What is a "ballistic loophole"?


PDA






IMtheNRA
December 5, 2012, 05:09 PM
I've seen fleeting references to this term in rifle forums, but I can't find much info on "ballistic loophole" and it's application in precision shooting. I guess it is related to calculating indirect fire, but I'd like to learn more about the term's current meaning and applications.

If you enjoyed reading about "What is a "ballistic loophole"?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
JAV8000
December 5, 2012, 05:24 PM
This topic concerns US military OPSEC and I would be happy if you left it be. You can find many other places on the Internet that run their mouths on this subject, but I should hope THR isn't one if them. I mean no offense, and in all honesty this topic has been fairly wrung out due to the Information Age, but maintaining OPSEC is my responsibility as a soldier. You cannot make a habit of something unless you practice it under all circumstances.

1858
December 5, 2012, 05:44 PM
This topic concerns US military OPSEC and I would be happy if you left it be.

A few months ago I saw a program on the History channel about military snipers and there was a segment in which the AMU were setting up and using ballistic loopholes. How secret can this stuff be. It's basic math for goodness sake!!

rcmodel
December 5, 2012, 05:47 PM
Think shooting from concealment from inside or behind a structure through a hole in the wall, and you pretty much got it.

It really has nothing to do with ballistics, as long as the hole is big enough to get the elevation necessary to hit the target through the hole.

There.
I hope we didn't give away too many military secrets or classified sniper information!

But the first American solder to use it was probably shooting from behind a rock fence at Lexington or Concord.

rc

JAV8000
December 5, 2012, 05:53 PM
The equation is "secret". As I stated, due to the Information Age, it's fairly wrung out. Putting it to use is the truly difficult part, and can be dangerous to the hack operator and anyone who fancies themselves as the hack observer. Regardless of how you feel about its proliferation out there, your country would appreciate you leaving it be.

JAV8000
December 5, 2012, 05:55 PM
Hooah.

snakeman
December 5, 2012, 06:20 PM
Let's not get into the government talk guys. The thread will be closed and no one else will get to chime in. He's asking a question about something to do with guns. That's part of being on the THR why take it so personally? It's just a simple question to a firearm related term.

JAV8000
December 5, 2012, 06:48 PM
Sorry, I get paid to deal with and spit out "government talk". This isn't fully firearm related, it's mostly training related.…specifically training to kill people. I'm sorry, but I don't think you'll find need for this while deer hunting.

Fishbed77
December 5, 2012, 06:57 PM
It's not rocket science and it's not some big government secret. It's common sense based on line-of-sight. Maybe there's a formula that maximizes the relationship between range, field-of-view, flexibility, and concealment. Maybe not.

Basically, you place the shooter deep in the interior of a room to conceal his position. The shooter looks and shoots out through a small hole or window. Considering the range of some sniper shots (even urban) the small hole can still give the shooter a wide field of view.

This frees the shooter from having to remain motionless (he's invisible through a small hole in the wall to a darkened toom), and makes the shot and report harder to trace.

Andrew Wyatt
December 5, 2012, 06:59 PM
I'm going to guess that a ballistic loophole is a hole in a structure which is in between you and your target that is sized and located such that your projectile travels through the hole. It's likely mostly used when firing inside structures. The main benefit is probably that it allows a room inside the structure to be used as a giant flash hider/suppressor.

snakeman
December 5, 2012, 07:04 PM
Jav, maybe people just want to try it at steel plates for a fun, new challenge. If you don't want to talk about it, then don't. Nobody's pushing you here.

Skribs
December 5, 2012, 07:10 PM
This sounds like info I've seen in a lot of movies, just without the term "ballistic loophole", that snipers shoot from inside cover instead of poking their gun outside of it.

JAV8000
December 5, 2012, 07:14 PM
Don't shoot the wall guys.

Andrew Wyatt
December 5, 2012, 07:14 PM
it's kind of hilarious that the formula for this is secret, because it's simple geometry.


You need to figure out what the zero for the shot is, figure out the height above bore, and figure out the difference between POA/POI at the loophole plane. you need to make the bottom of the hole lower(or higher if the POI is higher) than the POI for the loophole plane (so you don't hit the wall) , and higher (or lower if the POA is lower) than the POA(so you can see your target).

The first time I have heard the term ballistic loophole was about 20 minutes ago.

Revoliver
December 5, 2012, 07:18 PM
Jeehmehtree? You mean like that movie Life of Pi right?

Sam1911
December 5, 2012, 07:37 PM
[MOD TALK: Knock off the insults, guys. (Posts deleted.) If it's related to shooting, it's on-topic for THR. There is no "OPSEC" involved in basic geometry or shooting techniques, as far as we're concerned. If you're active military and feel you can't talk about this -- DON'T. Thank you.]

IMtheNRA
December 5, 2012, 07:42 PM
I'm sorry, but I don't think you'll find need for this while deer hunting.

:rolleyes: Well then, I guess we can do away with about 99.99% of THR and save a lot of time and all that typing...

MtnCreek
December 5, 2012, 07:43 PM
Ballistic Apps. Now everyone can be a ‘sniper’. :)

allaroundhunter
December 5, 2012, 07:45 PM
it's kind of hilarious that the formula for this is secret, because it's simple geometry

More trigonometry, but same thing, right ;)


The "classified" part is how to make it as small as physically possible. Yes, we can all make a hole in a piece of cover and shoot through it, and we can even use mathematics to make it pretty small; but none of us are going to go through the trouble to determine the formula to make it as small as possible.

Sam1911
December 5, 2012, 07:46 PM
I'm sorry, but I don't think you'll find need for this while deer hunting.Well then, I guess we can do away with about 99.99% of THR and save a lot of time and all that typing...

Indeed. The 2nd Amendment is not about hunting, and THR is not primarily a hunting site.

holdencm9
December 5, 2012, 08:31 PM
Yeah it is pretty straightforward, and I have seen various shows that show it, so it can't be too secret. Also, anyone who has ever played paintball understands the concept. It is one of those things that is easy in concept, but VERY hard in application.

If you are inside a structure during the day, it is pretty hard to see you in there, especially through a small hole. The "dynamic range" of the human eye is incapable of seeing both at the same time.

So then, shooting through a hole, the closer you are to it, the less cover you have (that is, the precise angle at which a bullet fired AT you and hit you is much smaller). The farther from the hole, the more cover you will have, but the field of view through that hole will be less. You can move around to see different things, but you can't see much all at once.

To get even more crazy/advanced...At first you might think that the hole needs to be at least 2" high in order to see through it with the scope AND shoot through it, but that is not necessarily the case. As we know, the bullet must be on the rise as it leaves the muzzle, which results in a close zero, and a far zero. So for instance, you might be zeroed at 25 yards and then again at 250 yards, depending on cartridge and scope-to-bore axis distance. If things time out right, you could theoretically view a target and shoot through a hole hardly large than the bullet diameter, and hit your target. Of course, the shorter distance from sight axis to bore axis helps.

k_dawg
December 5, 2012, 08:35 PM
Sorry, I get paid to deal with and spit out "government talk". This isn't fully firearm related, it's mostly training related.…specifically training to kill people. I'm sorry, but I don't think you'll find need for this while deer hunting.

I learn and train for many things which have nothing to do with deer hunting.

btw: commenting that something is OpSec itself is breaking OpSec. The proper response, if you can not avoid a response is "No Comment".

lefteyedom
December 5, 2012, 08:50 PM
I'm sorry, but I don't think you'll find need for this while deer hunting.

This shooting deer from a blind is using the same principle.

Any type of successful "brush shot" is in fact shooting through an opening.

JAV8000
December 5, 2012, 09:16 PM
So salty…

I guess I've forgotten what it's like to question or just generally disregard what I've been told. It's your civic duty as citizens of this nation I suppose.

IMtheNRA
December 5, 2012, 09:29 PM
So salty…

I guess I've forgotten what it's like to question or just generally disregard what I've been told. It's your civic duty as citizens of this nation I suppose.


Oh, for God's sake, dude, get over yourself! Your sanctimony is trivializing "OpSec" itself. I did not ask for some "secret formula", I just wanted to confirm my understanding of the term, which I heard from an actual Army sniper on a Discovery Channel show, of all places! The term "Loophole" appears 28 times in the sniper field manual, which is posted all over the net, for example:

http://preterhuman.net/texts/wars_and_weapons/US_Military_Field_Manual-Sniper_Training.pdf

And it begins with this: "All source material contained in the reproduced document has been
approved for public release and unlimited distribution by an agency
of the US Government. Any US Government markings in this
reproduction that indicate limited distribution or classified material
have been superseded by downgrading instructions that were
promulgated by an agency of the US government after the original
publication of the document."

:banghead:

Nico Testosteros
December 5, 2012, 09:36 PM
Remember, the Arabs invented algebra. Math isn't beyond our current adversaries. Heck, they're able to hack our drones and land em,

R.W.Dale
December 5, 2012, 09:37 PM
So basically its the modern interpretation of the mideval arrow slit?

Some secret




posted via that mobile app with the sig lines everyone complaints about

rcmodel
December 5, 2012, 09:39 PM
1st infantry division Ft. Riley KansasI shot with 5th. Army AMU at Ft Riley in 1968 - 1970.
Our rifle team members were snipers in Vietnam when they weren't at fort Riley shooting matches.

We knew what a hole in cover was then, but it wasn't classified, and it didn't take a smart phone app to figure out how big it needed to be.

I think you are taking your Spook Training far too seriously!

Hooah.HooRah ?? WhoHa? Hookah?

I thought thats what Marines screamed at each other because of their limited vocabulary after getting hit in the head one too many times?

Is the Army doing it now too?

rc

68wj
December 5, 2012, 10:01 PM
HooRah ?? WhoHa? Hookah?

I thought thats what Marines screamed at each other because of their limited vocabulary after getting hit in the head one too many times?

Is the Army doing it now too?

rc
Oorah= Marines, Hooah= Army, both have been hit in the head too many times. Oh wait, did I break OpSec? :what:

JAV8000
December 5, 2012, 10:09 PM
HUA: Heard, Understood, Aknowledged

Spelled pheneticly as "Hooah".

Ya, I have been hit on the head a few times, cuncussed actually. IEDs are a drag man.

guntech59
December 5, 2012, 10:09 PM
Sorry, I get paid to deal with and spit out "government talk". This isn't fully firearm related, it's mostly training related.…specifically training to kill people. I'm sorry, but I don't think you'll find need for this while deer hunting.
Really? I think you need to get over it. This topic has nothing to do with OPSEC.

Just because you're in the Army does not make everything you do top secret. :rolls eyes:

taliv
December 5, 2012, 10:11 PM
guys the information is relatively sensitive. other forums have reportedly been asked not to discuss it. you know, it wasn't too many years ago that most gun people thought they would be prosecuted for discussing how to make a machine gun.

no, it's not rocket science, but there is a little more to it than "a hole in cover".

i'm not going to stop people from talking about it, because i wish every American was competent with a rifle. But you should probably check yourself before ridiculing a service man for being conservative about opsec.

JAV8000
December 5, 2012, 10:16 PM
I was very specifically instructed NOT to Share said information. I'm sorry that's not satisfactory for you all to hear, but I'm surprised no one has posted the equation if its so not secret (not top secret).

guntech59
December 5, 2012, 10:17 PM
All due respect, but the theory and practice is spelled out in unclassified training manuals.

This has NOTHING to due with OPSEC.

JAV8000
December 5, 2012, 10:18 PM
Taliv, thank you sir.

USSR
December 5, 2012, 10:19 PM
taliv,

And we know he's a serviceman because he "says" he is? IMHO, he's acting more like a troll than a serviceman. Just saying...

Don

1858
December 5, 2012, 10:24 PM
but I'm surprised no one has posted the equation if its so not secret

Maybe because it's a formula.

allaroundhunter
December 5, 2012, 10:24 PM
All due respect, but the theory and practice is spelled out in unclassified training manuals.

The theory *might* be, but the formula most definitely isn't.

bigfatdave
December 5, 2012, 10:33 PM
I was very specifically instructed NOT to Share said information. I'm sorry that's not satisfactory for you all to hear, but I'm surprised no one has posted the equation if its so not secret (not top secret).
Drawing attention to that is either amazingly bad application of the concept of OpSec or a simple cry for personal attention.

JAV8000
December 5, 2012, 10:33 PM
This is hopeless. My bad, it's a formula and not an equation, you're correct, guess I'm just an idiot infantryman with a GT score of 125 and a PT score of 290. I'm in sniper section, though I have yet to get my 11B4…this march. I take this job very seriously, I'm sorry this amuses some of you folk. I'm humbled by the men I have training me to shoot. When I'm at the school house I'll be being trained to shoot by some of the best tactical precision direct fire minds in the world.

JAV8000
December 5, 2012, 10:36 PM
Yes, Guntech 59, please post an unclassified reference of the formula…wow

AethelstanAegen
December 5, 2012, 10:53 PM
JAV8000, if you feel something is compromising OPSEC the absolute last thing you should do is mention that to the public. That in itself draws attention to the subject matter and only gets people talking more. If you noticed a fellow service member spouting off classified information then by all means you should bring that up with a superior who can pass if up the chain and potentially plug the leak/assess the damage caused by the breach.

All you've accomplished in this thread is to get a lot more people who would have probably passed by the thread interested because they want to learn the "super tactical secret that JAV8000 got so bothered about." It would have been much, much better to not say anything at all. Quit before the thread spirals even more and just let it die out as it would have probably done before you said anything.

Drawing attention to that is either amazingly bad application of the concept of OpSec or a simple cry for personal attention.
+1

HOOfan_1
December 5, 2012, 10:58 PM
btw: commenting that something is OpSec itself is breaking OpSec. The proper response, if you can not avoid a response is "No Comment".

First rule of OPSEC, don't talk about OPSEC

Yeah History channel did have a segment on this.

In reality isn't a window just a really big "ballistic loophole" anyway.

guys the information is relatively sensitive. other forums have reportedly been asked not to discuss it. =


Oh I am sure that people who obtained the information through their job with clearance and have a duty not to release the information are asked not to talk about it on forums.

No one asked for the formula here though. The original question was "what is it?"

If a person worked the formula out on their own and has never been sworn to secrecy, then asking people not to talk about it would be censorship.

jerinco
December 5, 2012, 11:03 PM
JAV8000

first off thank you for your service. i mean that.

second, no offence but i think you drew more attention to the topic than if you would have said nothing. i understand where your coming from. i still get asked questions from time to time about the m1 tank. ive been on a few different models. its usually after some sort of documenty on tv.

on a side note my dad taught something about this on my first hunt. we saw a deer from our stand he aimed, shot and blew a 3" limb apart just 1ft in front of his barrel. said he didnt see the limb through his scope. at the time i was like:what:

If you enjoyed reading about "What is a "ballistic loophole"?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!