Ted Gundy WW2 sniper takes shots today

[mechanic]

It's pretty emotional to watch someone so humble and kind be honoured in such a way.

It made the old man very happy, that is best of motives.

[Rolex]

I think it would be interesting to know the story of how he came to get out of the service in 1944. He would have been 17 years old in 1944. He must have enlisted at 16 years old. You could enlist with your parent's permission at age 17, but could not, by law, be shipped to a combat area unless you were 18 years old, so he may have been shipped home and discharged if it was discovered he was too young, or had fraudulently enlisted.

[gyrene81]

he was wounded during the battle of the bulge...lost his right leg...the film was shot in 2011, he would have been 17 in 1944 which means he lied about his age by at least a year...

[Rolex]

So there was more to his story.

I read somewhere that perhaps 200,000 Americans enlisted even though they were underage.

[Reschke]

My moms dad enlisted in the Navy BEFORE he turned 17 and quit school to ship out to basic. He told me he really turned 18 on the boat headed out with his PV-1 Ventura group.

As for the man taking the shots...Vulcan in shooting terminology a "cold" shot means that nothing has been shot through the weapon that day. Or at least that is what I have always been told by guys who have shot more weapons than I have.

[Vulcan]

As for the man taking the shots...Vulcan in shooting terminology a "cold" shot means that nothing has been shot through the weapon that day. Or at least that is what I have always been told by guys who have shot more weapons than I have.

I know what a cold shot is, it shouldn't make much of a difference if any - unless you're doing something wrong the first shot should be the most accurate with accuracy going downhill as the barrel heats up. The only time I've seen a need for fouling shots was with cheaper suppressors. The remington (?) was shot by that sfc first and zero'd in by the sniper team. I assume the springfield had been pre-zero'd. It was good bench rest shooting, especially for a gentlemen of his age, and all credit to the guy, just saying the impossible-ness call on the shot was a bit... over the top.

[mechanic]

while I agree with your angle to some extent on the media hype I totaly disagree about the shooting. He was trained as a soldier not trained to be a soldier. It shows with his instinctive headshots. I rekon that was one take, he fired three rounds at all through that gun with 100% headshot ratio. The guys around him could not help but be moved by such a fine display by someone so old. Easy to understand why it became 'impossible' and, should you try to repeat the thing with any other man his age it might become apparent that he did do the impossible during that magical moment.

[Jayhawk]

My grandpa joined the Navy at 17, there was a program that allowed him to forgo his final semester of high school by joining the service.

[Banshee7]

I didn't see a 5" group, he hit outside the gong a few times then got the gong. I can do <2" groups on my low end cheap Howa 243 at 200m (~220 yards) on a cheap Nikon scope, on a crappy bipod with no monopod/sandbag on the end. Listening to the commentary they said 3 inches to the left and 3 inches down from the center of the gong. That would indicate the gong is ~5" diameter, so his grouping was ~10 inches (maybe a little more).

As for 'cold', well someone zero'd the scope in. So neither shot was really cold, the sfc was the one getting it on target with scope adjustments.

No disrespect to the old guy, and it's nice to see, and I'm sure in his younger days his shooting was pretty awesome, but calling it an impossible shot is a big stretch of the imagination, especially with so many factors in his favour.

And you get a pat on the back, way to go, "you da man."


The video was pretty awesome 

[007Rusty]

 

[olds442]

I didn't see a 5" group, he hit outside the gong a few times then got the gong. I can do <2" groups on my low end cheap Howa 243 at 200m (~220 yards) on a cheap Nikon scope, on a crappy bipod with no monopod/sandbag on the end. Listening to the commentary they said 3 inches to the left and 3 inches down from the center of the gong. That would indicate the gong is ~5" diameter, so his grouping was ~10 inches (maybe a little more).

As for 'cold', well someone zero'd the scope in. So neither shot was really cold, the sfc was the one getting it on target with scope adjustments.

No disrespect to the old guy, and it's nice to see, and I'm sure in his younger days his shooting was pretty awesome, but calling it an impossible shot is a big stretch of the imagination, especially with so many factors in his favour.

ARE U 84?

[gyrene81]

no olds he's not and he obviously doesn't know weapons and ballistics very well either....243 is a very fast flat trajectory round...03 springfield fires a 30.06 round, not as fast or flat shooting...add to the fact that you will not be as accurate with a weapon when someone else zeroes the scope for you...people hold a weapon differently...they can get you on the target, but you gotta get yourself on the bullseye.

[Vulcan]

no olds he's not and he obviously doesn't know weapons and ballistics very well either....243 is a very fast flat trajectory round...03 springfield fires a 30.06 round, not as fast or flat shooting...add to the fact that you will not be as accurate with a weapon when someone else zeroes the scope for you...people hold a weapon differently...they can get you on the target, but you gotta get yourself on the bullseye.

I've fired all sorts of rounds outside of 243, from .22's to 308's - but I also make no claims about my shooting, it's fairly average tbh, I know plenty of guys who are way better shots than me. As for the hold a weapon comment is was a bench rest shot. And you are talking about groupings, so how the previous person held it is totally irrelevant, it's reliant on the consistancy of the person shooting - and in this case it was well supported to the point I don't think his breathing had an effect on it. Fast and flat is not that relevant if it was pre-zero'd was well. Trajectory only matters when you a shooting at varying distances or the rifle was zero'd at a different range.

Are you guys googling stuff as you go? Because you don't seem to be thinking it through very much.

[Babalonian]

Bottom line is, over 65 years later, and you still don't want to be on the wrong side of him with a rifle.   

[gyrene81]

   google? i'm pretty sure i've fired more weapons in different conditions than you have...have you done a lot of long range bench shooting with multiple weapons? doesn't matter who zeroed the weapon in...i would hold that weapon differently than you would...and my sight picture will be different...recoil will affect each person differently too...we can both get on target but the person who zeroed the weapon in will get in the bullseye before the other person does...we're not just talking grouping either, as in that video the old man was not only consistent with an unfamiliar weapon, but he was very accurate...3 shots to a bullseye at 300 with a weapon he had never fired before.

not many can do that...

as far as trajectory goes...ya there is a difference...the lighter flatter trajectory bullet will be more consistent down range than the heavier bullet...adjustments will be smaller with the light flat trajectory bullet...