**
"So assuming that the distance between the top of the avg. Blackbuck antelope's back and the very underside of it's chest measures 16" (0.45 yards) and this part of his torso fills in 1/2 the distance between two dots in my reticle, then the animal is 900 yards out. Right? I calculated this by the simple equation of multiplying the height of the target in yards (16" = 0.45 yds) by 1000, and then dividing by the target's height in milliradians (0.5).
Also, what it the margin of error in this ranging method, especially given that the scope is only 16X and the target is pretty **** small. In other words, what's to prevent a 16" target that is ostensibly around 900 yards out, appearing to one man (through a 16X scope) as spaning 1/2 the distance between two mil-dots, while appearing to another man, as spanning 1/3 or perhaps 2/3 of the distance between two mil-dots?"
Dave,
I am not an expert on mildots but I was trained on them by a couple of guys who are experts. I am fortunate that they did a very thorough and excellent job of explaining dots, good enough that I use them a lot in hunting and just for the hell of it. I can give you my take on your questions.
First, the distance.
The mildot formula that we use is :
Size of object in inches times 27.77 divided by the mil reading.
That would be 16 times 27.77 divided by 0.5 or 888 yards, pretty close to your 900 yard reading.
In answer to your question about margin of error, I guess you could call that degree of accuracy - here goes.
First, I think that the mildot system is not user-friendly. It takes detailed instruction and a lot of repetitious training to develope the ability to be accurate. We think in inches and maybe MOA, but not in frigging mils. **** near as bad as metric.
In a perfect world, the mildot reticle would have little hash marks between each dot indicating 1/10 mil readings. No such thing,,. you have to put them there mentally. I understand that really proficient guys can even cut those imaginery lines in half, therefore reading to half of one tenths, as in 1.25 mils. That is a skill acquired through a lot ot practice, I doubt if many hunters could do that.
Biggest concerns are is that buck 16 inches or is he 17 inches thick, and is Joe's interpretation of a reading of 0.5mil right or is Pete's interpretation of 0.6 mil?
Again, only experience will tell you. I felt that dots are very good out to 600 yards until we started practicing out to 850 and got nice consistent readings. Comes down to practice and experience. You can easily do the above math and switch some numbers to see the variations that occur.
One great way to learn accurate use of the dots is to get a Mildot Master, and to use it for indicating exact mildot readings. Just look at the mildot reading rather than the distance reading. Laser a known size object so you know a distance, then the mildot master will instantly tell you what the correct mil reading is, then look through your scope to set that in your mind.
Degree of accuracy? Not sure I can state what it is because it varies with the operator. I don't worry about it much anymore, I trust that my mil reading will be much better than my questimate - but not as accurate as my laser when it is working. Try to get comfortable with the process, get a mildot master and use it when your laser craps out. Only way to make the dots work for you is to spend literally days out practicing. We use both steel plates of varying dimensions and critter decoys that I have made charts of for basic dimensions. Takes a lot of practice but good to have in your back pocket. Plus it is a fun challenge.
I believe that your MK4 16x is one of the finest long range scopes available, it will work perfectly for mil-ranging and long shooting. Long range blackbuck sounds like a great challenge, personally I would say that a 5-600 yard shot would be a dandy as they are such small critters.
Wish you good luck on that hunt.
