Mythbusters re-shoot Hathcock scope shot

Status
Not open for further replies.
All I know, is that I saw them take a .50 BMG rifle and fire it at a target, and it kind of slid back. When two snipers fired in what looks like Afghanistan using the same rifle, I saw body parts flying. The video is out there, and I have seen it. So there's no accounting for what it is that these guys can prove or disprove. I don't think if I got hit with a 50 BMG at the ranges that they fired it at that there would be anything left of me.
Click to expand...

Two issues come to mind:

a) did the MB guys use Raufoss ammo? Ball ammo will do different things to a target (human and otherwise) than Mk 211 with HE filler.

b) Is the video you're talking about the guys varminting prairie dogs with .50 cals out in the Rockies? It's been labeled "50 cal sniper Afghanistan" various places on the internet.
 
A friend of mine was a Marine sniper about the time Hathcock was. He said Hathcock did and my friend's word is good enough for me. He told of long shots by other snipers.Marines teach marksmanship. Byron
 
Is the video you're talking about the guys varminting prairie dogs with .50 cals out in the Rockies? It's been labeled "50 cal sniper Afghanistan" various places on the internet.
Click to expand...

Take a look at all the comments to this video. Proof positive that 99% of the people posting on the internet who portend to know what they are talking about really don't. Trust me, I know what I am talking about.;)

http://www.strategypage.com/military_photos/20056191.aspx
 
Wow. When I saw that link, it was on military.com. Guess I was hoaxed. Or maybe I am hoaxed now. Or maybe the Taliban are sneaking in across the mexican border disguised as woodchucks.

I might need to get a terrorist rifle now.
 
Brain fart

Even if the bullet never made it fully through the scope, if the enemy sniper was looking through his scope at the time the the bullet impacted it, could the scope be pushed back so fast or with so much force that he could have been killed form the blunt trauma?

Just a thought
 
Ive been checking nearly every day for this episode, but havent seen it, maybe I need to check youtube.
Seems pretty obvious that any round even at the reduced impact velocity will be capable of at least occasional penetration of an optic.
 
My gosh. Some of you guys must roll out of bed in the morning, and the first thought through your head must be about how you can't wait to find something to get offended by.

Okay, so the Mythbusters called a Garand an assault rifle. Wow. On one of the only shows on all of TV that isn't anti-gun, they used a term that probably 95% of the country's population would have used and not even thought about. The only people who know the definition of assault weapon are people like us, and face facts, the word has entered common usage whether we like it or not.

So getting back to the fact that it is one of the only shows on TV that isn't blatantly anti-gun, we better insult them, because they don't use the right terminology. The heathens, they called a hammer a lever. Jihad on them!

Well, I don't know what the proper name of the 3/4 of the tools they use on the show are. So I imagine if I called one of their cutoff saws a band saw, then a bunch of posters on a tool webpage would call me names. :rolleyes:
 
:D Good point Correia. :D

I think someone mentioned on a previous thread that the older scopes used by the Vietnamese snipers were not the same thing as what is in use today and might pass a bullet easier.

Also, haven't I read some people talking about bullet stabilization of a 30 caliber bullet doesn't really occur until 50 or 100 yard down range? That the bullet will wobble a little right out of the barrel? I think someone said penetration is sometimes better at a little distance because of that. I could have misread and I am most certainly not repeating it right. :)
 
The first Mythbusters test used a modern scope with
more lenses than the type of scope used by NVA in
the Viet Nam War. As I recall reading about that test,
the bullet got deflected. The Russian sniper scope is
alot simpler than a modern sporting scope: I also
believe the tube is steel which might tend to funnel
bullet frags and broken glass (ouch) more than an
aluminum tubed sporter scope.

If this is a re-test (and Mythbusters does retests if they
get enough complaints with good reasons) perhaps someone
ought to try to find an air date?
 
My thoughts before reading anything beyond the headline in this thread included "downloaded the ammo to simulate the anticipated impact velocity?", because doing it at distance is too hard to get a hit...

Followed the link, now I see they didn't. It's just like the "problem" that M855 ammo won't break up inside the target past [chose your distance, 20- or 14.5-inch barrel?] yards. Lower velocity equals greater penetrative ability once you're below the breakup point...then penetration gradually drops off as velocity continues downward.

I've seen a 16-year old shoot the spindle out of a spotter at 600 yards about 4 or 5 times in one 22-round string*. If Gunny Hathcock took that shot at 400, there's a certain statistical probability that the round will land inside the scope tube, there at the center of the 4- to 6-inch group's ES.

*Unfortunately, the kid was NOT in the X or 10 ring for most of them...
 
Take a typical man-sized sillouette target,
draw a scope-sized ring over one eye,
fire twenty rounds at 300 yds or so.
Odds are, one of the rounds at least will
be through the ring.
 
In war time theres allways alot of propaganda on both sides. Though I still think its possible I would take everything with a skeptical grain of salt.
 
Soap box "on"

If GySgt Hathcock said he did it, that's good enough. No further questions need be asked or so called "myths" to be proved! Honor the man and question not his deeds. Now go in peace my brothers. :D

Soap box "off"
 
Carl N. Brown said:
If this is a re-test (and Mythbusters does retests if they
get enough complaints with good reasons) perhaps someone
ought to try to find an air date?
Click to expand...
Premiere: March 21, 2007
Episode 75: Myths Revisited
Exploding Trombone, Sniper Scope, Finger in the Barrel and Coke and Mentos.

I hope they use the right scope this time...
 
As a regular Highpower shooter and an occasional Long Range shooter I know just how difficult it is to hit something at 1000 yards. I have blown out the spindle of the marking disc, in the X ring, at 600 yards with an AR. I have blown out the spindle at that distance a number of times, but most of those were ten ring shots. I have blown out the spindle a number of times standing at 200 yards. I have hit the marking disc at 1000 yards with a 308, and it was pure luck. I am a terrible long range shooter. I have been squadded a number of times with Wimbleton Cup winners, the Event Carlos Hackcock won, and those people are very accomplished shooters. For those who do not shoot with the best of the best, let me tell you they are very good. Movie stunts are of course better, but when you compete on a regular basis, you get a good idea of what is possible and what is impossible.

I believe that Carlos could have made the shot. I am certain he would have said it was a one of a million, but he was of the quality that he could make one of a million shots. And he was in practice.

I am certain most of you have read this article, of one of our snipers hitting a guy at 1200 yards in Iraq. The shooter took the shot and made it. And states that he could have gone through ammo boxes of ammunition trying to duplicate the shot. Honest man, but he made it. And he was in practice.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/01/01/wirq01.xml

There are people who are always trying to throw down the champions. Maybe they should just accept their mediocrity and deal with it.
 
I believe that Carlos could have made the shot. I am certain he would have said it was a one of a million, but he was of the quality that he could make one of a million shots. And he was in practice.
Click to expand...

Personally, I believe Hathcock made a snap head shot at a partially obscured target based on the scope glare, killing the bad guy and not getting shot in the process. That he was able to do so attests to his very high level of ability as a precision shooter and sniper.

I do not, however, think his specific intent was to shoot the other guy through the scope. A complete miss of the scope that still went into the bad guy's cranium would have been entirely acceptable. Nor do I think he was equipped with a rifle, optics, or ammunition that were capable of the sub-MOA accuracy necessary to produce that kind of accuracy consistently (regardless of his extremely high level of skill at precision shooting).

End of the day, the scope-hit was a one in a million shot that gets talked up more than Hathcock's other accomplishments as a sniper (+/- the .50 cal long range shot) simply because of the novelty issue, but the head shot was rather impressive (and intentional). He apparently wasn't the kind of guy to brag anyway, but I'd suspect he particularly did not brag on that shot because people hearing the story missed the actual feat (very quick, well aimed shot while the other guy was trying to do the exact same thing) and got hung up on (unintended and accidental) "feat" of shooting the other guy through the scope.
 
I believe it happened just as it was written as told by GySgt Hathcock in "Marine Sniper".
He would have had no reason to tell a lie about something like that, heck he endured and survived alot of other crap out there too, killed dozens of others with a skilled eye and he had witnesses to alot of it. I knew him, he was as straight as an arrow, heck I built a rifle for him and knew his son even better as we were teamates on the USMC rifle team, and he is also an upstanding honest and kind person like his dad.
Stranger things have happened!
Best-Mike
Sgt/2112
USMC
 
there's a reason why The Whitefeather's tactics are still taught in advanced marksman schools wether they be police military or civilian schools like the gunsight academy
 
I believe he did it. I saw an interview of him describing the shot. He wasn't bragging that he made the shot at all. He was pointing out that the other guy's scope was sighted in on him and he was just a little quicker with his shot than the other guy.
 
Carlos has had many stories told and some of them made as
they go. All those comments on his character were true. Rifles
made up to commemorate him are not necessary what he used.
His rifle was pretty much a standard Winchester Mod. 70 with a
heavier than standard barrel. I believe the mount was Redfield,
as used on the A4. Scopes were a mis mash of brands and powers
with mostly 10X. No variables at this time. Ammo was 30-06
match that was issued a case at a time. When the case was gone
and new issued, it was resight time. I don't know the time frame
but a Marine that retired from the US Forest Service and resides
in Oregon may hold top gun on confimed targets:) :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

M
  • Locked
Is this a good scope for a CZ 527?
Replies
14
Views
1K
bratch
B
MatthewVanitas
  • Locked
Saiga scope-mount for 1" scope?
Replies
0
Views
355
MatthewVanitas
MatthewVanitas
T
  • Locked
POSP/Dragunov Scope question
Replies
4
Views
495
TheVeteran
T
C
  • Locked
Scope for an AK-which one?
Replies
16
Views
587
Cal-gun Fan
C
D
  • Locked
Kalinka Optics POSP scopes: I am thoroughly pleased.
Replies
7
Views
1K
Deer Hunter
D
Back
Top