New World Record Set for Farthest Long-Range Rifle Shot: 4.4 Miles

[Dynas]

Some world records are more impressive than others. Was this truly a feat of remarkable skill or would anybody with enough time and money be able to pull this off. I suspect the latter. A 1km shot with irons gets me more excited. This pales in comparison to the record set by JTF2 in 2017.

Agree with the JTF2 bit. This target looks huge. Hitting a man sized target is SIGNIFICANTLY harder than just lobbing bullets at a stationary target.

[brownbear53]

It's neat but, hardly news. The fellas turned a rifle into an artillery peice and lobed small shells at a metal sheet until he hit it. What I would like to know is the degradation of MOA by distance. The shot that hits says the math works out to make a it a 1.5 MOA shot. Ok cool I guess but what was the MOA spread overall? If your going to the 'ragged edge' maybe set things up so you get some good data and not just one peice of data.

I bet this rifle could put 3 rounds through one hole at regular distance, so at one point did it stop being minute of a fly's ass. What was the MOA spread for the rifle at that distance? They didn't bother to find out. It's bad science if that was the goal and it's not very impressive overall if that was the goal. Just seems like a bit of a flop.

1.5MOA at that distance works out to about 11x11 feet hitbox

[Longbow]

The article helps with context..It is as much an experiment as anything else

Humphries and Austin acknowledge that the hit isn’t a repeatable event, even after several hours spent walking the shot closer to the target. But the fact that they were able to get any shot on to the metal plate is a testament to their equipment and skill.

I think the real benefit of these experiments is the improvement in our long-range shooting skills and collective knowledge at closer ranges, meaning at 3,000 yards and in. We’ve seen an uptick in the ability of shooters in competition to get hits within the framework of these matches, where you have a handful of attempts (usually three to five) under a time constraint to hit steel targets at distances that just a few years back would be considered unimaginable.

[Beeron]

The article helps with context..It is as much an experiment as anything else

Humphries and Austin acknowledge that the hit isn’t a repeatable event, even after several hours spent walking the shot closer to the target. But the fact that they were able to get any shot on to the metal plate is a testament to their equipment and skill.

I think the real benefit of these experiments is the improvement in our long-range shooting skills and collective knowledge at closer ranges, meaning at 3,000 yards and in. We’ve seen an uptick in the ability of shooters in competition to get hits within the framework of these matches, where you have a handful of attempts (usually three to five) under a time constraint to hit steel targets at distances that just a few years back would be considered unimaginable.

Deleted

[Longbow]

Agree with the JTF2 bit. This target looks huge. Hitting a man sized target is SIGNIFICANTLY harder than just lobbing bullets at a stationary target.

With all due respect to the JTF2 pair who clearly demonstrated an impressive level of marksmanship, communication and perhaps most importantly teamwork it would not have been possible without the gear that was developed by some flat faced civilians who decide to see if something was possible.

[Longbow]

I am not convinced we learned anything at all.
We have known the physics of ballistics for a long time.
It seems to me it has more to do with just trying it than anything to do with improvements in gear or tactics.
Basically, if your ballistic calculations say that the projectile is capable of carrying X amount of energy at 4.4 miles, then it can be done.

Actually doing it accomplishes very little except to say, yep, physics at 100yards is the same as physics 4.5 miles from here or 10,000 miles from here, or whatever.
Basically, if you can swim in the shallow end, you can swim in the deep end.
Seems to me the hardest part of this is the availability of an 8km shooting range.

Scientist and Engineers find out all the time that what makes perfect sense in theory and the lab is quite different in the real world with a myriad of external factors, some thought of some not. This is turn often results in innovation. I think the Charlie TARAC is a prime example of someone wanting to do something that in theory could be done but until its invention was darn near impossible.

[Suther]

Scientist and Engineers find out all the time that what makes perfect sense in theory and the lab is quite different in the real world with a myriad of external factors, some thought of some not. This is turn often results in innovation. I think the Charlie TARAC is a prime example of someone wanting to do something that in theory could be done but until its invention was darn near impossible.

Sure, but it's not like this is the first time someone has stepped out of the lab to test it. They've been studying ballistics in real world scenarios for literally centuries - projectile motion was described by Galileo.

So with that context are they really learning anything? Or are they just ####ing around? I'm sure they as individual shooters are probably learning from the experience, but I'm not so sure they're contributing to human knowledge as a whole...

[CZ Shooter]

This would be very impressive within the first 5 shots or so...given enough time and ammo, anyone can hit anything assuming the bullet is capable of getting there.
Either way it is pretty cool.

[Longbow]

Sure, but it's not like this is the first time someone has stepped out of the lab to test it. They've been studying ballistics in real world scenarios for literally centuries - projectile motion was described by Galileo.

So with that context are they really learning anything? Or are they just ####ing around? I'm sure they as individual shooters are probably learning from the experience, but I'm not so sure they're contributing to human knowledge as a whole...

I take your point. These folks are also selling a product, the ELR experience, so I am sure the press is part of their plan. I have not checked to see if they actively compete in ELR, but part of the problem as told to me by folks I know who do, is that because it is a competition and a costly one at that, everyone is left to discover their own truths. At this point there is no bank of easily accessible knowledge.

I guess my larger point was that progress is incremental and often comes from folks taking a theory or science applying it in the real world finding it doesn't quite work as expected and then innovating to make it happen.

[Beeron]

Scientist and Engineers find out all the time that what makes perfect sense in theory and the lab is quite different in the real world with a myriad of external factors, some thought of some not. This is turn often results in innovation. I think the Charlie TARAC is a prime example of someone wanting to do something that in theory could be done but until its invention was darn near impossible.

Deleted