collectorden

Would be great if they can make it work,
but it looks near impossible to do.

http://www.military.com/news/article...r-shooters.htm

TheRoguePirate

In baghdad, I once saw a guy mount a leopold deer scope on his M-4. (Yes, he was a conventional guyand yes, they always seem to mount more crap on their rifles making an M-4 weigh the same as a 240G) When I asked him why, he said he wanted to be able to shoot farther/better than the issued acog would allow. When I told him about bullet drop, conversions, calculations, ratios, windage and compensation he looked at me like I had a d*ck growing out of my forhead. I skipped over parralax, patted him on the shoulder and said "go get'em killer".
Why make an optic that can outperform the weapon its mounted to?

TRP

__________________
TRP

collectorden

Lockheed Martin claims they can compensate for all the variables, including drop and down range conditions, which would effectively increase the weapons performance.

sniperpeeps

Sure, lets make shooting easier by making it more complicated...here's an idea.....more time on the range shooting long range. Iron sights to 600 is not that difficult with practice. Also, unless they are going to issue everyone mk 262 it is pointless anyways. We have run green tip through the chrono and its deviation is very bad, don't remember the exact number but bad. This is a perfect example of people who don't know a thing about long range shooting (high ranking army officers) trying to make improvements while not listening to the subject matter experts (Snipers, Army Marksmanship Unit).

__________________
www.americansnipers.org, America's long distance service provider

TheRoguePirate

As My grand dad always said "The gun only shoots as well as the guy who's holding it"

__________________
TRP

Gravity3694

Here's an interesting read to understand the types of engagements in A-Stan and how our current marksmanship programs in the military are lacking.

Increasing Small Arms Lethality in Afghanistan: Taking Back the Infantry Half-Kilometer
http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA512331

The biggest immediate change that needs to be made is to dump M855 which has poor terminal ballistics. Issue Mk318 for all infantry and Mk262 to designated marksman. A good stop gap is to also increasingly field more designated marksman and eventually have all 11b and 0311s trained in long range realistic combat engagements.

sniperpeeps

Agreed, upper management wants to fix a lack of training with technology. If I could only tell you guys the amount of money I saw spent on crap like this when I was working at the sniper school it would make you sick. At least marines still engage with M16/M4 out to 500m, the Army's rifle qualification is a joke. Most soldiers have no idea what a BDC is, much less that they have one on their iron sights.

As far as the SDM training, the Army has to standardize it and implement it as a whole for it to be effective. Right now there isn't even a standardized weapon/optic combo for SDM's, much less any sort of SDM qualification table. This is in part due to lack of Long Range/sniper ranges on military facilities and also lack of standardized SDM training. You can't give a joe a M14 with a Leupold on it and say "go kill stuff" and expect them to do any good without a fair amount of training and a LOT of shooting. Unfortunately it has taken the Army ten years of armed conflict to bring the SDM issue to light, but as the boys come home and funding dries up, we will be right back where we started.

And I say give 262 to everyone, that shits hot

__________________
www.americansnipers.org, America's long distance service provider