The Record Holder once again...

"At the 1899 Hague Conference, the Martens Clause determined that non-uniformed insurgents were unlawful combatants subject to execution on capture. This means that according to Hague, the laws of warfare do not apply to guerrillas, pirates, and terrorists.

The Army has long reserved the right to use hollow points “where it saw a need.” Specified Army commands, Military Police, and Special Mission Units have been issued hollow points in the past."

The last part of that was referring to American units but I'm pretty sure terrorists and non signitory countries are exempt from the rules and may be blasted with v-max
 
tylerwitz said:
"At the 1899 Hague Conference, the Martens Clause determined that non-uniformed insurgents were unlawful combatants subject to execution on capture. This means that according to Hague, the laws of warfare do not apply to guerrillas, pirates, and terrorists.

The Army has long reserved the right to use hollow points “where it saw a need.” Specified Army commands, Military Police, and Special Mission Units have been issued hollow points in the past."

The last part of that was referring to American units but I'm pretty sure terrorists and non signitory countries are exempt from the rules and may be blasted with v-max
Click to expand...

Maybe they do use expanding bullets; all the special operations guys I know never say anything about that...
But think about this. You are special operations in a hostile country, in what is 'supposed' to be an advisory role, ie, non combatant. Then one of your guys is captured or killed, in combat, with weapons contravening international law. Not the sort of propaganda ammunition you want to give the terrorists, I think. And if I thought of that, Im pretty sure PM selfie and his cohorts have examined the 'optics' of this in much greater detail than I ever will. Thats not to say that I have any knowledge of the ammunition or specific tactics used by the sniper teams of any country, but Im thinking that for this sort of thing they probably have specialized projectiles that arent available at cabelas. I mean, I looked up the ballistics and used an A max as a best proxy, and there is around 230 minutes of drop on a 100yd zero. What optics can even do that? start with a 60 min rail, wind your elevation all the way up, then use your drop reticle? Im thinking that there are some (alot) of specifics that we will never know, because from what I can tell this shot shouldnt have even been possible. An Amax is subsonic about 400m before it arrives at 3500m. Maintaining .5moa accuracy 400m after transonic flight? thats nuts.
 
Last edited:
canada uses ammo loaded with amax bullets. they do not expand. also match hollow point bullets do not contravene the geneva convention for the same reason. the jackets are too thick to open up. check hunting regs and i believe they specify no fmj or non expanding bullets and match bullets not allowed.
 
The insane number of variables that comes into play with a shot at that range.

Velocity alone (something that is never constant, every round will have a slightly different velocity)

750 Grain A-max. Velocity 2850fps drop at 3550M=. 7260.10 inches!
750 Grain A-max. Velocity 2845fps drop at 3550M=. 7286.85 inches!

Over 2ft of difference with only 5fps at the muzzle!

Oh, and is it chrome lined?
 
hairbear said:
Stating the obvious...Canadians rock!!! Too bad MSM didn't mention anything....
Click to expand...

It is actually on Global News, the Globe and Mail, CTV news..and even CBC. Even the RedStar has it.

It was most likely news released straight from the DND.
 
It's also on many international news websites, but only on CNN does it state "Due to the distance of the shot, some voices in the military community expressed skepticism at the Canadian government's report."
 
Don't mean to be the downer here but if we do the math on a shot like that.... He got lucky.

Suppose the gun could shoot 1 MOA... at 3450 meters (3772 yards) that's a group size of what... 38 inches. (And please note that 1 MOA is exceptional accuracy for a 50 cal especially in military conditions.)

In other words all things being absolutely perfect he had no better than about a 50 percent chance of hitting the guy.

No doubt though to get the come ups right and the wind, that's a great call considering the altitude and atmospherics.

I'm really curious how many shots he took to hit the guy and what support equipment he used to determine wind, distance and trajectory. They have laser systems these days to automate all of this and I'm curious if he was using any of it, or just squeezed his butt cheeks together and took the shot.

Can't wait for the detailed video on the History Channel.
 
oddball_ted said:
Why are we even meddling in Iraq? What a waste of time. Fine rifle.
I'm no liberal, but for Christ sakes, forget about that filthy sand pile over there
Click to expand...

I know why the Americans are involved in Iraq.
The country is floating on a huge reservoir of oil.
Bush sr thought he had cut a similar deal with saddam as they had with the shah of iran. They'd prop up his oppressive regime in return for millions of barrels of cheap oil.
Saddam to the chagrin of the oil barons pulling bushes strings wouldn't co-operate.
The Americans are interested in any country that has huge oil reserves and the human rights of the native population has very little to do with it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom