Another 5 bite the dust

[lancslad]

Heard on the news this morning that a british operator took out 5 insurgents that were about to trigger an ambush on our lads.

 

Shooting 5 of them in 28 seconds.....................................

 

Good lad...........

[lancslad]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12...o=feeds-newsxml

 

 

link to the article....

[brown dog]

Outstanding.

 

 

Think the rules for McQueen's might need to be updated.

[lancslad]

Infact;.................just wondering.........

 

whats the mag capacity on these...........Im thinking 10 rounds.............

 

Ok..............to get 9 rounds off...........till he drops the first target...........Im thinking 1 second to reload..........................thats 9 seconds............

 

Breathe in....................breathe out........hold...............2..................seconds...............thats 18..............to give time to stabilize and shoot again.

 

 

9 plus 18 makes 27.......................

 

and the other 4 dropped within............................

 

 

0h.........and that doesnt inlcude a mag change...........

[brown dog]

LL,

 

I noticed the similar news story on the recent 'longest shot' getting all sorts of questioning on other sites. I just want to point out that these stories are not from the horses mouth, they are from journalists.

 

Journalists, the bulk of whom are trained in the liberal arts, sip cappucinos in Camden and whose most dangerous experience is sharpening a pencil. They likely know chuff all about shooting or military ops.

 

Now, I will say, this account sound thoroughly possible. I'm reading it differently to you. 9 shots to get on; then after that 4 dropped in 28 seconds. If you've shot at a mile, you'll know that the '9 to get on' rings very true.

 

What I think is really uncool is for shooting geeks -most of whom on the American sites are probably individuals who have never crossed their state line nor could point to Afghanistan on a map, to denigrate the stories from the comfort of their armchairs.

 

(I notice you've also fallen into the US tacticool-speak of calling him an 'operator' he isn't an operator, he's a 'rifleman' or 'soldier' )

 

I'm on decaff now ...

[provarmint]

LL,

 

I noticed the similar news story on the recent 'longest shot' getting all sorts of questioning on other sites. I just want to point out that these stories are not from the horses mouth, they are from journalists.

 

Journalists, the bulk of whom are trained in the liberal arts, sip cappucinos in Camden and whose most dangerous experience is sharpening a pencil. They likely know chuff all about shooting or military ops.

 

Now, I will say, this account sound thoroughly possible. I'm reading it differently to you. 9 shots to get on; then after that 4 dropped in 28 seconds. If you've shot at a mile, you'll know that the '9 to get on' rings very true.

 

What I think is really uncool is for shooting geeks -most of whom on the American sites are probably individuals who have never crossed their state line nor could point to Afghanistan on a map, to denigrate the stories from the comfort of their armchairs.

 

(I notice you've also fallen into the US tacticool-speak of calling him an 'operator' he isn't an operator, he's a 'rifleman' or 'soldier' )

 

I'm on decaff now ...

 

brown dog,

That about answers my PM.

[Barrelsniffer]

LL,

 

I noticed the similar news story on the recent 'longest shot' getting all sorts of questioning on other sites. I just want to point out that these stories are not from the horses mouth, they are from journalists.

 

Journalists, the bulk of whom are trained in the liberal arts, sip cappucinos in Camden and whose most dangerous experience is sharpening a pencil. They likely know chuff all about shooting or military ops.

 

Now, I will say, this account sounds thoroughly possible. I'm reading it differently to you. 9 shots to get on; then after that 4 dropped in 28 seconds. If you've shot at a mile, you'll know that the '9 to get on' rings very true.

 

What I think is really uncool is for shooting geeks -most of whom on the American sites are probably individuals who have never crossed their state line nor could point to Afghanistan on a map, to denigrate the stories from the comfort of their armchairs.

 

(I notice you've also fallen into the US tacticool-speak of calling him an 'operator' he isn't an operator, he's a 'rifleman' or 'soldier' )

 

I'm on decaff now ...

 

 

As Matt says i personally dont believe much that i hear in the papers unless its from the horses mouth or someone who was there and as ive been in iraq and afghan since 2004 i have heard alsorts...about guys doing this and that....and where does it all come from ?

 

Journalists who are in the safe haven of the green zone..they hear of a particular incident and before you know it some guy did a rambo and took on all the insurgents all on his own.

Even hear of guys in my line of work with amazing stories...

 

But dont get me wrong it is " do " able..and there was one not so long ago that was all over the papers about some shot from a sniper which when asked the guy who suppose to of taken it..he said wasnt true, he said something to a journalist who then made it bigger.than what it actually was.all for a laugh same guy said he had been shot through his helmet...when infact he did it with his mates on the range..again the journalist put what would be a good story.

 

There are good and brave actions being taken when iraq was on going and now in afghan and i take my hat of to them...but most you wont hear about...unless granted by there CO.

 

As for journalists better steered clear...as we do.

Mick

[lancslad]

LL,

 

(I notice you've also fallen into the US tacticool-speak of calling him an 'operator' he isn't an operator, he's a 'rifleman' or 'soldier' )

 

I'm on decaff now ...

 

 

 

Yeh, but its all Gucci BD.........lol

[brown dog]

From the Hide (with regard to the long shot 'record'). Not exactly a nailed-on int source; but rather underlines what I meant:

 

Mike504

Sergeant

 

Registered: 31-05-2004

Posts: 363

Loc: Ft. Lewis, WA

All,

 

I'm in southern Afghanistan; I saw a post about this incident on another forum and asked my S-2 NCO to see what he could find out on it. He was able to pull up the patrol report for the incident in question from a database.

 

The location is correct, the shooter is correct, the weapon is correct, the basic outline of the story is correct. The report says absolutely nothing about making the 2 kills with only two shots, or about disabling the machine gun. The 2 kills are verified, as well as the location of the shooter and the location of the kills. There is quite likely a lot of exaggeration in the media stories( the report doesn't say how many rounds the sniper fired, he may have fired half his basic load for all we know at this point), but that the sniper made 2 kills at that range appears to be fact.

 

Mike