Stolen Valor: The Truth Behind False Military Claims

[zoobyshoe]

Are you forgetting the Draft? First thing I thought of and a good reason why soldiers from that era may not be very knowledgeable of things they ought to have been. I do not believe many of the soldiers in the Vietnam War received proper training. And if not drafted they may have simply enlisted believing that they would have been drafted eventually anyway.

I still would find it a bit hard to believe though and I have met several persons at coffee houses that lied to make themselves sound more interesting. You would not believe the number of "hitmen" I have met. ;-)

Yeah, that's the thing. You may recall the thread where I recounted meeting a guy who claimed to have invented parallel processing and who knew Feynman via a position at the Atomic Energy Commission.

Regardless, both these snipers said they volunteered. They weren't drafted.

 

[ideasrule]

To test their basic sniper knowledge you should ask them if you were to drop a bullet at the same time they shot it from a rifle - which bullet would hit the ground first

So what's the answer? If they said that the dropped bullet hits the ground first, would that be 1) wrong, 2) correct for all practical purposes, or 3) correct in theory?

 

[Sorry!]

Regardless, both these snipers said they volunteered. They weren't drafted.

That doesn't mean they were previously trained snipers or marksmen in anyway.

 

[MotoH]

You know, the war was 40 years ago, Age and memory loss is probably playing a role here. Getting a name of a rifle or the definition of a calibre wrong really isn't anything out of the ordinary.

 

[DaveC426913]

So what's the answer? If they said that the dropped bullet hits the ground first, would that be 1) wrong, 2) correct for all practical purposes, or 3) correct in theory?

Wrong in theory.

In theory they should both hit the ground at the same time.

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

So what's the answer? If they said that the dropped bullet hits the ground first, would that be 1) wrong, 2) correct for all practical purposes, or 3) correct in theory?

I believe that they are supposed to both hit the ground at approximately the same time, all things being equal. Of course there is no reason that they would have been taught that.

Funny enough I have recently been speaking with a friend about similar topics.

 

[ideasrule]

Wrong in theory.

In theory they should both hit the ground at the same time.

I think you're forgetting the enormous air resistance that a bullet encounters, and the fact that a kv^2 force cannot be broken down into kV_y^2 and kV_x^2. A bullet moving horizontally always experiences a greater upwards force from air resistance than a dropped bullet for any given downward velocity.

I have to go to bed now, but tomorrow I'll see if this makes any appreciable difference to the fall time of the bullet.

 

[cronxeh]

So what's the answer? If they said that the dropped bullet hits the ground first, would that be 1) wrong, 2) correct for all practical purposes, or 3) correct in theory?

Every sniper is taught about the bullet drop. Not only the gravity is a factor, but also distance to visible horizon is only about 3 miles from standing height. The longest distance shot therefore was made from a considerable height of 9000 feet, where the bullet dropped down to ground over a 150 feet.

 

[DaveC426913]

where the bullet dropped down to ground over a 150 feet.

What does this mean?

 

[cronxeh]

What does this mean?

They had to shoot 150 feet above the head of a person to shoot it?

Let me rephrase: they had to aim 150 feet above the head of a target in order to hit it..

or let me try this one: the bullet would get 150 feet closer to the ground if it was shot tangent to the location of a shooter

 

[DaveC426913]

They had to shoot 150 feet above the head of a person to shoot it?

I guess I thought the bullet dropped 9000 feet.

 

[cronxeh]

I guess I thought the bullet dropped 9000 feet.

No you see since the visible distance to horizon is only 3 miles from standing height of 6 feet, you would have to shoot from a height (mountain, tower, building, helicopter) in order to see whatever it is you were shooting at and not have any obstructions in your path (buildings, other heads, structures, cacti). The shooter was at 9000 feet above sea level.

 

[bassplayer142]

What I'm trying to figure out is that there is 2 supposed snipers and that both of them get it wrong. What is the chances of 2 separate people with an odd claim that both get the answer wrong?

 

[Sorry!]

cronxeh I am just wondering wtf you are talking about with your 'longest distance shot' and standing at a 9000ft and aiming 150ft above the head of the object etc. etc.

The longest confimred kill was done by a Canadian sniper at 2,430m or about half of your purposed 'visible distance to horizon longest distance shot' (where you say the target is hit). I'm just wondering what exactly you're on about.

And snipers do go through external ballistics and during the time period of the Vietnam war they began pairing up spotters with the snipers themselves. It's pretty much the spotters job to do the external ballistics to calculate how to adjust the scope etc. I'm not sure exactly how much of this snipers in this era would know and understand however. If you do more research into it you can see that they were trained OVER there to become snipers (on the basis they were good marksmen) they received little to no 'formal' sniper training. It's very possible that it was the shooters job to shoot and kill the target on their on skill and spotters job to just pick out the targets and do no calculations what-so-ever, which is how I believe it was.

Your question of which bullet hits the ground is sort of tricky because you don't give any variables... you just ask which bullet hits the ground first. This leads to the assumption (for scientistific minds) that you are talking about in a vacuum on ground that has no curvature and the gun is shot perfectly horizontal in which case both bullets will hit the ground at the same time, you learn this in grade 10 or something. Even better... drop a feather and shoot a bullet what hits the ground first!

 

[cronxeh]

OK Suppose I wanted to shoot you in the head and you are 1.5 miles away. Obviously I can't shoot you from standing height because I can't see you and there are buildings and other people in the way. So I climb up to a skyscraper (Empire State Building is at 1250 feet). Now I have a view to horizon 70 km away, and can see your head from a good vantage point with a great angle. If I was to take a shot I would have to aim 121 meters above your head, and the total time it would take to hit your head is 5.9 seconds.

The longest confimred kill was done by a Canadian sniper at 2,430m or about half of your purposed 'visible distance to horizon longest distance shot' (where you say the target is hit). I'm just wondering what exactly you're on about.

How does that contradict anything that I said? And for that matter, it doesn't matter what distance it was, without the height he would've never made it. He could have made a longer shot if he had better computer instead of a spotter, and a better bullet

 

[Sorry!]

How does that contradict anything that I said? And for that matter, it doesn't matter what distance it was, without the height he would've never made it. He could have made a longer shot if he had better computer instead of a spotter, and a better bullet

I assume you've never fired a rifle? That shot is amazing 1.5miles? Jebus Do you know how small the target is at this distance?

 

[cronxeh]

I assume you've never fired a rifle? That shot is amazing 1.5miles? Jebus Do you know how small the target is at this distance?

Larger than the bullet?

 

[Andre]

I don't share the fascination for lethal weapons at all, maybe having fired far too much of them due to my profession. However, I don't like to see misconceptions. Hence:

A higher caliber bullet has a longer length

No, not necessarily:

9mm round versus 7.62mm round.

 

[cristo]

A higher caliber bullet has a longer length, maybe that was the source of their misconception. To test their basic sniper knowledge you should ask them if you were to drop a bullet at the same time they shot it from a rifle - which bullet would hit the ground first

The one that he dropped, since you'd expect a bullet from a sniper to be embedded in someone/thing and never hit the ground As for the OP, maybe they are just ignorant. You don't need to know the definition of processor speed to be able to use a computer.

 

[Vanadium 50]

Caliber means both things.

For small arms, it's a measure of the diameter of the bore. For real guns, it's a measure of the length of the barrel. For example, a 5"/38 has a barrel that's 5 x 38 = 190 inches long. An 16"/50 would have a barrel that's 16 x 50 = 800 inches long.

 

[MotoH]

taken from militaryphotos.net

I've been taught both ways and with regards to artillery/gunnery but it has a different meaning with hand held weapons. So, caliber can be the ratio between width and length of the barrel, it can be the weight of the shot, or the width of the round; dependent on context. Now, if they are getting mixed up and saying that caliber is just the length? Well, that's only half right on one of 3 possibilities. Gotta toss out the BS flag on this one. Other Marine's here can testify that no matter how old you get there are some things you will not forget.

Ask them what there MOS was, what unit they where in and what year. Division Snipers had Bolt guns. on a company end, a company sniper was not a trained or MOSed sniper, more in the the line of a Designated Marksman. He would have a M14 with iron sights. I run this pass another friend.

Sorry I'm not adhering to the original topic, but I would rather not have someone claiming something that they haven't earned

 

[cronxeh]

I don't share the fascination for lethal weapons at all, maybe having fired far too much of them due to my profession. However, I don't like to see misconceptions. Hence:
No, not necessarily:

9mm round versus 7.62mm round.

You comparing handgun cartridge to a rifle cartridge? Why don't we throw in a shirt gun there for a good measure

 

[MotoH]

I r not know much bouts rounds but check comparison:
JDAM
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/jdam.htm
vs.
.22 long rifle
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.22_Long_Rifle

 

[Sorry!]

You comparing handgun cartridge to a rifle cartridge? Why don't we throw in a shirt gun there for a good measure

What about .22LR and .22 short or .22 long? All are used for revolvers and the last 2 can be used in rifles too... In general however the bullet does increase in length as it goes up in calibre but there are exceptions.

 

[DaveC426913]

A lot of people seem to be jumping in late and not bothering to read previous posts wherein we've settled some things (such as that calibre does not refer to length).

Also, there are now two separate threads: the original, about calibre, and an offshoot about bullet-drop.

 

[Evo]

A lot of people seem to be jumping in late and not bothering to read previous posts wherein we've settled some things (such as that calibre does not refer to length).

Also, there are now two separate threads: the original, about calibre, and an offshoot about bullet-drop.

Where is the offshoot thread about bullet drop?

 

[DaveC426913]

Where is the offshoot thread about bullet drop?

Forks in post 9. (Actually, I guess the real fook occurs in post 32.) Continues in posts 35-42, 44-47, 49.

 

[cronxeh]

The thread title implies there are 2 people pretending to be snipers, and a bullet drop is a valid form of testing this hypothesis. How is that a separate thread?

 

[DaveC426913]

The thread title implies there are 2 people pretending to be snipers, and a bullet drop is a valid form of testing this hypothesis. How is that a separate thread?

It certainly is a valid form of testing it. My concern is not with your proposal, but with the follow-up discussion of it (which begins in post 32). It's fine discussion, but it does nothing for the OP except decrease the signal-to-noise ratio, which is nearing 50:50. And that is causing further discussion of the OP to get befuddled, as new contributors are not reading earlier posts before replying.

 

[rewebster]

just a quick 'aside' post---with the title, the subject, and bullet 'drop'--this reminded me of a visit to a guy's apt. in college where one of his roommates was in the basement throwing a 12 gauge shotgun shell against the wall trying to make it 'go off'--I picked it up and told him what level of intelligence he was.

I just remembered another 'person' in his mind, 'having fun' by throwing live .38 rounds into a bonfire---I didn't stay at that party.