Army approves full fielding of M-107 sniper rifle - Page 2

Gene Econ · 07-31-2005, 08:13

[QUOTE=longrange1947] As far as the Chey Tec, the demo for us and some of the other demos I have heard of, give it about the same planning groups, 4 moa. --- The ammo is also dangerously over pressured and I would be hesitant in shooting it under hot desert conditions. It may be fine at first but he pressures are going to climb.

Rick:

My, there is something strangely familiar about this story.

I am sure the fellow presenting this rifle and ammo made detailed technical claims concerning the design of the rifle and the ammo. Do you recall any of the technical features that were used as selling points for this particular rifle and ammo?

Gene

HOLLiS · 07-31-2005, 09:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by Footmobile

Longrange, nice new avatar. Rocket Mountain has a spectacular view no?

A friend of mine who was in the only sniper platoon in the Corps to test run the Chey-Tac said the samething about the ammo. Shot great in the cold in Utah on Chey-Tac's range, shot terrible in the heat at 29 Plams before deployment. Said about 1 in 5 primer blow outs when the temps went above 100.

There is a old trick, though NOT very practical for a combat situation. That is to keep your ammo in a cooler. I saw a chart that shows the increase of chamber pressure in relation to temperature. A number of SASS shooter will place their ammo in a "cool" compartment on their carts after that article came out.

I think, the military should, if it doesn't, teach and allow their sniper teams to reload for their specific rifles. Down side would be acquiring ammo in the field from another sniper team. Generally a reload for a specific rifle is only neck sized for greater accuracy. The case may or may not "chamber" in another rifle. I think they could probably they could work around that problem. Factory loads are sized for minimum chamber size, so that it chambers in all rifles but accuracy is not as good.

Longrange1947, thanks for the info on the barret. Seesh, sounds like the Army ordinance is still run by General Ripley (Civil War), He was a strong supported for smooth bores with buck and ball and would delay the development of any of the "newer Rifled muskets".

**Bill Harsey** · 07-31-2005, 10:09

The word "cryogenic" was used here earlier in relation to possible improvement in a rifle barrel.

I've had some serious discussion about this exact thing with the top metallurgists at Crucible Specialty Tool Steels.

Does cryogenic treatment of rifle barrels do what is claimed?

**The Reaper** · 07-31-2005, 10:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by HOLLiS

Seesh, sounds like the Army ordinance is still run by General Ripley (Civil War), He was a strong supported for smooth bores with buck and ball and would delay the development of any of the "newer Rifled muskets".

And repeaters. He said that if the troops could fire more rounds per minute, they would just waste them.

TR

longrange1947 · 07-31-2005, 16:30

Footmobile - Thanks and yes it is Rocket, was shooting at the destroyer turret at the 1200 meter mark on the right limit of the range. Hit it three of five times.

Of course that sucker is what, 12 feet by 15 feet in size, kinda hard to miss.

Had a 'group' try downloading the Chey Tec ammo to make it safer and it shot like crap.

Gene, you know the dude. I refused to be there becasue I knew there would be an arguement. Of course there was one anyway, but when I get "It would have been a .5 moa group if it had hit" then it is time to hang it up. When I get six shots with only two within measureing distance and they want to measure the group off of those two shots, I call BS. This too has happened at other shots. Of course the guys came back and originally said it had done great trying to get to me, but all I care about is getting a good piece of equipment in the hands of the shooter, I don't care who lmakes it. My problem is when junk is bought because someone has an unholy relationship with the manufacturer or it "appears to be" that way.

Hollis - We teach reloading at SOTIC. It was done originally because when we started the Air Land Battle 2000 doctrine stated that we would be behind the lines, read Soviet, for however long without resupply. We worked up loads so that the shooter could take in only primers, Lee hand press, and bullets. Then using powder from the 7.62x 54R ammo load up to continue the mission. The problem is the legality of shooting hand loads. The XM118LR says not for combat as it had not been cleared to use in combat when it was first manufactured, the same is the reason why M852 ammo states the same thing.. You can run into a problem by handloading bullets not approved by JAG as a combat round. ie, the plastic ballistic tip rounds guys love is a no no as the plastic tip does not show up in xrays. Could be a problem. Reaper could probably talk much more intelligently about this then I can.

Bill - I have heard good and bad things about cryoing a barrel. I don't see how it would hurt and if it stress relieves it the way it claims it should stop some of the POI shift caused by hot barrels. The Chey Tec, I don't think that is the problem. They test their ammo in the north moutain region and it is cold. They can get away with the hot loads. but the military can't take that chance.

Hollis - As far as cooling, you would have to have a set of charts for your ammo and keep a thermometer on the ammo all the time to monitor the temp as it woudl shift during the day as the ice melted an the inside of the container increased in temp. At those temps, the POI shift would be dramatic if not monitered and could be detrimental to the overall mission.

The problem really isn't that the Ord people do not want change, they change on the wrong whim. For an Ord officer to decide to buy a shit load of Barretts based on "hey that one is neat" is rather stupid. They also listen to only one side and if he talks loud enough then he is heard. Could be loud bad advice, and many times it is.

Reaper, the repeater on is the best and was the augrement against the M1 as well, waste of ammo. The soldiers will just shoot it up. Well, unfortunately that one has proven almost prophetic for full auto when you see the full auto spray and pray shooting done at times.

Well time to run off and hide.

Rick

**The Reaper** · 07-31-2005, 16:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by longrange1947

Gene, you know the dude. I refused to be there becasue I knew there would be an arguement. Of course there was one anyway, but when I get "It would have been a .5 moa group if it had hit" then it is time to hang it up. When I get six shots with only two within measureing distance and they want to measure the group off of those two shots, I call BS. This too has happened at other shots. Of course the guys came back and originally said it had done great trying to get to me, but all I care about is getting a good piece of equipment in the hands of the shooter, I don't care who lmakes it. My problem is when junk is bought because someone has an unholy relationship with the manufacturer or it "appears to be" that way.
Rick

I was there for that demo, as was Peregrino.

I told the shooter (let's call him DM for short) that he should call it a day after he couldn't get it to hold 6" at the 200 yard line.

He refused, and Ed rode him like a borrowed pony. I do not believe that DM is with them any more.

TR

Smokin Joe · 07-31-2005, 17:36

I'm not trying to hijack this...while attempting to stay with the theme of this thread

The Candian the broke Hathcock's record...what did he use? I have heard a McMillian TAC-50 rifle. Google seems to confirm this.

But,

Was this a lucky shot?
Is the McMillian (that was used) the superior rifle?
Also at that range (I understand it to be 2,430 meters) who is actually making the shot the shooter or the spotter?

Technically I know the shooter is...however if LR1947 is saying its difficult to ID targets past 1200 meters (and I have no reason to doubt that) isn't the spotter really doing the IDing and shot calling at 2,400 meters not the shooter?

**The Reaper** · 07-31-2005, 17:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smokin Joe

I'm not trying to hijack this...while attempting to stay with the theme of this thread

The Candian the broke Hathcock's record...what did he use? I have heard a McMillian TAC-50 rifle. Google seems to confirm this.

But,

Was this a lucky shot?
Is the McMillian (that was used) the superior rifle?

That is what I heard.

Yes, that was, IMHO, a lucky shot.

The Mac is one of the best.

I'll let LR1947 respond to the tough questions.

TR

**Bill Harsey** · 07-31-2005, 18:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smokin Joe

I'm not trying to hijack this...while attempting to stay with the theme of this thread

The Candian the broke Hathcock's record...what did he use? I have heard a McMillian TAC-50 rifle. Google seems to confirm this.

But,

Was this a lucky shot?
Is the McMillian (that was used) the superior rifle?
Also at that range (I understand it to be 2,430 meters) who is actually making the shot the shooter or the spotter?

Technically I know the shooter is...however if LR1947 is saying its difficult to ID targets past 1200 meters (and I have no reason to doubt that) isn't the spotter really doing the IDing and shot calling at 2,400 meters not the shooter?

Small point here, Hathcock, with all possible (AND I MEAN IT!) respect doesn't hold the record for USMC confirmed kills. An Oregon boy named Chuck Mawhinney does.

Footmobile · 07-31-2005, 18:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill Harsey

Small point here, Hathcock, with all possible (AND I MEAN IT!) respect doesn't hold the record for USMC confirmed kills. An Oregon boy named Chuck Mawhinney does.

Bill, I think he's refering to Hathcocks long distance shots in Vietnam with a Ma Deuce. I can't remember the distance of that one, but I do know the canucks had him beat by quite a few hundred yards, and it was a true sniper team kill, not luck, as would have had to have been a great deal of what Hathcock did with that Ma Deuce and a jury rigged scope.

Not taking anything away from him at all either.

longrange1947 · 07-31-2005, 20:50

OK, will try this again, my computer froze like a tastee freeze last time. Had a long explanation post but screwed it up.

Sorry Footmobile, it was pure luck. At that range a one mph wind shift moves the bullet over 25 inches. A one moa bullet and one moa gun still shoots a group over 27 inches, which is bigger than the human body. What this means is that even if he did everything right he would still miss some of the shots. The angle of fall on the bullet is great enough that he must estimate the range to within 20 meters or the bullet will pass over head or fall in front of the target. Now add in the human factor of the shooter having to do everything right. He can not nudge the weapon at all to settle it in his shoulder while firing, a very common shooters error that is not a problem until you get to the 900 to 1000 meter mark. He can not get a muscle twitch, adrenalin cannot be racing the heart or the pulse will take the sights from below the target to over the top of the target. The shooter must fire exactly right. A very hard thing to do, even top shooters throws shots at 1000 yards, or 914 meters. With that and multiple wind shears, mirage dancing, and other environmental conditions, well, lady luck was smiling that day. Now if the target is alive and standing then he is in constant motion and that is erratic motion at best. Time of flight would have been about 3 seconds; a lot can happen in that time. Saying that shots like that are the norm for anyone is not realistic and for those that make those claims, such as regular head shots at 1000 meters I give them a bullet and say show me. No one has yet been able to do that.

The 82d guy that fired a Barrett shot at almost 2000 meters admits that it was luck. He stated that he observed a group of Iraqis and held Kentucky holds, both elevation and wind, and fired. He hit one and now that seems to be the expected norm with the Barrett, not happening. Yes the McMillan is a far superior weapon to the Barrett, but nothing can change physics.

Now then, as to the question of, “who makes the shoot”. The shooter is the monkey on the trigger and the observer is the more experienced sniper. He is the one that is indexing the target, doing final range computation and then figuring the rest of the environmental effects on the shooter’s zero. Once that is accomplished, he will watch the wind and compute winds for the range computed and watch for wind shears, he computes dominate wind then computes winds changes for other wind shears that modify the dominate wind. If the target is a mover he then computes the wind effect on the shooter’s normal lead and gives the shooter his final hold. If you want to see what I mean come to our range and what the interaction of the shooter observer when we are running a course. The observer can make the shooter miss the target.

On Hathcocks shot with the Ma Deuce, even he admits, in his book, that it was luck and that the one always quoted was fired on a VC kneeling in the same mud spot that he had just zeroed the weapon.

OK, settling down and waiting for incoming.

Smokin Joe · 07-31-2005, 21:20

Thanks LR1947,

That is kind of what I thought.

So why not go with the MacMillian over the Barrett (besides politics)?

longrange1947 · 07-31-2005, 21:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smokin Joe

Thanks LR1947,

That is kind of what I thought.

So why not go with the MacMillian over the Barrett (besides politics)?

Your last two words (besides politics) say alot. One of the problems right now is the desire to go semi for rapid shot follow up. Problem with that is that the weapon bounces enough that you must get the weapon back on target and then wait for the correction. Heck by then you have racked the bolt and have one chambered in a bolt gun. Oh well.

Another problem is that there are those that just feel that the Barrett is the best way to go and they fight tooth and nail to keep it. Again, Oh Well.

The McMillan is not the only good shootng bolt gun, there are a goodly number out there and I would like to see a good shoot off. I would like to see a realistic doc of needs set up that has realistic requirements and that can be met by weapons and also a test program that properly identifies the best weapon. Still waiting on that one.

**The Reaper** · 07-31-2005, 21:52

LR:

None of that matters without the right ammo.

1 MOA gun with 4 MOA ammo is not going to get the job done any better.

Would love to see us try the AMAX rounds or one of the Bore Riders.

TR

longrange1947 · 07-31-2005, 22:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Reaper

LR:

None of that matters without the right ammo.

1 MOA gun with 4 Moa ammo is not going to get the job done any better.

Would love to see us try the AMAX rounds or one of the Bore Riders.

TR

Fully agreed and they are working on that problem as well. So the last thing we need is a 1 moa bullet in a 4 moa gun.