OT - 100 meters

[Cdnwolf]

Great concept of how far 100 meter is... most rifles are listed as being effective at 50 m...

[kcdusk]

Great perspective.

My thoughts, and i'm not a gun person by any stretch.

Given the picture below 100m is both;
1. a difficult shot when you factor in movement/cover/poor light (un-aimed fire with SMG or Assult rifle)

2. a somewhat easier shot when you take the time to aim and have a scope (aimed shot with a sniper rifle)

But the 100m thing is important. Yes, its a long way. Also consider how difficult it is to spot a target 100m away - not only are they 100m away but they are in a huge area (human eye has a 35 degree of view or something?), and if you do see someone, you still need to identify it. Lots to consider.

[Schone23666]

Originally Posted by kcdusk

Great perspective.

My thoughts, and i'm not a gun person by any stretch.

Given the picture below 100m is both;
1. a difficult shot when you factor in movement/cover/poor light (un-aimed fire with SMG or Assult rifle)

2. a somewhat easier shot when you take the time to aim and have a scope (aimed shot with a sniper rifle)

But the 100m thing is important. Yes, its a long way. Also consider how difficult it is to spot a target 100m away - not only are they 100m away but they are in a huge area (human eye has a 35 degree of view or something?), and if you do see someone, you still need to identify it. Lots to consider.

It's also important to factor in issues such as:

Adrenaline, thus making it more difficult to keep a steady hand and line up accurate shots. It gets worse if you're suffering anything in regards to fatigue, exhaustion, cold, dehydration, etc.

Fog, rain, and dust kicked up from friendly and hostile fire that will impair vision even more.

The target may be camouflaged or hidden, thus even harder to spot, which particularly leads to the last factor to consider...

The target may just as likely be shooting at YOU, thus unless you've got nerves of steel (or just don't care) your first reaction will likely be to try to take cover and avoid getting hit, rather than trying to line up that perfect shot.

[mikeo80]

Maybe that is why the statement "Wait until you see the whites of their eyes" is still a truism.

I practice with my long arms at 25 and 50 yards. (For our metric fans, that is 22.8 to 45.6 meters) Anything past that, I better have a DAMN good reason to send hot lead that far,

My $0.02

Mike

[Cdnwolf]

The main reason I posted this was after reading the Scud hunt story, I was thinking some of the distances mentioned seemed over estimated and was trying to visualize what was going on.

[Raellus]

That might be a shade over 100m since the view is from the back of the end-zone (American football fields are 100 yards, from goal line to goal line and each endzone is 10 yards long) so we're looking at about 120 yards in the pic, but all of the previous points still stand.

I recently fired an AR-15 (civilian M4 clone) for the first time. I shot at 30m (to zero the sights), at about 50m, and at about 100m. Using only iron sights, I had no trouble hitting a man-sized target at 30m, with tight groupings center mass. At 50m, I was still getting mostly hits but my grouping started to spread and scatter- overall accuracy dropped off significantly compared to 30m. At 100m, I started registering complete misses (not all shot, of course). It's really quite astounding just how much smaller a target looks at 100m. I'd like to try it with a 4x scope and see how much better I could shoot at 100m (and longer).

[StainlessSteelCynic]

I don't know about other countries but here in Australia they once used to teach various professions (and the military) to estimate distances based on the length of known objects. The Australian Rules Football field in particular was often used and also the length of a cricket pitch (from stump to stump). Going from, memory I think they are 150 and 20 metres respectively.

By the way Cdnwolf, I don't think this thread is OT at all, I think it's very much relevant to the game

[James Langham]

UK forces still use this method as long as there is no dead ground.

[kcdusk]

Originally Posted by Cdnwolf

The main reason I posted this was after reading the Scud hunt story, I was thinking some of the distances mentioned seemed over estimated and was trying to visualize what was going on.

I admit i dont know anything about effective yards or anything like that in real life. The measurements i use in my games are based on rulebook movement factors for people and vehicles, and also short/medium/long ranges of weapons.

I dont think its a bad way to go (even if you disagree with weapon ranges given). I tend to think of weapon ranges and vehicle / people movements as abstract numbers. This does tend to cause some problems depending on your background .... it causes more problems for people the more real life experience they have (which is unfortunate).

For example if an enemy PC is 100m away, what do you do? Generally there are 3 types of responses;

1. Ppl with real life experience "wait until they get closer, say 40m and within short range so i can nail them". The problem with this is they often get 1 round to fire on their targets, before the targets are within 1 combat turn of movement from being able to "over run them". PCs yell "well i wouldnt have let them get that close!"

2. Gung-ho types who start shooting straight away "long bursts down range, lots of lead, how many times do i hit?". Lots of negative modifiers later they have missed all targets.

3. "Game" type people, and i include myself in this group and try to use this explanation to help my players. PPl that are 100m away means you can ... fire on them in 3 combat turns if they start to run at you (assuming 30m distance covered per turn running), or a vehicle can get to you within "x" amount of turns. So players know what options they can consider and what time frames they do or dont have.

Distance divided by movement rate gives player an idea of how "relatively close" the enemy is, what can you do in that time? So i dont necessarily agree with literal ranges or speeds given in the game, but i use them abstractly to determine what actions can or cant be done relative to what other characters are doing and how far away they are.

Sometimes i work backwards. A vehicle might be 160m away and travelling at "80". 160m may or may not be a long distance for an RPG shot, and "80" may or may not be unrealistically fast or slow for a vehicle. But the guy with the RPG knows he can take one round to aim (range reduces to 80m) and then safely fire an aimed shot in the next round. Realistic? Maybe not. But it helps players and Refs work within a consistent system that they can they develop tactics with.

[weswood]

100 meters works out to 108 yards. Close enough for gubmint work.

When I was in the Marines, our annual qualification with the M16 -A1 and later A2- was at 200 meters, 300 meters & 500 meters. I know shooting at paper isn't combat but I had no problems hitting the target @ 200 & 300 meters. I did have some difficulty @ 500 meters, I was nearsighted and had trouble seeing the target. I could hit the target often enough but I couldn't see the target markers so more often than not I was shooting at the wrong one. This is with a standard M16A1 or A2.

So in my opinion, I'd take 100 meter shots. Aimed shots anyway, no quickshots. I'm way out of practice these days and probably miss, but I'd do it.

As a side note, I heard that asshole Hasad that killed those people @ Ft Hood practised pistol shooting and could regularly hit a target @ 100 yards with a pistol. Don't know if it's true.

[CDAT]

To me 100 meters is close range with any rifle/carbine, less than that and you are getting in to CQB range. I am not nor have I ever been a sniper but the longest shot I have ever taken was my issue M82 .50 and that was 1600 meters, at a vehicle, at man sized targets with M14, M16, or M4 we would be takeing aimed shots at about 3-400 for the M14 everything else would start about 250. I would expect most trained troops who are not being shot at or have a good covered postion to hit about 75-80% at that range. Last time I looked the specs for the M4 are that it is accurate out to 550 meters, the M16 gets an extra 50 and is good out to 600, the M14 is out to 1000, this is all for man sized targets slow fire. If you are talking about rapid fire then you are better off at CQB ranges as it is difficult to miss at that range, but that works both ways.

[Cdnwolf]

M16A1

Manufacturers Colt Manufacturing, Harrington and Richardson, Hydra-Matic Division of General Motors
Length 39.625 inches
Weight (without magazine and sling) 6.55 pounds
Weight (with loaded 30 round magazine and sling) 7.96 pounds
Bore Diameter 5.56mm (.233 inches)
Rifling Right-hand twist, 6 grooves, 1 turn in 12 inches
Maximum Range 2,653 meters
Maximum Effective Range 460 meters
Muzzle Velocity 3,250 feet per second
Rate of Fire (Cyclic) 800 rounds per minute
Rate of Fire (Sustained) 12-15 rounds per minute
Rate of Fire (Semiautomatic) 45-65 rounds per minute
Rate of Fire (Automatic) 150-200 rounds per minute

[Cdnwolf]

http://www.angelfire.com/art/enchanter/range.html

Great article on effective ranges during combat.

[Rockwolf66]

Originally Posted by weswood

As a side note, I heard that asshole Hasad that killed those people @ Ft Hood practised pistol shooting and could regularly hit a target @ 100 yards with a pistol. Don't know if it's true.

Well I have access to an FN FiveseveN pistol like the one the Ft Hood Shooter used and the round it fires is supposed to be flat shooting out to 200m. I haven't practiced that much with said handgun but I know it can hit Gatorade bottles at 20M. So hitting a man sized target out to 100m is not out of the picture. I have a friend who regularly shoots his USP .40 out to 125M. I've also seen Glock 20s shot to nearly 300m and I have seen long range competition shooters Shoot out past 500m. Then there is Elmer Keith's 600 yard shot with a .44 magnum pistol.

http://www.handloads.com/articles/default.asp?id=34

So long range pistol shooting is very possible it's just not usually very practical.

[Cdnwolf]

Had to check it out myself...

The traffic lights are at 100 meters and the white goal post in the distance is at 200 meters.. if you look closely you can see two people by the baseball diamond.

(BTW I had to use 4x Optical zoom to get a good picture)

[Targan]

In RL if I had a rifle I was familiar with (the SLR would be first choice in my case) and a man-sized target was static or moving pretty much directly towards or away from me (as in, not a lot of lateral left/right movement) I'd definitely be taking shots at 100m. And I'd expect to be hitting with most shots too, assuming I'd zeroed the iron sights.

[Schone23666]

Originally Posted by Cdnwolf

http://www.angelfire.com/art/enchanter/range.html

Great article on effective ranges during combat.

Just bear in mind that article is written by good 'ol "M113 Gavin Nutboy" Sparks, so while it's an interesting read, should be taken with a multi-megaton sized grain of salt.

[James Langham]

Studies showed that the average combat range in WW2 in Europe was 300-400m hence the adoption of lower powered ammunition by NATO and the WP. Interestingly modern experience which is more desert or mountain based seems to be longer with significant urban combat that is much shorter - implying the SMG/heavier rifle would be more appropriate!!!

[Rockwolf66]

As a "friend" who served in Aden, Yemen, Northern Ireland and London put it.

"In the middle east the air is so clear you can see for miles."


As an Avid backpacker in the Trinity Alps. I can honestly say that spotting fellow backpackers at distances of over 1,000m just depends on your line of sight. Even deer can be easy to spot if they are in a clearing.

Basically if you are in an area with clear air, accommodating terrain and a lack of obscuring vegetation you can see quite a distance.

[Rockwolf66]

oh and a fun little calculator I found to give an estimate on how far a person could see if they were on clear flat terrain.


http://www.ringbell.co.uk/info/hdist.htm