Quote:
Originally Posted by HorseSoldier
A .30 caliber rifle with iron sights is not much of an advantage over a 5.56mm rifle or one of the Soviet x39s -- you'll almost never be able to acquire and positively ID a target for the added range to matter, and then no one, even with lots of training, manages to make those longer range shots with iron sights with anything more than statistical static on two way ranges...
|
I would argue that this is more to do with terrain and situation, for example, as has been found in Afghanistan, the current 5.56mm round doesn't have the power required for some engagements due to the distances involved.
Any region where there is a lot of open terrain favours a heavier projectile with a higher charge like the 7.92mm, .303, 7.62x51 and so on. For example, during the Boer Wars in South Africa there were many accounts of what we today would consider extreme range shooting. In some cases these were marksmen (not snipers) and in other cases they were normal infantrymen, but they were shooting over iron sights.
They managed to identify and hit their targets at distances greater than 800 yards in some cases. This was true for both sides in the war and Boer long range shooting was a significant factor in reducing the effectiveness of British cavalry in that conflict (to the point where they were no longer used as an offensive unit).
While the Boer Wars are a century ago, similar engagement distances are being found in other conflicts, they might not be the norm but they do still occur.
And while I don't dispute that optics do much for long range shooting, I'd rather have a telescopic sight on a 7.92mm Kar98 or .303 SMLE than on a 5.56mm AUG or M16 for medium- to long- range shooting.