Skip to comments.Army snipers get new rifle
Posted on 04/23/2007 5:31:12 PM PDT by mdittmar
U.S. Army snipers in Afghanistan have become the first troops in a combat zone to field a new semiautomatic sniper weapon, military officials said Monday.
Members of Task Force Fury based mainly at Forward Operating Base Salerno have received the XM110 rifle. And while the rifle will not completely replace older sniper rifles such as the M24, it does have some advantages, officials said.
Its semi-automatic, so it allows for rapid re-engagement of targets, Staff Sgt. Jason R. Terry, an Army Sniper School instructor, said in a news release. The older rifles are bolt-action, meaning the shooter must manually feed another cartridge into the firing chamber after each shot.
The XM110s are also fitted with suppressors, a tube that cuts down on muzzle flash and noise.
Terry and other instructors traveled to Afghanistan with the new equipment, then trained snipers in the country on the new rifle. They held a three-day training course, with both class time and range time.
Snipers were also taught how to maintain and repair their weapons, along with perhaps the most important thing: when not to fiddle with something thats broken.
One of the instructors, Kyle P. Gleason, of the Tank Automotive and Armorist Command, emphasized the basics.
Heres your rifle, heres what it can do and heres how you take care of it, he was quoted as saying.
What, no pictures? Calibre? Scope type? IR-capable?
Sure, under the category of wasteful military spending.
If I am not mistaken, it is similar to the SR25, 308 caliber M16 type.
... how about a new target?
Looks like an AR-10 to me:
Ahh beat me to it.
I know jack about sniper rifles, but why would you want a .30 instead of say... .50?
The both military channel and the discovery channel have shown this weapon in the past few months. Impressive. I especially liked the one round that has a sharpened tungsten penetrator inside of a white phosphorus round. It will penetrate armour then burn.
Looks quite capable, but from this perspective I think the flash suppressor needs some enhancement. Love to get hands-on with the scope, though.
I saw a special on this a while ago so I'm fuzzy on the specs.
Ahh, now THAT is a better suppressor! Just did not see it to the side in the previous pictures. Much better.
I’m not a sniper but have been a shooter most of my life. While the range of the .30 is less you can see the weapon weighs only 16 lbs. It’s still very effective up to probably 800 to 1000 meters in the hands of a skilled shooter.
There was one of those modern weapon shows where they were displaying a 416 I think it was. They’d developed a new round that would maintain supersonic speeds for a longer period of time. In the episode they hit a target at 2500 yards in 1 shot...his shot was about 5 or 6 inches below bullseye.
If I had to design a sniper rifle from scratch I’d likely want something which was shooting more like 3300 fps than 2700 and might end up with something in 270 WSM caliber. That 140 gr all copper Barnes bullet in front of something like that would give you a huge ballistic coefficient and let you shoot to just about any sort of distance.
Uh...moles in the backyard. Big ones.
Lighter ammo = more shots for a given weight / space tradeoff, and a .308 has more range and knockdown power at further distances than the .223.
Hmmm. I must have missed that one -to My sorrow. Have to keep a closer eye on it to catch it on the reruns.
I’m wondering about the wisdom of combining a direct impingement rifle with a suppressor. That thing must get filthier than a Tijuana whore house after a few mags have been run through it.
The two new calibers you’re hearing about are the 6.8 Remington and the Alexander Arms 6.5 Grendel; the Grendel is said to pack more of a punch downrange and the main selling point of both is that they can work with existing M16 lower receivers.
As a completely uneducated guess, I’d guess less recoil, easier to suppress/silence.
Buy a cat....
As a completely uneducated guess, I’d guess less recoil, easier to suppress/silence. I honestly don’t know, just want to see if my guess is right.
It is not just distance; you need a round that retains its kinetic energy over a good distance, and also transfer it effectively upon impact. The further a round can maintain those two critical aspects, the better a sniper (or hunting) round it is.
Why do none of these military rifles come in .243?
Um, no thanks Sarge. I think it'd be better if I took one shot and then changed my position just a bit. Taking that "second shot" from the same position stands a good chance of telling the opposition exactly where you are and then they'll probably try to drop a mortar shell or two down on top of you or pin you down by recon fire until they can pinpoint you for termination.
There may be old snipers, and there may be bold snipers, but there are no old, bold snipers.
The folded up legs on the green one look like little rocket launchers. ;-)
That’s called ballistic coefficient. Believe me that 140 gr 270 WSM bullet has a whole lot more of it than any sort of 308.
its ability to hold accuracy, while producing less rip in sound.
oh...and the weight and capacity for rounds as well.
I’d take that picture to bed with me...but my wife would accuse me of cheating...
What you failed to mention was that 2500 yard shot was a “COLD BORE” shot!
They also showed a .50 cal needing 3 shots to get into the “BLACK” area
The russians in the last two decades had developed a 4mm round -or was it 4.25... Anyway, it had great specs; incredibly fast speeds, impossibly flat trajectories for unheard of distances, and good penetration at much further distances than any other standard round. Plus many more rounds could be carried for the same weight, and training could be loosened because it was no longer so important if long bursts were hosed in the general direction of the target without sacrificing the quantity of remaining rounds too quickly.
However... in the real world other problems soon surfaced. Twigs and heavy brush could deflect the rounds, and wind as well. Penetration was affected by things such as the thickness of the uniform worn, and even if the round struck something such as a plastic canteen or a pen for instance, and anything other than a straight-on angle would affect it as well. Not to mention that sometimes there would be a straight-through hit and the target would barely be affected by it, if at all. Plus, fire discipline was spiraling downward as well, after all if every troop was carrying several hundred rounds then why not fire off bursts of ten instead of three? More and more troops were using the 'hose' method of firing instead of the more disciplined Take Careful Aim Before Firing, one- and three- round shots.
I will take the larger, heavier round any day thank you. Hits harder over longer distances, makes a bigger hole when it does, better penetration and knockdown power retained over a greater percentage of its trajectory, and more difficult to become affected by external influences allowing for tighter shots throughout its range.
I’m sorry to hear that BtD...I take it the grenades didn’t then?
Little SOB’s threw ‘em back at me. And napalm’s hard on the petunias.
I saw that episode ... impressive.
bookmark to read later
The point would be to take several quick shots and then relocate. Depending on the din of the area, you are safer taking three shots rapidly than dragging them out.
Of course you would always be safer taking only one shot, but its not always about being safer.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.