Jump to content

Talk:Sniper

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 62.154.195.115 (talk) at 12:15, 12 September 2011 (→‎1st reference: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Terrorists?

One of the most famous snipers can be found on http://youtube.com/HDsweeneyHD I've never heard of snipers being called by the moniker of "terrorist." If this is so, we should have a citation for it. There's a real trend anymore with calling any form of combat that doesn't involve a face-to-face encounter "terrorism." Snipers do not qualify as terrorists. Unless someone can cite that, I'm taking it out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.171.16.87 (talk) 04:19, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Training

Perhaps a training section can be implemented. At present, snipers are usually trained at in the regular national army, and can then follow extra courses at England (Platton Weapons 3 Sniper Course, or America (Scout Sniper Advanced Course) afterwards. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.246.171.164 (talk) 07:21, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Training isn't just done in America and the UK. You could do a whole article on Countries' sniper schools. -- Esemono (talk) 07:26, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Problem with lead

Hi, thanks for making the change that I suggested earlier, but please don't delete comments from a talk page, especially if you have that warning comment in the article itself. I think there is still a problem with the lede, where it says that a sniper is "usually a highly trained marksman..." A sniper may usually be a highly trained marksman, but he or she is always a highly skilled one. The difference between a sniper and a marksman may not be training in fieldcraft etc., but the fact that snipers kill people and marksmen not necessarily. Have a great day!Jarhed (talk) 07:10, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just rethought that and I may be wrong. An unskilled marksman taking potshots from a covered position is still a sniper. Perhaps the distinction is that snipers shoot people, whereas a highly trained infantryman in a deer stand is just a hunter. In any case, the definition needs to be nailed down without the "usually".Jarhed (talk) 07:14, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Snipers in history

Skirmishers are not snipers. They are light infantry, an entirely different thing. I believe the reference should be removed.JohnC (talk) 10:06, 21 July 2009 (UTC) ''I agree, but the Royal Greenjackets--the first British regiment equipped with rifles were both in the peninsular War —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.40.93.214 (talk) 21:25, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agree that skirmishers are not snipers. In the ACW, snipers were referred to as "sharpshooters". Skirmishers were entirely distinct (though sharpshooters, notably Berdan's Sharpshooters with the Army of the Potomac, were often used as skirmishers...) Well-Read Red (talk) 05:18, 8 May 2010 (UTC)Well-Read Red[reply]
Thank you Well-Read Red. I saw that comment about skirmishers being the term during the ACW and was asking where they got that from when even then it was the sharpshooters who were doing the sniping. - annonymous, 4/5/2011 10:42 PM EST —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.71.215.124 (talk) 02:43, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nick Ranstad

In the Sniper#21st_century section there is this:

United States Army Spc. Nick Ranstad while deployed to Nuristan Province, Afghanistan with the 173rd Airborne, 1-91st Airborne Cavalry "Hatchet" Recon Platoon took out a Taliban target that he and his spotter had been stalking from 2,100 m (2,297 yd). Ranstad's shot is now confirmed as a US Army record for a sniper kill in Afghanistan.[67] Ranstad then provided suppressive fire until air support could move in to eliminate a second target.

But its sourced to a little paper (2000 circulation) the Battle Lake Review Tamke, Jon A. (29 July 2008) "Servicemen" Battle Lake Review (Battle Lake, MN). Doing a google search just brings up forums who have copied the Wikipedia article. Although I did find this. Anyone have anymore info on this guy? You'd thing breaking the American distance record would account for a little more press. -- Esemono (talk) 07:06, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Was this writen by a British person?

I mean come on the "notable individual" section where Patrick Ferguson COULD HAVE shot George washington as tho this should be notable as to any gaurd of washington just thinking of killing him would be admitted LoL Yet American Timothy Murphy actually shot and killed British generals like a duck in a barrel should be noted better and mopre on an American play on sniping since it truly with guns originated from American during the revolutionary war. ChesterTheWorm (talk) 23:33, 23 May 2010 (UTC) ChesterTheWorm[reply]


Pictures

Man, look at all those photos of United States snipers littering the page. You'd think the subject is exclusively American or something... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.57.78.255 (talk) 04:05, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sniper masks in WW I?

I just recently saw an episode of Boardwalk Empire showing a German sniper mask made out of steel. Information on this seems to be hard to find in general. Has anyone details on this aspect of historical sniping?--79.230.13.139 (talk) 12:09, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. I have the The German Sniper, 1914-1945 by Peter Senich which has photos and drawings of various masks/face-coverings, hides, metal shields etc. Its heavily illustrated and also includes a good section on Soviet snipers. Here is a photo of a German steel mask. Here is a British sniper's version. Take a look at this page showing some.
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 14:13, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sniper#Longest_recorded_sniper_kills

User:Francis Flinch, Why did you just essentially revert my contribution, but tried to make it like you didn't? Instead of editing you just copied in exactly your old paragraphs one by one, in three edits, with no reasoning. Are my data wrong? Are my wording inferior?

Calculation-wise, QTU Lapua, as offered by Lapua themselves, uses the more accurate model when Lapua bullets are used. You can load the drag curve for the specific bullet, as measured by doppler in real life, instead of approximating using BCs on the G1 model and a bunch of velocity thresholds.

I also took the care of pulling up the climate history for the region (closest station with records being Kandahar) for the 11/2009 month to take a closer average, including averaging barometric pressure and humidity by hand, to provide the "30.1 inHg (102 kPa), humidity: 25.9%, and temperature: 15 °C (59 °F)", instead of simply using ICAO. The pressures are significantly different.

Wording-wise, this isn't external ballistics, it's a public consumption article. There is no reason to "illustrate how environmental condition differences can significantly affect bullet flight", and even if you did it makes no sense to simply offer a comparison between sea-level and 1,043 m. Why would that be particular relevant to this record?

This is why I offered the most basic information first that would be interesting to the general reader: travel time, drop (in distance and in degrees instead of MOA, any ballistics enthusiast can multiply by 60, but the general reader doesn't know to divide by 60), and possible wind offset, because it illustrates the distance and also ties in with the next part of the article. I left all the other numbers used to arrive at those in the back, instead of scattering them everywhere.

-- Znode (talk) 20:40, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I checked the numbers and it did turn out that I forgot to compensate for on-site barometric pressure from weather stations' sea-level-equivalent. 101930.29887 * ((1 - (2.25577 * (10^(-5)) * 1043))^5.25588) = 89940.8865 Pa on location, and moist-air ρ is back to 1.0854 kg/m3 (1.0821 air, 0.0033 H2O) which is much closer to your value of 1.069 kg/m3. My original value of 1.2336 definitely didn't make any sense since it was higher than sea-level. Travel time is back to 6.0 sec (well, 5.957) If that was the reason you reverted, I apologize. -- Znode (talk) 21:46, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Refer to Talk:Sniper/Musa_Qala_calculation -- Znode (talk) 22:07, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dubious photo inclusion: Marksman in Afghanistan.jpg

Why is a guy holding an m4 carbine considered a "Sniper"? Everything illustrated goes against the definition provided by the article.

In fact, that photo and this photo are a perfect comparison between sniper activity (the later) and regular troop activity. Stay across the room from the window to conceal the muzzle flash, use an actual distance weapon, etc.

74.83.16.252 (talk) 14:10, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sniping - the facebook version.

Sniping is the act of 'firing' off a comment into other peoples fb conversations. Invented by Dave Cowell in 2011, it has become the latest online craze. The object of the game is to be the first to 'snipe' a post by commenting with only the word snipe. It is also considered a bonus if you get multiple snipes at the same time on one of your own posts. It was one of the early events that led to Dave Cowell becoming a household name around the world. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.169.234.240 (talk) 12:51, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Operating in Pairs, WWI

"Both British and German sniper teams operated in pairs, with one sniper and one spotter." Pegler (Osprey, 2004) claims that the German snipers only operated as individuals during this conflict.

1st reference

The first reference to snipers is the Boer-War. But in the 18th century the German army trained individual soldiers, which were recruited from hunter´s or ranger´s familys, into "Schützenbattalione". Great Britain even used them as mercenarys (even equipped with a special rifle for sniping) in the American-Revolutionary-War against the settlers. The experience they gained with the German mercenarys led to the establishment of the first Britsh school to train marksmanship over long ranges.