Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Username:
Password:
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

There aren't any users online.

[Char]

Yeah, thanks.  This is the place!

Of Russian heritage, I'm inspired by the climax in Craig's ENEMY AT THE GATE.  Russian and German snipers rule the rubble at Stalingrad.  While being searched out from a half a mile away, the Russian hero puts the final shot through the center of the German's scope.  The irony is awesome.

I don't intend to plagiarize but have built a similar scene in a modern skyscraper city.  Craig writes when shooting up at a distance, you have to raise sights to make up for the pull of gravity.  The opposite is true when shooting down from a high place.  The sniper lowers his/her sights because the pull gravity helps.

Makes perfect sense, yet a know it all cop says his SWAT manual makes Craig wrong.  This novel is so well researched, I can't believe William Craig would screw up a point so vital.  Can you back up the author or is the SWAT book right?  What happens when shooting up into a tower or down from one?  Makes a huge difference to my heroine sniper.  Char

[JIM DOHERTY]

Char,

What was the name of the SWAT guy who disputed Craig?  I haven't qualified with a rifle in several years (and that was an M-16, not a high-powered sniper rifle), so I'm not in a position to say which one is right, but if the SWAT guy has a solid rep in the shooting world, I'd go with his non-fiction manual over a fictional novel.

OTOH, if he's regarded as a flake, I might do further research to confirm one author's position or the other's.

[Chase]

Char,

Indeed you're in the right place, for we have a rich abundance of know-it-all cops.  I’m not one, but they let me play third-assistant know-it-all gun guy, especially on easy questions like yours.

Your cop friend is right.  Craig repeats an old shooting myth.  Half of its physics are off kilter.  However, I think there’s a greater problem.  Let’s deal with ballistics first, then hash over the scene that’s been done to death.

1.  As successful mountain goat hunters know, whether you shoot up a steep incline or down from on high, you always hold low – both ways.  If a sniper or hunter holds high at an uphill target – all other ballistic elements the same – the bullet will pass over.  In hunting, that’s extremely dangerous, as someone may be at the impact area.  It’s why horizon shots, nearly always uphill, are extremely unsafe.  In sniping, it’s worse, as you’ve needlessly given away your hide (pun very much intended).

A simple experiment will prove the ballistics you need.  Stand on a ledge and hold a supple stick straight out from you.  A bamboo fish pole or long fiberglass pop tent support works well, the longer, the better.

Note the arc from your hand to the far tip.  The arc will be at its maximum at center mass.  Stephen Hawking, my fourth assistant in charge of gravity is currently in space, or Stevie would explain the affect of gravitational waves on a long, perpendicular object affects the length of the pole and the flight of a bullet similarly. 

Now cant the rod at a steep downward angle.  As expected, you’ll see the arc decrease, until straight down there is no arc at all, only a straight rod.  With length perpendicular to gravity reduced, mass is redistributed, and the rod shows less and less arc.  Gravity acts the same on the arc of a bullet in flight, and with the decrease in arc, your bullet will drop less, so you must hold low to compensate for the lack of arc.  The author of Enemy at the Gate is correct to this point.

Now hold the rod up.  It will again decreases in arc until straight up shows no arc, just as with pointing the rod down.  Up and down bullet trajectories are the same.  At far uphill targets, your sniper must hold lower than at the same distance on the flat, because her bullet will drop less.

2.  The greater issue is two-fold:

A.  At any distance, line-of-sight (the level of the telescope) is straight from eye to target; however, as we’ve seen above, the bullet arcs (except when straight up or down).  The greater the distance, the more arc, and it’s not rainbow perfect  At the receiving end, the bullet loses both velocity and momentum, causing a steeper and more rapid fall.  From a great distance, if the bullet were to strike the front lense of the level scope, it would most likely tear through the bottom of the thin metal tube, not making it to the rear leans nor the shooter’s eye.   I’m not saying it wouldn’t play havoc.  I’m just saying it won’t be the neat through-the-center-of-lenses shot the way Hollywood FX promotes the myth.

B.  This unlikely feat has become cliché.  It’s not only featured in Craig’s novel.  It’s also in Chandler’s Carlos Hathcock, White Feather, the biography of the real-life super sniper of the Vietnam war.  I’ve seen it in Sniper, the movie with Berringer and Zane in title roles.  It was also in Saving Private Ryan.  I’m sure it’s been done in other works, as we writers tend to damn the torpedo data and go full speed ahead.
   
I hope this has been some help to you, though I suspect I’m only the bearer of bad news, in which case you shouldn’t waste a bullet on a mere messenger.

Chase

[Char]

Wow!  I'm sitting here stunned, my Mary Janes swinging above the rug.

Sorry about the know it all cop comment.  My mystery friend warned me a few of you were walking-talking firearms encyclopedias, but I never imagined images so clear without talking down.

Thank you both so much.  I'm a believer, you guys should take this show on the road, Char

[Lee Lofland]

Char, you've indeed found the place for weapons information. If Chase or some of the other weapons experts here don't know it it isn't worth knowing.

[Peg H]

I'm a believer, you guys should take this show on the road, Char

Some of them do.     They are what make writers conferences so informative and fun.

Peg H

[Elena]

Not to worry Char - the guys on Mythbusters were shooting at a range with the target not very far away.   You wanted to know about shooting up or down which has different dimensions.  Besides, their 'science' isn't always very rigorous - it's worth checking and this is a good place to do it.

So, keep those questions coming 
Elena

[Chuck]

I don't have it in front of me but give me a day or so and if I can find my Army tech manual on snipers, I'll see if I can find the information. All info is in regards the 7.62mm (.308) round, but will apply to any high power caliber used.

If I had to say without checking, I doubt there'll be much difference unless you're talking extreme ranges. One thing to remember is that, unless you're Simo Hayha the famed Finnish sniper, you will be using a scoped rifle that is zeroed for a given distance and if much closer you shoot low to compensate for bullet rise.

A .30-06 caliber rifle, with scope adjusted to point of aim at 300 yards will hit about 2 1/2 inches high at 100, depending on bullet weight, length of barrel, etc. I know this for a fact since I have the rifle and scope adjusted as mentioned.

[Chuck]

I found absolutely nothing regarding shooting from heights down or vice versa in my 1969 Army Sniper training manual. The only mention was that shooting up, people tended to underestimate distance and shooting down they tended to overestimate. The manual covers all aspects of sniper training, from rifle, to scope, to ammo, to camouflage, to shooting out to 1000 meters, to shooting from heights in cities, concealment, stealth, and more.

I'd gather from this, and considering that snipers shoot from all angles, that there isn't any difference worth mentioning.