Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: KINGcobra on January 26, 2007, 07:39:26 AM
-
all
i have been playing for a while,and i have noticed that the F4U1A seems to have a more powerfull round them the P51D.I have my convergences set to the same thing and it seems to me and other that it's more powerfull.i have been asking around and other people agree with me. the both have 6 .50cal guns both are inside the wing but the 1A's gun's seem to dish out more power.What do you guys think about this?:aok
-
I strongly disagree. Everything I shoot with the 50s in the P51 shred into ribbons quickly. Everything that can be shredded anyway.
-
alot of people have this assumption, then again others have the other sides opinion...........
my belief is it is the gun platform and where the guns are located that makes it appear guns seem more powerful in one plane vs the other,, those who fly the P51 mostly and the F4U series seldomly would prob think the 51's 50 cals are more powerful and vice versa..........
-
all,
yes sir,my self and 5 other's agree with me,most i asked are rooks but 2 knights agreed with my...but most of the guys i asked were MAINLEY P51D.I asked them if they flew the 1A at all and they said yes,they continued to say that the 1A's .50's are more stronger and it takes less of then so shoot some one down.
comparing the 2,the P51's rate of fore is better then the 1A's but im combat me and others see a difference in the shooting performance
-
There shouldn't be any difference in rate of fire between the F4U and P-51. Both are armed with the same Browning M2.
The perceived difference MAY have to do with gun placement, (I thought I remember reading that, due to the wider propeller arc, the F4U's guns are further outboard on the wing, and as a result convergence is best set closer) or that since the F4U is a better turner it's easier to maintain a tracking shot and put more fire into the target (the four guns of the FM-2 give me the same impression of having more punch).
Also check convergence range. Players may be using a different range in the P-51 than they do in the F4U, and even a change of only 50 yards can make a big difference with the Ma Deuce.
-
saxman,u do have a point.but i have the convergences set to the same thing,300 and working out in both the P51 and 1A.The guys i asked keep the comvergences the same aswell. i dont know to be honest i think the 1A's .50's are more powerfull then the P51's
-
IMHO
I think it's a subconscious reaction to the lighter ammo load.
You are not holding the trigger down as long as you would in the hog/fm2.
I have had to make a conscious effort to make sure I hold trigger in the 51.
Bronk
-
While I don't have the measurements to prove it, my $0.02 is that the gun packages on the hogs are closer to the aircraft centre line than the gun packages on the ponies. The 50cal is the same gun in the hog and the ponies, it's just that in the hog you've got a wider convergence range where all the bullets from your guns will converge inside the space occupied by your target.
asw
-
go offline and test them both against a hanger.
-
detch01,i never thought of that sir,but why having the gun's closre to the body help with it's .50's power?
-
generally speaking, now is when Widewing would hop into this thread and supply us with mountains of info to prove one way or the other. since he hasn't, it is either A) a not valid idea or B) like bronk said and is a subconscience thing. either way, one thing i have noticed is switching from .50's to cannon is hard sometimes, i have to remind myself to lead according to the plane i'm in.
-
well i dont hold the trigger down only small bursts,but in them small bursts, for me anyways the 1A seens to be more stronger.
and beleave me im not a noob even thow i just regestered to the bord :aok :O :t
-
As a P-51D regular, I assume that is why I was asked my opinion for this topic. Funny thing is VanScrew was doing the asking not this new account. Interesting. :confused:
I fly the 51D most of the time. It can and does shred a plane when you get a concentrated 1 sec or more burst in. I did say that I thought the F4U-1A seemed to be hitting harder than the P-51D.
I also said that it was probably a function of the better view down the nose in the F4U-1A and its increased ability to hit a target in a turn fight along it's profile thereby giving the APPEARANCE of more damage being done by the F4U-1A's guns. Besides you can see the shots hit better in the F4U-1A.
And Bronk too raises a valid point.
Cheers,
-
Originally posted by KINGcobra
detch01,i never thought of that sir,but why having the gun's closre to the body help with it's .50's power?
It doesn't. A 50cal is a 50cal. But say the width of the fuselage of your target is 3ft. If the angle of the bullet flight paths from your guns is smaller, you'll be able to put your bullets into that 3ft wide area over a greater distance forward and back from your convergence point, giving you a higher probability of actually getting your shots into your target. If you can put four of your six 50cal bullets into your target, that's a lot more powerful a hit than if you can only put 2 of them into it. That's where the apparent difference in hitting power comes from.
Of course, if the guns in the hogs are the same distance from the centre line as the pony, well, that blows my theory right out of the water :D. But, until I find out different, it seems like a reasonable idea to me.
Cheers
asw
-
Is there a test you can perform offline just incase a varience exists between the two planes gunner model? Have you tried staggering the convergence across 3 distances like Schatzi describes in her article about gunnery?
I did that with my P47's. Outside 2 .50's at 325. Inside 2 at 350. When I "hit" planes now more damage happens in 1 sec by my perception than before. Now when I kill spits much of the time both wings fall off and the plane falls to peices. Before when I had all .50's converging at the same spot, I got fewer kills with only one wing falling off or part of the tail section.
I tried a 1A with it's six .50 staggered outside 275, mid 300 and inside 325. Improved my snap shooting. Same with a 51D. At 400 and shorter everything fell apart the same for me. But then I may have a scewed perception due to flying 47's.
-
I'd also add that the stability of your gunning platform matters. The f4u has a bit more stabilty at mid ranged speeds... The p51 takes a little more attention to keep it stable and not bounce your nose when shooting. This can have an effect as well.
-
Originally posted by jhookt
generally speaking, now is when Widewing would hop into this thread and supply us with mountains of info to prove one way or the other. since he hasn't, it is either A) a not valid idea or B) like bronk said and is a subconscience thing. either way, one thing i have noticed is switching from .50's to cannon is hard sometimes, i have to remind myself to lead according to the plane i'm in.
Remember, guns were situated to the outside of the propeller arc. Thus, the larger the propeller, the further out the guns must be. When we look at the diameter of the P-51D's prop we find that it is 11'2" in diameter. Looking at the F4U, we find a diameter of 13'6". I also have annotated drawings of the P-51D and F4U showing the distance measured from centerline of the fuselage to the centerline of the inside machine gun.
Span from centerline of left inside gun to centerline of right inside gun....
P-51D: 13'2"
F4U: 15'10"
Therefore, the F4U's guns have naturally greater convergence angle than those of the P-51D.
My regards,
Widewing
-
Originally posted by Widewing
Span from centerline of left inside gun to centerline of right inside gun....
P-51D: 13'2"
F4U: 15'10"
Therefore, the F4U's guns have naturally greater convergence angle than those of he P-51D.
My regards,
Widewing
:aok Now I have to come with a new theory :D
Thx Wide:lol
asw
-
Originally posted by Widewing
Remember, guns were situated to the outside of the propeller arc. Thus, the larger the propeller, the further out the guns must be. When we look at the diameter of the P-51D's prop we find that it is 11'2" in diameter. Looking at the F4U, we find a diameter of 13'6". I also have annotated drawings of the P-51D and F4U showing the distance measured from centerline of the fuselage to the centerline of the inside machine gun.
Span from centerline of left inside gun to centerline of right inside gun....
P-51D: 13'2"
F4U: 15'10"
Therefore, the F4U's guns have naturally greater convergence angle than those of the P-51D.
My regards,
Widewing
Agreed Widewing that the angle is greater for the F4U since the guns are wider out, but is the angle of convergence of the 2 bullet streams 300 yards away really that significant a difference?
Here's the math:
Distance in inches - center gun to center gun:
P51: 158 inches
F4U: 190 inches
Distance in inches - aircraft centerline to center gun (1/2 the above):
P51: 79 inches off aircraft centerline
F4U: 95 inches off aircraft centerline
Target Point: 300 Yards Convergence on aircraft centerline:
10,800 inches
Doing a quick SAS (Side, Angle, Side) on this triangle gives you the degree of cant of the guns to give you convergence at 300 yds. 90 Degrees would be the guns firing straight ahead, so to get them to converge they are set inward at the following angles:
P51: 89.580 degrees (.420 degrees inward on each wing)
F4U: 89.496 degrees (.504 degrees inward on each wing)
The makes the angle of bullet impact 300 yards out is less than 1/10 of 1 degree different between the two. Can it really make that much difference?
Not that I actually fly the F4Us (or the P51s much for that matter), but if the anecdotal evidence really says that the F4Us guns are that much more lethal than a P51s, I think I'd do some more testing.
EagleDNY
$.02
-
Originally posted by EagleDNY
Agreed Widewing that the angle is greater for the F4U since the guns are wider out, but is the angle of convergence of the 2 bullet streams 300 yards away really that significant a difference?
Well, the difference in angle is completely insignificant. I was addressing the question of which was greatest.
My regards,
Widewing
-
Originally posted by EagleDNY
Agreed Widewing that the angle is greater for the F4U since the guns are wider out, but is the angle of convergence of the 2 bullet streams 300 yards away really that significant a difference?
Here's the math:
Distance in inches - center gun to center gun:
P51: 158 inches
F4U: 190 inches
Distance in inches - aircraft centerline to center gun (1/2 the above):
P51: 79 inches off aircraft centerline
F4U: 95 inches off aircraft centerline
Target Point: 300 Yards Convergence on aircraft centerline:
10,800 inches
Doing a quick SAS (Side, Angle, Side) on this triangle gives you the degree of cant of the guns to give you convergence at 300 yds. 90 Degrees would be the guns firing straight ahead, so to get them to converge they are set inward at the following angles:
P51: 89.580 degrees (.420 degrees inward on each wing)
F4U: 89.496 degrees (.504 degrees inward on each wing)
The makes the angle of bullet impact 300 yards out is less than 1/10 of 1 degree different between the two. Can it really make that much difference?
Not that I actually fly the F4Us (or the P51s much for that matter), but if the anecdotal evidence really says that the F4Us guns are that much more lethal than a P51s, I think I'd do some more testing.
EagleDNY
$.02
I think widewing was just reaffirming that there is a difference in the angle of convergence, but the consensus is that there is no difference in the effectiveness of the two! The P-51's guns work exactly as good as the F4U-1!
:aok
-
Someone always thinks the .50 in one plane is harder hitting in another, I've seen them all claimed one way or the other. HT has spoken on this before, in the game a .50 cal is a .50 cal only the placement is different.
-
Speaking of .50 Cal damage, I saw an episode of futureweapons last night where they were testing the AS50 (a .50 cal semi-auto sniper rifle). At 600 yards, vs a target consisting of 2 steel plates seperated by 1 meter, a .50 cal API round went right through both steel plates. The plates weren't that thick I grant you, but for sure they were a lot tougher than aircraft aluminum.
Another test was engaging a simulated enemy hiding behind a concrete wall at 600 yards. To simulate this, they put 2 melons behind a concrete block about 3 inches thick (which appropriately looked like a headstone). The .50 Cal hit shattered both the concrete block and the melon representing the target's head.
Final test was accuracy - the shooter was able to consistently put .50 cal rounds in a 3 inch circle on a target 2,000 yards away.
I'm convinced - the .50 cal is deadly. If you got 6 of those in your wings, you got all you need.
EagleDNY
$.02
-
Originally posted by BluKitty
I'd also add that the stability of your gunning platform matters. The f4u has a bit more stabilty at mid ranged speeds... The p51 takes a little more attention to keep it stable and not bounce your nose when shooting. This can have an effect as well.
Blu....i love that avatar.
-
This is why I use a P-38, 4 Ma Deuces and a 20mm Hispano in the nose
-
Originally posted by EagleDNY
Final test was accuracy - the shooter was able to consistently put .50 cal rounds in a 3 inch circle on a target 2,000 yards away.
Not saying your memory is wrong, but the .50 cal is nowhere near as accurate as 3" at 2000yds. Its more like 2-3' at this range with the best ammo available (if at all) given no wind, no gusts and a gun bolted to half a ton of concrete.
Best regards,
Matt
-
Having nevev flown either, I speek from the guy-gettin-shot-at side of things. The F4U1A seems to have much more powerful guns. I have seen a P-51D behind me in my Bf-109, have taken a half second burst but only lost a few control services. The same half second burst, from the same distance, from an F4U1A shreds me. Not even a half second and im dead. They just seem to be lazer beams...
-
Having nevev flown either, I speek from the guy-gettin-shot-at side of things. The F4U1A seems to have much more powerful guns. I have seen a P-51D behind me in my Bf-109, have taken a half second burst but only lost a few control services. The same half second burst, from the same distance, from an F4U1A shreds me. Not even a half second and im dead. They just seem to be lazer beams...
That's because the F4U1 pilots are usually a lot more aggressive than the P51 pilots.
When a F4U1 pilot is 200 yards behind a 109, he thinks of shooting it down.
When a P51 pilot is 200 yards begind a 109, he thinks, "Oh crap, the enemy is so near me! I'm so skeeeerd.. I gotta get away!" and starts losing his nerve, and gets ready to 'extend' the moment the 109 even flinches, thinking that it might be some kind of a "turning the tables" maneuver.
Therefore, "in effect", 50cals used by tougher guys will hit a lot harder than sissies usings 50cals.
:D
-
No offence, but, this is the stupidest pile of misspelling and gibberish that I've ever seen in text.
-
Originally posted by Serenity
Having nevev flown either, I speek from the guy-gettin-shot-at side of things. The F4U1A seems to have much more powerful guns. I have seen a P-51D behind me in my Bf-109, have taken a half second burst but only lost a few control services. The same half second burst, from the same distance, from an F4U1A shreds me. Not even a half second and im dead. They just seem to be lazer beams...
The F4u had his convergence at a short range for dogfighting. The P51 probably set his to 600 yards to get maximum effect from 500 mph cherry picking...
:D
-
Originally posted by Keiler
Not saying your memory is wrong, but the .50 cal is nowhere near as accurate as 3" at 2000yds. Its more like 2-3' at this range with the best ammo available (if at all) given no wind, no gusts and a gun bolted to half a ton of concrete.
Best regards,
Matt
Maybe for the Ma Deuce that is the case, but this guy was shooting at a man sized "target" (head) at 2,000 yards and getting hits. Admittedly, this is the .50 Cal Sniper Rifle and not a machine gun - the gun is likely to have different rifling and may even have special ammo (not all .50 cal is alike).
Believe me, I can't make that shot, and I was properly amazed that he was able to...
EagleDNY
$.02
-
Originally posted by EagleDNY
Maybe for the Ma Deuce that is the case, but this guy was shooting at a man sized "target" (head) at 2,000 yards and getting hits. Admittedly, this is the .50 Cal Sniper Rifle and not a machine gun - the gun is likely to have different rifling and may even have special ammo (not all .50 cal is alike).
Believe me, I can't make that shot, and I was properly amazed that he was able to...
EagleDNY
$.02
IIRC information on the .50 cal rifles is...................
Standard .50 cal ammo is designed for the MG. Weights and the construction of each round, jacket thickness, powder charge, etc, are not exact. The range of plus or minus to a specific standard is large.
Why?
It is desirable when firing the ammo through a MG that there be dispersion!
When using a sniper version the ammo construction is far more controlled and the round is kept to a specific weight, diameter, jacket density and conformity, powder charge, etc are highly contolled. The range to a specific standard is close to NIL AND VERY EXACTING!
-
all,
even thow the .50 call seems small,it actually weighs about 1lb,even if their is a difference in the bullets weight 20hits on a wing is like another 20lbs if the power of the rounds are the same, the lethality of the round has been dimed down.:aok
witch brings up another subject,are .50cals dimmed down
:huh
-
Originally posted by wrag
IIRC information on the .50 cal rifles is...................
Standard .50 cal ammo is designed for the MG. Weights and the construction of each round, jacket thickness, powder charge, etc, are not exact. The range of plus or minus to a specific standard is large.
Why?
It is desirable when firing the ammo through a MG that there be dispersion!
When using a sniper version the ammo construction is far more controlled and the round is kept to a specific weight, diameter, jacket density and conformity, powder charge, etc are highly contolled. The range to a specific standard is close to NIL AND VERY EXACTING!
Its also a LOT CHEAPER to crank out 180 rounds per minute (mass produced bullets from different machines = different weights and composition, slight differences in powder lots, eg burnrate, different case volumes, different primers) and manufacturing lane than to make one bullet per 5 seconds, not counting any quality control issues. Mil grade ball will just get checked for weight, over-all-length, seal of primer and neck, crimp, optical issues (dinged case, bullet not seated the wrong way).
High qual match ammo comes from one lane, one powder lot, one case lot, one bullet lot, all checked for consistency.
Easy to imagine whats better (from a budgetary standpoint) to crank out of a MG or a sniper rifle! :)
Regards,
Matt
-
Originally posted by Keiler
Not saying your memory is wrong, but the .50 cal is nowhere near as accurate as 3" at 2000yds. Its more like 2-3' at this range with the best ammo available (if at all) given no wind, no gusts and a gun bolted to half a ton of concrete.
Best regards,
Matt
He got the 3 right ... the goal of the gun is to maintain a 30" group at 2000 yrds which should be maintainable due to it being a sem-auto and employing a new and sophisticated dampening of the recoil.
So, if the first round is on target, then the following 4 rounds should be able to be dropped within 30" of the first round. The host fired all 5 rounds in 1.5 seconds.
Here is the show clip on YouTube ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfnwyJvtJuI
-
Believe me, I can't make that shot, and I was properly amazed that he was able to...
The Host of the show is an ex-Navy SEAL ... my guess is that he is/was a trained SEAL Sniper.
-
The only difference between .50s is between ground vehicles and aircraft. Aircraft .50s use a 36" barrel versus a 45" barrel on ground vehicles. That equates to something like an extra 100 fps M.V. for the GV .50s.
That said, the F4U does hit harder on average(not at peak) due to the differences in their ammo loads. If you fire all of your guns together, both planes will have 30 seconds of fire. After about 20 seconds the P-51 will run out of ammo on 4 of its guns and be left with only 2 for the remaining 10 seconds. After about 28 seconds the F4U will run out of ammo for 2 of its guns and be left
with 4 guns for the remaining 2 seconds. Over the course of 30 seconds, the F4U will deliver 25% more firepower.
-
Honestly, I don't one has more powerful guns than the other. I think it's just pilot skill, convergance, what you were flying against(Spit, Fw-190, etc.) and what forces were acting on the bullet (if you shoot a guy flying level or in a turn). By the way snipers still fire mil grade .50 BMG ball ammo from their guns and these aircraft are using AP-HE so either way, it's going to do alot of damage.
-
Originally posted by Pyro
The only difference between .50s is between ground vehicles and aircraft. Aircraft .50s use a 36" barrel versus a 45" barrel on ground vehicles. That equates to something like an extra 100 fps M.V. for the GV .50s.
That said, the F4U does hit harder on average(not at peak) due to the differences in their ammo loads. If you fire all of your guns together, both planes will have 30 seconds of fire. After about 20 seconds the P-51 will run out of ammo on 4 of its guns and be left with only 2 for the remaining 10 seconds. After about 28 seconds the F4U will run out of ammo for 2 of its guns and be left
with 4 guns for the remaining 2 seconds. Over the course of 30 seconds, the F4U will deliver 25% more firepower.
Thats for that info Pyro ... can you give me the same info for the FM2 ?
-
Originally posted by SlapShot
Thats for that info Pyro ... can you give me the same info for the FM2 ?
The FM2 has the same number of rounds in all 4 of its guns so lethality remains constant through the entire ammo load when you fire all guns.
Aircraft .50s have a fire rate of 800 rpm. FM2's duration of fire in minutes would be 430/800 = .5375 minutes or 32.25 seconds.
BTW, another difference between the .50s in the aircraft and GVs is rate of fire. The aircraft .50s have a higher rate of fire.
-
Originally posted by Pyro
The FM2 has the same number of rounds in all 4 of its guns so lethality remains constant through the entire ammo load when you fire all guns.
Aircraft .50s have a fire rate of 800 rpm. FM2's duration of fire in minutes would be 430/800 = .5375 minutes or 32.25 seconds.
BTW, another difference between the .50s in the aircraft and GVs is rate of fire. The aircraft .50s have a higher rate of fire.
:aok ... thanks !!!
-
Originally posted by bozon
The F4u had his convergence at a short range for dogfighting. The P51 probably set his to 600 yards to get maximum effect from 500 mph cherry picking...
:D
The distance was about 600 yards, so the P-51 would have had the advantage in that situation...
-
Originally posted by Keiler
Not saying your memory is wrong, but the .50 cal is nowhere near as accurate as 3" at 2000yds. Its more like 2-3' at this range with the best ammo available (if at all) given no wind, no gusts and a gun bolted to half a ton of concrete.
Best regards,
Matt
Actually a .50 cal sniper rifle is vey much that accuarate. It's a sub MOA rifle to start with. A match tuned barrel and match grade ammo make it very accurate. The SR-25 is a .75 MOA or better out of the box. Accuracy under .5 MOA is very possible. A world class sniper could hit a headshot at 2000M with a SR-25....however I'd assume the range is 2200 ft (660 M) which is considered the max effective range for the SR-25 (and similiar weapons) A group in the 1.5-2 in range would be pretty standard for a world class marksman with matchgrade 168 gr ammo.
-
F4U-1<---owns the pony!
:aok
-
accuacy with the SR-25 or similiar is astounding. This is a "blurb"...
"On a bullet-drop-compensating scope, the elevation knob has, as its increment markings, yards or meters . . . not 1/4 MOA markings (for example). To hit a target at 500 meters, just set the elevation knob to "5." To hit a target at 300 meters, just set the elevation knob to "3." The knob has graduations from 1 (for 100 meters) out to 10 (for 1000 meters). If you know the range of the target, you can hit it every time very rapidly. For every different caliber gun on which the scope is used, a standard load has to be used, as well as a properly calibrated elevation knob. The disadvantage to this sort of setup is that the ammunition used has to use a certain projectile fired with a certain muzzle speed. The shooter cannot use any bullet desired which is launched at any speed desired. The Leupold MK-IV M3's 7.62x51 elevation knob is calibrated for 173 grain bullets launched at 2550 fps. The scope came with elevation knobs calibrated for the following cartridges: 5.56x45, .308 Winchester (7.62x51), 30-06 Springfield (7.62x63), and .300 Winchester Magnum (7.62xA whole bunch of millimeters!). If you want to be able to shoot any handload through your weapon, then get the MK-IV M1. All I'm going to shoot through my SR-25 is the Federal Gold Match, so the M3 should work fine (Note: the Federal Gold Match in 7.62x51 uses a 168 grain bullet as opposed to the 173 grain bullet for which the dial is calibrated. This works fine out to 500 yards. It might throw things off at greater distances, in which case I'll just need to pick up some Lake City Match Ammo! Of course, I could just learn how to adjust the scope, accordingly, to compensate)."
I picked the SR-25 since I've shot it. The best ammo for the SR-25 is 168 grain match ammo. Correctly adjusted and calibrated with scope and tripod you can easily hit a coke can at 500 M. You can hit at 1000 if wind conditions are right. The gun is so consistant that its drop (with match ammo) is amazingly consistant. The range I shoot at isnt long enough for measured distance shooting (The NRA nationals are only 600 yd for example) so I have no 1st hand experience at 1000M....but my understanding is site is accurate all the way up to 1000M.
-
Originally posted by humble
Actually a .50 cal sniper rifle is vey much that accuarate. It's a sub MOA rifle to start with. A match tuned barrel and match grade ammo make it very accurate. The SR-25 is a .75 MOA or better out of the box. Accuracy under .5 MOA is very possible. A world class sniper could hit a headshot at 2000M with a SR-25....however I'd assume the range is 2200 ft (660 M) which is considered the max effective range for the SR-25 (and similiar weapons) A group in the 1.5-2 in range would be pretty standard for a world class marksman with matchgrade 168 gr ammo.
I am a sportshot too. I can shoot about 0.5 MOA with very good ammo with my particular rifle in 308, with 168gr SMK. 50 BMG is an entirely different ballpark than 308 though, 300 WinMag etc. With Matchgrade ammo in 50cal and a M82 light fifty it is expected to shoot subMOA, meaning barely below that at any range. At 2000m, thats roughly 23.6" of dispersion. Since the 50cal wont pass the transsonic threshold at this range, one can calculate ballparkwise linearily.
A world class sniper would be absolutely lucky if he hit a head at 2000m with a 308, its simply pure statistics. The 308 passes the transsonic threshold at 800, maximum 1100m for very heavy Matchloads (175gr) and 24" barrels. Within the transsonic area the bullet gets dispersed a lot and loses its initial trajectory, opening up groups considerably. If we take out the case of transsonic behaviour, 0.5 MOA at 2000m means 30cm, thats roughly 11.8". Were talking about human heads? ;)
My best regards,
Matt
[edited for spelling]
-
Originally posted by SlapShot
He got the 3 right ... the goal of the gun is to maintain a 30" group at 2000 yrds which should be maintainable due to it being a sem-auto and employing a new and sophisticated dampening of the recoil.
So, if the first round is on target, then the following 4 rounds should be able to be dropped within 30" of the first round. The host fired all 5 rounds in 1.5 seconds.
Here is the show clip on YouTube ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfnwyJvtJuI
OK - So I can't say for certain that the guy hit the 3" face circle on that man-sized target 2,000 yards out, but you can see that he definitely dropped his target. I am still properly impressed.
EagleDNY
$.02
-
Yeah it was an awesome shot!
Still, there is no way in hell to produce a rifle with a semi-action, rocoil dampener (more moving parts eg more tolerances) and ammunition to "maintain" (btw. that doesnt mean the first round is dead on, and the rest is somewhere inside a 30" circle, it means the rifle must be able to shoot within that 30" with every shot, given perfect conditions) 3" at 2000yds. This would be a true revelation.
The best benchresters are not capable of shooting that kind of precision with 20kg heavy guns firing 6mm PPC at 100m, change out barrels after 100 rounds, clean after each or third shot, handload using micrograin gauges etc.
Simply not possible, as a 100% rule! Statistically spoken its well possible to put a headshot at this distance. But if you only had one round, I wouldnt expect my luck to give me that 10% chance if I hadnt to.
30" at 2000yds is still awesome performance and absolutely top-notch. Remember its not an anti personal rifle primarily eventhough you can use it just for that. Its designed to pick and maim high value targets from long range, with little effort. For example, imagine how much hassle you'd have when a SEAL team or SAS or whoever cripples all the radar noses of enemy jetfighters/radio station or AA-control on the ground. Fighting ability diminished.
Best regards,
Matt
-
True, the 2,000 yard shot was probably the exception and not the rule. Given the damage that the rounds did to the concrete and steel targets at 600 yards (certainly a more realistic engagement range), anybody on the wrong end is definitely in trouble.
-
My 2 cents on the .50 cal m2 ,they are heavy ,pain in the butt to clean and the tracers set range on fire nicely and drive the range NCO nuts there by making the day worthwhile:D (back in the day):aok