon totally unsuited to the task" to paraphrase Mark Twain, makes it all the more impressive.

Bill

 

[7mmSendaro]

I have the show taped on DVR, can't wait to watch now!