Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Weapons of the World Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: .50 cal SNIPER RIFLE performance
HYPOCENTER    1/15/2007 11:01:07 PM
I'm just wondering what first hand-accounts there are of using the .50 cal sniper rifle in Afghanistan and Iraq. I'm well-aware of what a .50 cal sniper rifle can do on a test range and what it can do in-theory... and now I want to know how it's performing in-practice. For instance, -I'm very curious to know the ranges we're getting kills at. -Is it even necessary? It's not like we have to kill enemy hiding inside armored vehicles or tanks... and it's not like we have to disable the engines of enemy airplanes. I'm questions if it's practical and is overkill. At most the enemy is hiding behind an adobe wall or is driving in a pick-up truck. In which case, wouldn't a standard snipe rifle be better (can carry more ammo... and isn't as loud). -Finally, and above all... I want to know the physical effects it has on the human body. Some of the things i've heard sound unreal... I've heard of kills where the shot decapitated the enemy. This propaganda or fact? I want to hear details of its effects.
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: 1 2
RockyMTNClimber    My Bad   1/20/2007 11:33:47 PM
 
Quote    Reply

Horsesoldier       1/21/2007 4:59:11 PM

rocky the canadian military doesn't use the barret.  we use a
mcmillan 50 cal rifle.  no idea what the differences are between
the rifles though.


McMillan is the more accurate of the two, but a lower ROF weapon.  It is actually very well-suited for use as a long-range anti-personnel sniper weapon, the Barrett less so (it's just not as tight grouping -- still does the job at most practical ranges).
 
Quote    Reply

Horsesoldier       1/21/2007 5:25:09 PM
>>Shackelford may very well be correct on this one, but I don't seem to have a copy of the Geneva Convention lying around (probably makes for dull reading anyway).  We were told that by treaty the Ma Deuce could only be used to destroy equipment, so to justify its use against infantryman we were told to aim for their equipment, such as their weapon or load bearing equipment.  This piece of information was delivered with a wink and a nod, knowing full well that a hit on an enemy soldier's load bearing equipment will turn the poor sap into a steaming pile of blood and guts.<<
 
The (supposedly) relevant statutes would be the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907, specifically the 1899 convention's prohibition of dum-dum type rounds in conflict between signatories and the 1907 convention's prohibition of ammunition intended to cause unnecessary suffering.
 
First, neither ever addresses a minimum or maximum caliber for use against personnel.  This is, no doubt, because at the time of both conventions, truly full-bore infantry rifles and rounds like the .450 caliber Martini-Henry and the US 45-70 Gov't were either still in service here and there or only very recently retired from service, most likely in the living memory of those negotiating and signing the conventions.  Probably the guys negotiating were old enough to at least somewhat remember fifty-plus caliber rifled muzzle loaders, for that matter.
 
Second, the .50 caliber round and its foreign contemporaries (remember, cal 50 started as an early anti-tank round) like the Russian 12.7mm and 14.5mm, the British Boys .55 caliber, the massively overbore German and Polish 7.92mm AT rifle rounds, etc., just did not exist when the conventions in question were formulated.
 
Finally, this would only leave the issue of kinetic energy, which is not addressed at all by the conventions.  It was legal to fire cast iron roundshot at massed infantry formations within living memory of the conventions' negotiators, so it is hard to see how or why they would have argued against a round that is much less gruesome than getting hit with a twelve pound cannon ball.
 
Quote    Reply

Cogito Argentum    McMillan .50   11/21/2007 12:42:26 PM
McMillan .50 in all its glory against the Taliban
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

Old Grunt    unbelievable!!   11/21/2007 2:48:33 PM
That fake sniper video seems to have as much staying power as the "SEALs vs SAS" thread!!
 
Quote    Reply

smitty237       11/22/2007 8:46:49 PM

McMillan .50 in all its glory against the Taliban

 

 


Sorry, but that's the varmint shooting video I mentioned earlier.  Those aren't men being vaporized by snipers armed with .50 caliber sniper rifles, but smaller mountain critters being blown to bits by very powerful, but much smaller weapons. 
 
Quote    Reply
1 2



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics