SAS sniper 'kills ISIS commander from nearly 1.5 MILES away' in Afghanistan

[cancel2 2022]

A British sniper gunned down a jihadi from almost 1.5miles away in what is reportedly the best long-range shot ever in the SAS. The sergeant killed the Islamic State commander with a .50 Calibre machine gun, shooting him in the chest. The Islamist's arm and shoulder were torn off due to the force of the bullet and he died instantly. The jihadi was on a British and US kill list. A veteran of Iraq and Syria, the sergeant was secretly patrolling a region of northern Afghanistan under Islamic State control.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ILES-away.html

[cancel2 2022]

An incredible feat especially with a Browning machine gun.

[RB 60]

An incredible feat especially with a Browning machine gun.

Yes, without a doubt.
Many gunsmiths use old Browning machine gun barrels to build some extremely accurate long range rifles.

[sear]

Why would an SAS sniper use or even carry a machine gun?

.50 cal is formidable, w/ even armor piercing capability. U.S. Navy S.E.A.L.s may use .50 cal, but bolt action. One shot, one kill. "If you run, you'll only die tired."

PS
In Vietnam some of our troops preferred the AK-47 to their government issue M-16-A1. Our M-16's fired .223 whereas the AK fires a heavier rnd.

This gave our troops afield an advantage. For our troops could carry the same number of rounds, at significantly lighter weight.
Bump that up from .223 to .50 cal, and you get an idea of how difficult it is to lug a .50 cal around.
I've fired the M-60 belt feed. I'm not sure what .50 cal machine gun is referred to here.
But it's reportedly a single shot. So why a machine gun?

And I've never seen a machine gun with a scope.
At 8,000' I'm guessing a scope would be essential.

At a mile and a half a 16" wide human torso is an exceedingly small fraction of one degree of angle. And then of course there's windage and elevation to attend to.

[Micawber]

Does Britannia have its red baron to lionize? Buy war bonds!

[Micawber]

Why would an SAS sniper use or even carry a machine gun?

.50 cal is formidable, w/ even armor piercing capability. U.S. Navy S.E.A.L.s may use .50 cal, but bolt action. One shot, one kill. "If you run, you'll only die tired."

PS
In Vietnam some of our troops preferred the AK-47 to their government issue M-16-A1. Our M-16's fired .223 whereas the AK fires a heavier rnd.

This gave our troops afield an advantage. For our troops could carry the same number of rounds, at significantly lighter weight.
Bump that up from .223 to .50 cal, and you get an idea of how difficult it is to lug a .50 cal around.
I've fired the M-60 belt feed. I'm not sure what .50 cal machine gun is referred to here.
But it's reportedly a single shot. So why a machine gun?

And I've never seen a machine gun with a scope.
At 8,000' I'm guessing a scope would be essential.

At a mile and a half a 16" wide human torso is an exceedingly small fraction of one degree of angle. And then of course there's windage and elevation to attend to.

Nice shot though, and I agree some degree of luck combined with the skill and science are involved in such a shot.
Without a scope you could barely make out the target as a human.

[cancel2 2022]

Why would an SAS sniper use or even carry a machine gun?

.50 cal is formidable, w/ even armor piercing capability. U.S. Navy S.E.A.L.s may use .50 cal, but bolt action. One shot, one kill. "If you run, you'll only die tired."

PS
In Vietnam some of our troops preferred the AK-47 to their government issue M-16-A1. Our M-16's fired .223 whereas the AK fires a heavier rnd.

This gave our troops afield an advantage. For our troops could carry the same number of rounds, at significantly lighter weight.
Bump that up from .223 to .50 cal, and you get an idea of how difficult it is to lug a .50 cal around.
I've fired the M-60 belt feed. I'm not sure what .50 cal machine gun is referred to here.
But it's reportedly a single shot. So why a machine gun?

And I've never seen a machine gun with a scope.
At 8,000' I'm guessing a scope would be essential.

At a mile and a half a 16" wide human torso is an exceedingly small fraction of one degree of angle. And then of course there's windage and elevation to attend to.

You have to overANALyse everything, if you read the article it stated it was a Browning machine gun.

A senior officer stationed at the Joint Special Operations Command HQ in Kabul gave the go-ahead for the kill.

One source told the paper a special sight was fitted on the machine gun and a spotter then estimated wind speed.

[Bigdog]

You have to overANALyse everything, if you read the article it stated it was a Browning machine gun.

He should know that the 7.62 M-60 machine gun has a maximum effective range of 1100 meters, ... more than twice that of the M-16.

And the U.S. has had the 'Barret M107 .50 cal semi-automatic rifle with optional 10 round magazine for more than a decade, IIRC. Because of the accuracy of the .50 call, ... bolt action is no longer a necessity for sniper rifles.

[sear]

"You have to overANALyse everything" HM #7

You define "overANALyse" as critical thinking that exceeds your comfort level?
I'm a scientist. Critical thinking is what we do.

"if you read the article it stated it was a Browning machine gun." HM #7

- I did not read the article.

- I read the lead post, where it is clearly stated: The sergeant killed the Islamic State commander with a .50 Calibre machine gun

I have only a tenuous interest.
But in my limited U.S. military experience generations ago, I never heard of a military sniper using a machine gun. I understand: SAS.

That's fine.
I thought it unusual. Is it not?
What is the quantification? The ratio between military snipers using .50 cal using bolt vs machine?

[Irish]

Awesome shot! Can't believe they can hit that far away.

I noticed no libs liked the OP...? Maybe they are mad ISIS is dying?

[Lesh]

An incredible feat especially with a Browning machine gun.

Carlos Hathcott pioneered that tactic in Vietnam

[Callinectes]

Why would an SAS sniper use or even carry a machine gun?

.50 cal is formidable, w/ even armor piercing capability. U.S. Navy S.E.A.L.s may use .50 cal, but bolt action. One shot, one kill. "If you run, you'll only die tired."

PS
In Vietnam some of our troops preferred the AK-47 to their government issue M-16-A1. Our M-16's fired .223 whereas the AK fires a heavier rnd.

This gave our troops afield an advantage. For our troops could carry the same number of rounds, at significantly lighter weight.
Bump that up from .223 to .50 cal, and you get an idea of how difficult it is to lug a .50 cal around.
I've fired the M-60 belt feed. I'm not sure what .50 cal machine gun is referred to here.
But it's reportedly a single shot. So why a machine gun?

And I've never seen a machine gun with a scope.
At 8,000' I'm guessing a scope would be essential.

At a mile and a half a 16" wide human torso is an exceedingly small fraction of one degree of angle. And then of course there's windage and elevation to attend to.

SHOT2018158.jpg

M2HBSCOPEMOUNT.jpg
This is the new hotness. Back in the day, there used to be a milled dovetail scope mount on top of the receiver. Right below the butterfly trigger is that knurled knob. If you hold down that little paddle between the trigger tabs and turn that knurled knob counter-clockwise, the gun is single shot. Turns that Ma Deuce into just about the flattest shooting, deadliest sniper rifle in the world. But I'm thinking the Sargent probably used something like a Barrett .50 cal sniper rifle which of course fires the same ammo as the .50 cal M2 BMG. Doesn't take away from the skill required to make a shot like that. The SAS are some real badasses

[Callinectes]

A senior officer stationed at the Joint Special Operations Command HQ in Kabul gave the go-ahead for the kill.

One source told the paper a special sight was fitted on the machine gun and a spotter then estimated wind speed.

Didn't see that part. Those guys are REALLY badasses for humping that gun through hell's half acre

[blackascoal]

Big fucking deal.

The 'commander' he killed was replaced by another as soon as he hit the floor .. and the longest war in American history continues as we fight people who ride mules and often live in caves.

[countryboy]

Why would an SAS sniper use or even carry a machine gun?

.50 cal is formidable, w/ even armor piercing capability. U.S. Navy S.E.A.L.s may use .50 cal, but bolt action. One shot, one kill. "If you run, you'll only die tired."

PS
In Vietnam some of our troops preferred the AK-47 to their government issue M-16-A1. Our M-16's fired .223 whereas the AK fires a heavier rnd.

This gave our troops afield an advantage. For our troops could carry the same number of rounds, at significantly lighter weight.
Bump that up from .223 to .50 cal, and you get an idea of how difficult it is to lug a .50 cal around.
I've fired the M-60 belt feed. I'm not sure what .50 cal machine gun is referred to here.
But it's reportedly a single shot. So why a machine gun?

And I've never seen a machine gun with a scope.
At 8,000' I'm guessing a scope would be essential.

At a mile and a half a 16" wide human torso is an exceedingly small fraction of one degree of angle. And then of course there's windage and elevation to attend to.

Is there a point to this verbose word salad? Did you even read the article?