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
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
F.y.i. us army orders $50 million barrett mrads in 300 prc
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="mdk777" data-source="post: 1597054" data-attributes="member: 96764"><p>Right, knew I was going down the rabbit hole in this thread.</p><p></p><p>Long story short:</p><p></p><p>Target shooting and long range hunting is not military action.</p><p></p><p>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.</p><p></p><p>My brother flew A10, my daughter works for Lockheed Martin.</p><p></p><p>The weakest link has not been technology per see for many many years.</p><p>The weak point is operator overload, too much information and too much multi-tasking.</p><p></p><p>How does this relate to the topic?</p><p></p><p>The caliber of the bullet, the design of the BC, everything discussed here as being paramount....is really fairly low on the list.</p><p></p><p>Like everyone here, I enjoy stats and technology/ballistics as a hobby.</p><p>However, I also follow history.</p><p></p><p>Prior to WWI, military planners thought the 30 06 would be a 400-600 yard weapon.</p><p>Sights and drills were designed for sending long range fire.</p><p></p><p>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.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="mdk777, post: 1597054, member: 96764"] 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. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
F.y.i. us army orders $50 million barrett mrads in 300 prc
Top