That's not the effective range of the rifle, that's the effective range of the shooter. It's related, but not the same.
The purpose of training, whether casual target shooting like I was doing Saturday, or military Scout Sniper training, is to increase the range at which you can effectively hit with the rifle.
Effective range of the rifle is also related to the shooter.
The US army defines "effective range" as the range at which 50% of shots will result in a hit. This is very dependent on shooters.
The largest modifyer in reducing that is supported positions. The 460-500 Meter modern assault rifle effective range is only achievable from a supported position (foxhole or bench). The hundred meter distance sounds about right for off hand, shooting without support.
As a matter of policy, when you know with certainty that your rifle is good out to 600 (based on testing), but your troops are only good out to 50. How much money are you willing to spend on a rifle that goes to 1000?
Honestly, the reason why I like the AK over the AR is due to this. My eyes simply aren't capable of hitting a target over 200 yards away reliably without decent optics.
I have a remarkably accurate DPMS LR-308 that I can make good hits with at 500 yards, but that's with a good 12x+ scope.
If I ever lost my glasses, I'd be lucky to see the rear sight on a pair of irons.
For way too long my club held the rifle stages of 3-Gun matches on the 45-yard deep action range bays, so it was all "high speed CQB" with no shot longer than 30-35 yards. When the rifle stages were moved to the 300 meter range (where they had been 8 years ago) the game changed. By range rule, no targets were closer than 100 yards and 7.62 caliber rifles ceased to suffer the abuse of "fast, faster, fastest". A series of single 168 grain A/B-area headshots or upper A-ring hits - still against the clock, to be sure - could carry the day against rapid fire 40-55 grain pellets.
As a certain person instructed me decades ago, it ain't how many rounds you fire, it's how many rounds you hit with, however far out the target is. And, the bigger the round, the fewer you have to use. I was taught "see it, learn to hit it." I still think that's an effective philosophy.
4 comments:
That's not the effective range of the rifle, that's the effective range of the shooter. It's related, but not the same.
The purpose of training, whether casual target shooting like I was doing Saturday, or military Scout Sniper training, is to increase the range at which you can effectively hit with the rifle.
Effective range of the rifle is also related to the shooter.
The US army defines "effective range" as the range at which 50% of shots will result in a hit. This is very dependent on shooters.
The largest modifyer in reducing that is supported positions. The 460-500 Meter modern assault rifle effective range is only achievable from a supported position (foxhole or bench). The hundred meter distance sounds about right for off hand, shooting without support.
As a matter of policy, when you know with certainty that your rifle is good out to 600 (based on testing), but your troops are only good out to 50. How much money are you willing to spend on a rifle that goes to 1000?
Honestly, the reason why I like the AK over the AR is due to this. My eyes simply aren't capable of hitting a target over 200 yards away reliably without decent optics.
I have a remarkably accurate DPMS LR-308 that I can make good hits with at 500 yards, but that's with a good 12x+ scope.
If I ever lost my glasses, I'd be lucky to see the rear sight on a pair of irons.
For way too long my club held the rifle stages of 3-Gun matches on the 45-yard deep action range bays, so it was all "high speed CQB" with no shot longer than 30-35 yards. When the rifle stages were moved to the 300 meter range (where they had been 8 years ago) the game changed. By range rule, no targets were closer than 100 yards and 7.62 caliber rifles ceased to suffer the abuse of "fast, faster, fastest". A series of single 168 grain A/B-area headshots or upper A-ring hits - still against the clock, to be sure - could carry the day against rapid fire 40-55 grain pellets.
As a certain person instructed me decades ago, it ain't how many rounds you fire, it's how many rounds you hit with, however far out the target is. And, the bigger the round, the fewer you have to use. I was taught "see it, learn to hit it." I still think that's an effective philosophy.
Post a Comment