Right, knew I was going down the rabbit hole in this thread. Long story short: Target shooting and long range hunting is not military action. I simply tried to make some of the exhaustive studies done by military / defense industry easy to verify for yourself. Simulations are not perfect, but you can gain a tremendous amount of data. My brother flew A10, my daughter works for Lockheed Martin. The weakest link has not been technology per see for many many years. The weak point is operator overload, too much information and too much multi-tasking. How does this relate to the topic? The caliber of the bullet, the design of the BC, everything discussed here as being paramount....is really fairly low on the list. Like everyone here, I enjoy stats and technology/ballistics as a hobby. However, I also follow history. Prior to WWI, military planners thought the 30 06 would be a 400-600 yard weapon. Sights and drills were designed for sending long range fire. We all know that this happened now and again,but 100 years of study showed that the long range expectations (for rifleman) has simply been the very rare exception and not the rule.