Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Chatting and General Stuff
Polls
What is your preferred scope reticle calibration?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Mikecr" data-source="post: 701891" data-attributes="member: 1521"><p>Well I don't know how many artillerymen are hitting groundhogs(peeking over grass) at 500+ with THIS system.</p><p>IMO, all the twiddling with a Mildot Master & use of FFP scopes isn't gonna help, cuz it isn't precise enough ranging, 'doping', dialing, or holding-off. </p><p></p><p>Let's get to what a MIL is -in the field,, compared to MOA, and IPHY, for the American HUNTER:</p><p>6283.185 Mils/circle ([2*Pi]*1000)</p><p>While an MOA is 21,600 Mins/circle (360deg*60min/deg)</p><p>21600/6283.185= 3.437747 MOAs/MIL</p><p>An MOA=1.047198 IPHY, so 3.437747*1.047198= 3.6 INCHES/MIL/100yds (3.6 IPHY)</p><p>1MIL= ~3.438 MOA</p><p>1MIL= 3.6 IPHY</p><p>.1MIL=.36 IPHY, 1/4MOA =.26 IPHY, .25 IPHY =Just that</p><p></p><p>1/8MOA =.13 IPHY</p><p></p><p>Maybe it's a different thread, but IMO the FFP scopes & the standard target sizes their ranging is based on, pales in precision to laser ranging, SFP scopes w/med-fine CHs(or finer), and 1/4moa dialing(or finer) in the field. </p><p>This side of armageddon, it makes sense to change batteries once in a while, for the accuracy, just as it makes sense that our military would embrace smart weapon precision of late.</p><p></p><p>Eventually(I don't know what's takin so long), we'll have micrometer side focus w/a focus prism on the reticle plane, and LRFs will fade away.</p><p>We won't need batteries to range, and of course we still will not need MILs.</p><p>But for some reason, it will be just as hard to convince..............</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mikecr, post: 701891, member: 1521"] Well I don't know how many artillerymen are hitting groundhogs(peeking over grass) at 500+ with THIS system. IMO, all the twiddling with a Mildot Master & use of FFP scopes isn't gonna help, cuz it isn't precise enough ranging, 'doping', dialing, or holding-off. Let's get to what a MIL is -in the field,, compared to MOA, and IPHY, for the American HUNTER: 6283.185 Mils/circle ([2*Pi]*1000) While an MOA is 21,600 Mins/circle (360deg*60min/deg) 21600/6283.185= 3.437747 MOAs/MIL An MOA=1.047198 IPHY, so 3.437747*1.047198= 3.6 INCHES/MIL/100yds (3.6 IPHY) 1MIL= ~3.438 MOA 1MIL= 3.6 IPHY .1MIL=.36 IPHY, 1/4MOA =.26 IPHY, .25 IPHY =Just that 1/8MOA =.13 IPHY Maybe it's a different thread, but IMO the FFP scopes & the standard target sizes their ranging is based on, pales in precision to laser ranging, SFP scopes w/med-fine CHs(or finer), and 1/4moa dialing(or finer) in the field. This side of armageddon, it makes sense to change batteries once in a while, for the accuracy, just as it makes sense that our military would embrace smart weapon precision of late. Eventually(I don't know what's takin so long), we'll have micrometer side focus w/a focus prism on the reticle plane, and LRFs will fade away. We won't need batteries to range, and of course we still will not need MILs. But for some reason, it will be just as hard to convince.............. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Chatting and General Stuff
Polls
What is your preferred scope reticle calibration?
Top