FireForEffect
New Member
What are other uses of snipers besides recon n assasination of HP targets ???
What is the diff between Designated Marksmen n Snipers ???
What is the diff between Designated Marksmen n Snipers ???
Uses of Snipers
- Thread starter FireForEffect
- Start date
Designated marksmen are normally good-shots singled out in a section and provided with a heavy barreled scoped semi-auto, but still remaining an integral part of the section / platoon under the command of section / platoon commander. Trained snipers are those who have attended and passed a rigorous sniper course, which focuses not just on shooting ability, but tracking, surveillance, camouflage, advanced stalking techniques, enemy asset recognition, communications etc. etc. They will always work in pairs as a minimum, one shooter, one spotter.
The role of the trained sniper is varied, but includes: targeting of key individuals – officers, senior NCO’s radio operators and medics to cause maximum disruption on the battlefield; surveillance of known routes by infiltrating enemy forces; denial – a sniper team can command a wide area and prevent unprotected movement of enemy troops; over watch of advancing friendly forces, counter sniper-fire (locate and kill enemy snipers) the list goes on and on. They are a tremendous asset in the current asymmetrical battlefield, hence countries such as the UK/US are currently upgrading their sniper rifles and associated scopes, rangefinders and night vision capabilities.
The role of the trained sniper is varied, but includes: targeting of key individuals – officers, senior NCO’s radio operators and medics to cause maximum disruption on the battlefield; surveillance of known routes by infiltrating enemy forces; denial – a sniper team can command a wide area and prevent unprotected movement of enemy troops; over watch of advancing friendly forces, counter sniper-fire (locate and kill enemy snipers) the list goes on and on. They are a tremendous asset in the current asymmetrical battlefield, hence countries such as the UK/US are currently upgrading their sniper rifles and associated scopes, rangefinders and night vision capabilities.
winnyfield
New Member
The trend in Iraq is to have more than 2 in a team to provide security. Assymetric means more threats to the team.medics
Combatintman
New Member
Read Sniper One by Sgt Dan Mills for the UK perspective on this - it is an excellent read.
Snipers can also have a demoralizing effect on an opposing force.
A chapter in a book about the war against secessionists in 2000, described the first combat use of .50 cal Barret sniping rifles by the Philippine Marines. It was April 10, 2000.
The focal point was a guard post at Camp Bilal (our Muslim secessionists insist on fighting in a conventional fashion, complete with camps and regular formations. Which is why the AFP has been handing them their rear ends for years).
The camp had been subjected to mortar fire and air strikes for a number of days, but the secessionists had taken advantage of a protracted ceasefire and prepared shelters in their camp that allowed them to ride out the strikes.
That's when the snipers were brought in, in advance of the main assault. It took two KIA on the rebel's side till they realized that they were faced by a sniper. Rebels in other positions attempted to return fire with small arms and B40 rockets. However, the futility of their efforts became apparent when even after their expenditure of resources . . . their comrades still continued to drop dead. They eventually abandoned the guard post.
This reportedly facilitated the assault of the 1st Marine Battalion Landing Team through this gap in the secessionist's lines.
A chapter in a book about the war against secessionists in 2000, described the first combat use of .50 cal Barret sniping rifles by the Philippine Marines. It was April 10, 2000.
The focal point was a guard post at Camp Bilal (our Muslim secessionists insist on fighting in a conventional fashion, complete with camps and regular formations. Which is why the AFP has been handing them their rear ends for years).
The camp had been subjected to mortar fire and air strikes for a number of days, but the secessionists had taken advantage of a protracted ceasefire and prepared shelters in their camp that allowed them to ride out the strikes.
That's when the snipers were brought in, in advance of the main assault. It took two KIA on the rebel's side till they realized that they were faced by a sniper. Rebels in other positions attempted to return fire with small arms and B40 rockets. However, the futility of their efforts became apparent when even after their expenditure of resources . . . their comrades still continued to drop dead. They eventually abandoned the guard post.
This reportedly facilitated the assault of the 1st Marine Battalion Landing Team through this gap in the secessionist's lines.
Maybe, but I'd rate mines/IED's as a larger worry, that and being worried you'll let your mates down in some way.
F-15 Eagle
New Member
Yeah but once thats blows up its over already but if its a sniper he can fire one shot but still have more bullets and strike again.
A sniper if he is any good will kill with one shot. Soldier dead, that's life. An anti-pers minefield is not designed necessarily, to kill but to maim. It is often said that the range of an M16 A-pers mine was one foot - the foot that stood on it. These mines are designed to blow sombody's foot off - and whilst they are rolling on the ground screaming in agony, everybody else is thinking "Geez too bad for that bloke - the rest of his life has changed forever. They will still be thinking about the blood spurting from the shattered stump whilst they carefully prod their way to recover their dying mate then to safety. Then they start thinking "Christ, am I next?". That probably has a far more profound psycological effect than someone being killed by a bullet.
There is also the issue that it is possible to retaliate against a sniper (providing he's been sloppy or you've gotten lucky), whereas a mine? How do you seek revenge against that?
If you ask people from the Australian Taskforce in Vietnam what made them the most bitter - it wasn't the sniping, it was the mines and IED's laid by the enemy who had been unwittingly supplied by the minefield laid upon the directions of Brig Graham. It was a truly excellent minefield aparently - as per NATO doctrine designed to stop the warsaw pact forces rushing through the Fulda gap. Unfortunately the NVA and VC didn't play by warpac rules, and simply lifted tens of thousands of the mines (most of the minefield was not covered by observation or fire) and used them against Australian, US, Kiwi and South Vietnamese forces.
F-15 Eagle
New Member
Here is an interesting article. Although the Army is buying the M110 now they want to keep the M24 and upgrade it to use the .300 Winchester Magnum that would give snipers able to engage targets well past 1000M. The Army and USMC recently issued a new requirement for a longer rage anti-personal sniper rifle that can hit targets at a longer range(1500m) than the standard .308 rifle.
Link: http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/2008/08/army_sniper_080308w/
Link: http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/2008/08/army_sniper_080308w/
Human Bass
New Member
Very interesting article!! I had the bad feeling that since the M110 has the same gas impigment system of the M-16, i would be just a matter of time to appear some jammed guns. Cmon, just put a piston on the damn rifle and make it reliable.
If they want a robust very accurate semi-auto rifle, just look at this POF beauty
http://www.pof-usa.com/p308/P-308-20-MRR-CF-308-SPR-C.R.O.S..htm
If they want a robust very accurate semi-auto rifle, just look at this POF beauty
http://www.pof-usa.com/p308/P-308-20-MRR-CF-308-SPR-C.R.O.S..htm
F-15 Eagle
New Member
They really don't need semi-auto snipers at all. Bolt-actions are far better in accuracy and reliability. Just put a bigger round and your good to go.
Human Bass
New Member
They really don't need semi-auto snipers at all. Bolt-actions are far better in accuracy and reliability. Just put a bigger round and your good to go.
If they didnt need it, the M110 would never be made...
Having a faster rate of fire can be very useful in many scenarios.
Yes in some ways correct, but I think the point of a semi was so that the sniper did not have to loose his sight through the scope
F-15 Eagle
New Member
In my opinion they don't need semi-autos. The Army still wants semi-auto snipers but now they want to keep the bolt-action with a heavier round for longer ranges.
ColdWarrior
New Member
Roughly 10% of combat forces are designated marksmen and they are the ones who are using the M110 which is an effective weapon in the sniper/marksman role out to about 100 yards which is how I understand they are being employed currently.
The upgraded M24 is a sniper weapon along with the Barret; the M24 being envisioned as a medium range weapon with the Barret covering long-range engagements. Or at least that is my understanding.
So there actually is a need for both weapons.
carman1877
New Member
Markman have guns usually with clips and hits targets during a mission.
a sniper waits days or weeks for one shot then runs away, and has a bolt action rifle
a sniper waits days or weeks for one shot then runs away, and has a bolt action rifle