Some news sources (CNN mostly) seem to want to make an issue about the shooter making calculations to zero in on people. As though this made him an elite sniper or something.
But he was shooting an AR-15 from 100 yards up, and maybe 100 yards away. These are trivial distances for aiming an AR, typically sighted in at 100 yards anyway. There are no calculations needed for such distances unless you are a target shooter, shooting at a distance different then your sight-in distance and trying for the X ring.
And the bullet drop at 100 yards would be cancelled out by the bullet rise due to shooting off the horizontal.
Not to mention, he was shooting at full auto. Heck, using a bump fire stock to shoot full auto, with even less control then “real” full auto.
OK, further than I thought looking at the sketches, thanks. Checking an actual layout, it was 400 yards from the hotel to the stage, and 100 yards up, total shooting distance of 415 yards. Now the sight-in distance makes more of a difference.
I mentioned 100 yards because that is what I sighted at, but it looks like 50 yards is the more popular sight-in distance for an AR, since that gives nearly point blank hits out to 300 yards. He was shooting at 100 yards more, but elevated, so some cancelling out.
Even if he sighted at 100 yards and did not correct, that just means if he targeted a head shot, he hit in the chest. And then factor in the full auto into a crowd of 20,000 people, using an Aim Point sight with a red dot as large as a person at 400 yards, I think he was just plain shooting, not precision aiming through calculations.
Nitpick: I think you mean “accurate”. Point blank is in your face.
I don’t know much about .223, but it wouldn’t be flat. Using Hornady’s calculator, I figure it would’ve dropped 9.3 inches at 300 yards and 24.4" at 400. Almost 50" @ 500. At that shorter range, easy to compensate for. Though aside from actually adjusting the dials, some scope reticles have gradations to compensate for ranges.
Shooting downhill (downbuilding) or uphill is considerably more difficult than straight. Again, a learned skill.
And as for the article, every rifle hunter should be checking their sight-in before every hunting season. To not do so is irresponsible. It’s not “elite” in any manner of speaking.
It will be interesting to see how this shakes out. Since the calculations and the elevated firing distances have gotten press, I hope the forensic experts test the rifles to see if they were actually corrected for the range and ammunition used. And I hope they eventually publish a photo of the hand written calculations.
But I shot high power rifle for several years, and never heard of anyone actually making “calculations” the way I think of it. We just used trajectory tables. Like these:
Or even simpler, what we called our “come-ups”. Sight in at 200 yards, come up 4 clicks for 300, 11 more clicks for 600, etc. We all knew our come-ups, typically written in our log books for different ammo. That way if you lose track while making an adjustment, you just cranked the sight all the way down, and re-did the come-ups. You don’t even need to look at anything, just count clicks.
Heck, I’m not even sure how to actually do a calculation, it is quite complex. To use the tables, you need to know your zero yardage, the ammunition used, and then just look it up in the tables. So I guess his “calculations” could be just hand written versions of the tables with correction needed at the various yardages he was contemplating. He would only need to write down a few numbers: 400 yards = 20 clicks or whatever.
I am not sure about that. I am not curious about it enough to do any serious research but what we were taught is that Point Blank/Point Blanc is whatever range your guns are sighted for. In aircraft is was the point at which the guns from each wing overlapped/met inside a circle of a given diameter.
Yeah – everyone uses it as you do. I’m just not sure everyone is right. In my family we still tend to ask, when being handed a rifle, “What’s Point Blank on this one – 50 or 100”?
I’m not going to say that your usage of “point blank” is wrong per se, just that it might lead to confusion.
Some people (read: precision shooting nerds who spend 6 hours at the range making 5 shots) use “dope cards” to list the effect of certain. E.g this tool for Burris scopes which asks the elevation and temperature, if you want to get really specific. Sounds like similar to what you did. Sometimes the printed card is taped to the side of the stock for quick reference.
There are apps that measure all this stuff (e.g. Strelok)
Some manufacturers (e.g. Leupold) let you get a custom turret for your scope that is made for both your rifle and a specific bullet, whether brand or reloaded specification. These simplify the adjustments, but of course may not apply to other bullets, even if they are the same brand but different shape etc.
The few times I’ve gone big game hunting we sighted in for 200 yards. So 100 was mostly the same, 300 minimal adjustment (or if not compensated for, still within minute of animal).
I wouldn’t assume that anything a homicidal lunatic did necessarily makes any sense.
In an interview with an officer who examined the note at the scene he said that there were no calculations. The results of the calculations were all that were written on the paper and he probably did the actual calculations online.
But since I got curious I did a Google and got a couple pretty close
For those who don’t want to read the full thing
“Point-blank range is any distance over which the trajectory of a given projectile fired from a given weapon remains sufficiently flat that one can strike a target by firing at it directly. Point-blank range will vary by a weapon’s external ballistics characteristics and target chosen. A weapon with a flatter trajectory will permit a longer maximum point-blank range for a given target size, while a larger target will allow a longer point-blank range for a given weapon.”
Different from how the kinfolk use it but close enough for government work.
I think what you’re talking about is what I would call Maximum Point Blank Range which is basically the distance that upward change in the bullet height equals downward change. Basically, my 308 is sighted in to be 4" high at 100 yds with my 150 grain round which at 300 yards it will be 5" low. So at anything inside 280 yards, all I have to do is aim at the middle of what I want to shoot and I’ll end up within 4" of the bullseye.
For people who do crazy long distance stuff, I’ve heard you need to start accounting for the rotation of the earth on top of windage and elevation corrections. 400 yds isn’t in that range and considering this guy couldn’t have been even aiming too much I’d bet his calculation was just pulling out his range finder and then adjusting his zero.
I use it yet a third way - the distance where you don’t need to make sight or lead adjustments at all and still have a very good chance of hitting something. That last criteria means that point blank range for a pistol is shorter than on a rifle.
