I have a good friend ex-CRPF who served in Op Black Thunder as a sniper. He claims to have used a heavily modified .303 whith scope but of course at short distances <300 meters. He is now a personnel manager with a pvt. firm in Madras. Claims that negotiating with unions is a lot tougher than sniping!
The following is one of the participating Rangers e-mail messages at the aforementioned PBS web site. This is the last message I will post about the subject. - TJ<P><BR>KENI THOMAS: I first want to reiterate to all my friends [at FRONTLINE and Invision], and, yes, I do consider them friends, just how grateful all of us are that you gave us the opportunity to tell the story. I know from all the letters that many Americans were touched and moved by your presentation. I too have been deeply moved by the overwhelming letters of support and gratitude.... You have helped the healing process and lent to us a sense of validity and added pride in our small piece of history. <P>Next I was asked if there was anything I would want to add to the story. I want to ensure that people know the heroic events that took place at the second crash site. Because of classified information and unit sensitivity very little has been told about SFC Randy Shugart and MSG Gary Gordon, the two Delta operators who roped down to aid CWO Michael Durant and his crew. <P>With nothing but the weapons on their backs the two men roped down and raced through a barrage of fire from the oncoming Somali militia. They made their way to the crash site through a maze of shacks and fought off the overwhelming numbers until their ammunition ran out. When Shugart was finally killed, Gordon grabbed a rifle with his last five rounds of ammunition and handed them to Durant, the only survivor, and said "Good luck." Gordon stepped back out from the wreckage and resumed the fight, armed only with a pistol, until he too was killed. Durant was captured and held hostage for 11 days. But he was alive.<P>Gordon and Shugart were both awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor for their actions that day. These men will be remembered.<P>
hi, <P>I am not aware of the alternate designations for an earlier attempt to recover the temple complex by CRPF and BSF personnel. This attempt was aborted as it was clear that the terrorists were well entrenched. <P>This is sometimes referred to as Black Thunder I. The subsequent operation was carried out by NSG and other SFs and is referred to as Black Thunder II. <P>Perhaps Pennathur's acquantance can tell us more. <BR>
From the discussion here it seems that in keeping with its image, the Indian army does not have any systematic doctrine for snipers and for marksmen. This is compounded by the fact that DRDO-OFB combine does not manufacture any sniper rifles. <P>This is not really astonishing for a army which was facing automatic AK rifles in the hands of insurgents since fifties but initially stuck to bolt action then went to SLR rather than learning from US experience in Vietnam.<P>Also the lack of sniper rifle manufacturing facility on the basis that it is not cost effective is misplaced. The cost has to be seen in the context of the fact that even CIS equipment is no longer available at friendship prices and also we are unable to fulfill the requirement of the immediate neighbors who look to our enemies and other foreign suppliers to fulfill these needs. <P>Additionally the development of INSAS & sporting rifles; license manufacturing facility of L1A1 (Isapore 7.62mm) & G Mag in combination with flexible production lines set up for the same, would provide adequate base to develop and manufacture of an “adequate” sniper rifle.<P>The Indian army has rarely understood the concept of “adequate” rather than best. They are always hankering for the best while using third grade two-generation-old foreign equipment.<P>For a sniper rifle the main differences can be categorized as follows: -<P>There is evident requirement of better raw materials and precision manufacturing for higher standards for the rifle and ammunition.<P>Better ergonomics, cheek rest, adjustable shoulder rest, bipod etc.<P>Most importantly the things that make for the genuine sniper rifle like single piece stock, floating barrel, thicker barrel, machined parts, if a muzzle brake is used then it should be designed as not to affect the accuracy, the vibration and bending pattern of the barrel while firing, distortion pattern when the barrel is heated, flexing, vibration pattern and fixed points of the barrel, balance etc.<P>And off course the scopes, the lasers and the other electronics like wind direction and speed indicators.<P>Looking at the present scene the Dragnov is the standard sniper rifle for the Indian army. This rifle in fact does not have the all-important floating barrel and single piece stock that is almost the must for the western counterparts. Additionally this rifle was made by Soviets when they did not have/use complicated CNG machines and is made of stamped parts. Present India with its capacity to make and procure the necessary raw material and CNG machines should not delay starting its own line of sniper rifles.<P><BR>The difference in the concept of Snipers in Western philosophy and Soviets has been pointed out above. Basically I wonder whether Indian army has any doctrine at all. IIRC The Dragnov firing Indian ammunition is basically good for upto 400-500 meters in practical situations. To put things into perspective at 300 meters a man size target would be half the size of the aiming post of a rifle and would be totally covered by it. Or to put it in a different manner a person would be perhaps 4mm high and 1mm thick at 300meters. Also at 300 meters, one is well out of practical range of AK assault rifles and RPGs.<P>So I suppose for all practical purposes if a soldier can hit consistently at around 500m men sized targets then he is definitely in sniper category. Off course we all hear stories about hitting coins at 1000m but that is perhaps more to do with test range conditions and folk tales. In field there are issues like slopes, wind speed, wind direction, humidity, rain, air pressure, air density, smoke, fog, snow, dust, light conditions, mirages, equipment condition, ammo condition and the mental and emotional factor. In fact the accuracy may not differ fundamentally from WW II but now it is easier to achieve and consistently maintain the accuracy achieved by the best of WW II snipers. Also semi automatic is giving accuracy close to what used to be achieved by bolt action.<P>Normally a rifle is considered to be reasonable sniper quality if it can consistently produce 25mm grouping at 100 meters. Though is sporting bench rest shooting 15mm grouping at 300 meter is routine. Some of the best World War II snipers were expected to hit consistently at 500-800m with bolt-action sniper rifle. Nowadays the idea is to generate the same quality with more consistency and with semi automatic rifles.<P>Though the so called best of the best snipers in western school of thought are supposed to hit man sized targets at 1000 –1200m which would be around 250mm – 300mm target size at these distances. (I also read the articles eulogizing the capabilities of NSG snipers in the wake of Black Thunder but a coin at 1000m in field is definitely far fetched. Though for sporting bench rest a coin at 1000 “feet” is possible.) <P>So I suppose the following can be the course of action for the ARMY-DRDO-OFB at least on the hardware front.<P>5.56 x 45 mm INSAS <P>Carefully manufactured INSAS rifles on the present production line (or rifles selected for accuracy after testing) and equipped with a scope will be adequate for 200m-300m range which will address most of the counter insurgency situations, the requirement of a marksmen shooter as well as for normal police and para military requirements.<P>For future a new INSAS rifle should be developed with the features of sniper rifle as discussed above (albeit the same action). This rifle can be effective for say 300m-400m range. This range will allow the exploitation of (I think the maximum reasonable range) of night scopes, thermal sights and will be almost the same range as Dragnov without the difficulties of a different type of ammunition. In fact IIRC the Indian standard ammo is supposed to be more powerful than the western counterparts and what better way than to exploit it’s potential.<P>7.62mm x 51mm<P>The Indian standard rifle (prior to INSAS) Isapore 7.62mm is based on L1A1 which IIRC is improved FN-FAL and has a very wide and well deserved reputation for a well machined, rugged and accurate rifle as also fires a powerful round. It is almost begging to be used as a sniper rifle. Some improvement in machining equipment alongwith a scope will provide a good interim sniper rifle. Say for a range of 400-500m. (With a poor reputation of Dragnov it may prove equal if not better to the role.) <P>Incidentally as discussed above I have always wondered what prevented the army from effective use of present 7.62 mm Isapore by adding a scope. It is very well built and accurate rifle with a long range. There are sniper rifles available internationally both in L1A1 and FN-FAL on which Isapore is based. A jerry rigged Isapore will probably give a performance equal to Dragnov. India-OFB also manufactures .22” and .315” sporting rifles but they are not really sniper quality.<P>Just to add - the US sniper rifle is based on WW II Garand.<BR>Israel sniper is also based on their standard assault rifle Galil<BR>Dragnov on AKs.<BR>PSG-1/2 on G-3<BR>Etc.<P><BR>Simultaneously an effective Sniper rifle in both SLR and bolt-action 7.62mm x 51 should be developed. It would be easier perhaps to utilize the basic action of Isapore for the semi automatic version. (Hopefully a bull pup variant) These rifles may be fulfill the requirement of specialist snipers in the mode of the western counterparts. The semi automatic 7.62 mm can replace or be used as per the role of PSG-1/2 and bolt action rifle can be used as supplant for SSG-2000 where exceptional single shot accuracy is required. Also a suppressed version can be developed of semi automatic rifle for Special Forces.<P>SLR snipers for range of say 500-700 m<BR>Bolt action sniper of say 700-900 m<P>The interesting thing is that bolt action is considered more accurate over SLR but over long range the difference starts decreasing in “field” as external environment factors starts becoming important preventing achievement of laboratory capabilities in the field.<P>This course of action will also make the ammo compatible with G Mag/Bren 7.62 mm x 51 compared to the use of 7.62mm x 54R for Dragnov. Also in any case Dragnov is unsuitable and incapable of this long range role.<P><BR>9mm x 39<P>Russians have unveiled a new series of special purpose “silenced” sniper rifles. This caliber is worth evaluation. Though suppressed versions of 7.62 and 12.7mm sniper rifles may be able to do most of the tasks.<P><BR>12.7mm X 99 <P>This caliber semi automatic/single shot rifle is also becoming useful for long range 2000m special purpose sniping. Mostly anti material use. (These caliber bullets are not used for man-sized targets at extreme range but to hit thin-skinned vehicles and fuel containers etc). A bull pup variant will reduce the unwieldy length. License manufacturing facility from Russians who have fielded various types or a copy of these models can be pretty effective and quick solution to the lack of adequate numbers of these arrows in the quiver of Indian forces. For counter insurgency role a normal 12.7 mm round (or better a sabot round) can be effectively used to shoot the rats through obstructions. No need to storm mosques or scale the walls, just shoot the *******s through the wall itself. This rifle will also be useful for deep infiltration harassment and border skirmish role. A suppressed variant may also be developed for Special Forces.<BR> <P>India manufactures a 12.7mm spotting rifle. Incidentally India makes 12.7 mm machine gun (NSV) for T-72 and Arjun alongwith ammo. This heavy machine gun has also been mounted in a turret for naval use. As usual the army has not found a use for these machine guns for light infantry. I suppose that on border and in defending dug in positions/bunkers it would be useful. But then army brass always knows better. NLI used 12.7mm machine guns in Kargil. In fact honestly I have never understood the concept of exploding ammo dumps and self-combustion in the clothing stores also.<P><BR>20mm x 102/23mm x 115<P>Frankly the aforesaid para should have ended this post but as I am in mood I intend to use some bandwidth. This caliber brings us to South African Anti material rifle. Also the uses of AA guns for ground targets was shown effectively by Ethiopian, Afghan and to some extend the border skirmishes on Indo-Pak border.<P> The South African rifle is a heavy behemoth for single shot anti material/bunker use. It is not bull pup design and is consequently pretty long. In any case a bull pup version would be more manageable. My personal feeling is that this is a concept that went out with WW II. I would think Carl Gastav would be better in most of the conditions though in some situations this is an effective rifle.<P>India does not manufacture any AA guns of this caliber.<P>This caliber is also used in aircraft mounted guns. India I understand makes a twin barrel Russian/Soviet version that is rather outdated. The in thing is the multi barrel electrically rotating action for aircraft mounted and AA use.<P>30mm<P>India manufactures Medak 30mm x 165 gun and ammo for AFV use. This gun has also been adapted for naval turret mounting. <P>Automatic Single/Twin barrel versions of these guns can be optimized both for AA and direct firing role. Semi automatic version can be used for anti-material use. DRDO-OFB kindly wake up! If sabots are used then Pak border posts can be engaged till almost 5000m+. An anti material rifle may also be developed in this caliber rather than 23mm in order to maintain uniformity and to reduce the number of calibers.<P>Also perhaps a rotating barrel version for naval and aircraft mounted use like Kashtan/Gsh-6-23 (?).<P>40mm<P>India recently has stabilized the manufacture of L40/70 Bofors gun firing 40mm x 385 for AA use. This gun is almost 50+ years old design. The present 300 rounds per minute action are also 30+ years old. This gun requires serious up gradation for AA use, though for direct firing use can be pretty effective. Bofors has introduced armor piercing rounds for use with this gun.<P>30mm/40mm<P>Grenade launchers are not even remotely used for sniper role so I will desist.<P><BR>84mm<P>84mm Carl Gastav is RCL and a pretty effective design. Presently for anti-tank role RPG and for bunker busting RPO are considered more effective. Though this design is very cost effective and remains relevant in these roles also.<P>The idea of mentioning it in this thread is that it is being used extensively on counter insurgency role in siege situations and for killing terrorists who are hiding inside build up area. The normal round used is HEAT/HE that is very effective but causes lot of secondary damage that in some situations is not intended/warranted.<P>A very effective use of this weapon would be to develop a FSAPDS (fin stabilized armor piercing discarding sabot) round. The weapon can be made more accurate by adding a light tripod, laser range finder, scope, wind speed and direction indicator etc. This will transform the weapon into formidable sniping equipment of say 250-500m range. It would easily penetrate 2 feet thick walls with hardly any damage to the structure. This will reduce the need for storming a complex to evict terrorists as if normal HE/HEAT rounds are used it burns down and also caused extensive damage to the complex. Sabot would be like firing a thick bullet through the wall. (12.7 mm can only tackle thin obstructions) India has also set up a flexible manufacturing facility for sabot rounds that reportedly can address all calibers. This will perhaps eliminate the role for South African imports.<P><BR>105mm/155mm<P>Kargil experience has pointed out the possible and effective use of these weapons in direct firing roles.<P>Conclusion <P>The whole intention of writing such a long post is to demonstrate that the capabilities and potential exist but lacking is the vision and pro active approach. In fact a few months is all that is required to provide a arsenal of effective sniper weapons by indigenous production. But the difficulty is to tackle the do it tomorrow attitude of the babudom. Incidentally the delay in LCA/Arjun is explained by the technological difficulties but what about small arms. The INSAS programme conceived in 1980 has taken almost 20 years to reach bulk production. A delay of 10-15 years. And to top it all the 5.56 carbine is till not supposedly ready. The Indian sniper doctrine can never be effectively created or realised unless indigenous production around which it is to be formulated is available.<P>Also it is not out of place to mention that a reasonably good sniper rifle will cover 99% of the need of the army and the Special Forces. For the limited 1% needs the rifles can be imported. It is astonishing that we consider ourselves unable to meet production standards of WW II and Soviets with Dragnov. It is worthwhile to note that India has extensive CNG machine tools and precision cutting tool industry which is much better than say Soviet (erstwhile) industry and making a sniper rifle should not be even remotely difficult. <P>If the DRDO-OFB combine is unable to do so then it should be handed over to the private sector. In order to deride the efforts of the Pvt sector an example often quoted is their inability to make 9mm carbine. Though is forgotten that this is an isolated incident of sixties. Today if they can make parts for LCA and GSLV then Sniper Rifles are nothing. Nandas permitting.<P><BR>As for cost it would be worthwhile noting that the cost for developing the INSAS series was around 3-5 crores. (Less than one million US$). For setting up the weapon and ammunition production line around 250 crores (US$ 55million). INSAS series consists of three versions in 5 models and the production line is for around 80,000 to 200,000 units per annum. If sniper rifles in 5.56, 7.62 and 12.7 mm range are developed and current production lines are adapted then development cost may be less than 5 million US$ and production line may be adapted at say another 25 US$ million. A cost of purchasing around 5000 western sniper rifles will be around the same around.<BR>
CRPF and other paramilitary organizations depute people to the NSG. Hence the possibility of a CRPF member being an NSG sniper.<BR> <A HREF="http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/LAND-FORCES/Special-Forces/NSG.html" TARGET=_blank>http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/LAND-FORCES/Special-Forces/NSG.html</A>
Excellent and educative post Raj!!<P>It is so dumb not to make cheap clones of AK-47 and other rifles and export to US when NRA is in the white house.<P>The Chinese have dumped all kinds of rifles in US and are making a killing (yes pun intended).<P>If only our OFBs DRDOs and baus were half as smart as mushrooming IT training institutes, they too would have exported and made a killing ..<P>But then in GOI sub kutch chalta hai
Harry try <BR> <A HREF="http://www.balckhawkdown.com" TARGET=_blank>www.balckhawkdown.com</A> <P>for a fascinating book on the Somalia ops by Mark Bowden of Philadelphia Inqurier. This site has actual video of the action as well as interviews etc etc. <P>In one word -- GRIPPING. A Must see..<P><p>[This message has been edited by Arun Kolal (edited 22-06-2001).]
Chanakya, to add to your Carlos story-<BR>The NVA guy was sent to hunt down Carlos after he bumped off a NVA general in his own GHQ. They spotted each other at about the same time, but Carlos squeezed faster and shot the guy first- the bullet travelled up the NVA scope and hit the guy in the eye.
Raj :<BR> Man that was some impressive read. I think you should think of sending that in as BR piece. Admins please note.<P>On this issue of Snipers. I remember reading in "THE WEEK" many years ago about how one single LTTE sinper would sit on a speically made jig atop a coconut tree and hold an entire IPKF platoon for weeks...till his food ran out.<BR>
The chaps name was carlos hathcock. <A HREF="http://www.snipercountry.com/sniphistory.htm#Hathcock" TARGET=_blank>http://www.snipercountry.com/sniphistory.htm#Hathcock</A> <P>Snipers have always been deadly...lots of indians died in the sniping done to hinder harass the construction of the famed burma road...<BR>The record as regards "kills" is held by a finn..Simo Häyhä<P>TSJones,<BR>Those delta operators were indeed the bravest of the brave.<BR>Thankyou for posting that excerpt/mail.<P>Regards,<BR>nitin<P>The following link says it all...read about all the aces. <A HREF="http://www.snipercountry.com/sniper.htm" TARGET=_blank>http://www.snipercountry.com/sniper.htm</A>
Raj - one of the best posts I've seen on BR in a long, long time.<BR>LTTE snipers holding up Indian platoons for days till "food ran out" is hogwash. Actually, LTTE snipers were NOT very good. They were effective only because LTTE operated as guerillas (1-2 guys hiding and firing a shot before running) and because our units initally were not trained for that kind of fighting.
Tim,<P>Thanks for a detailed note. The reason I used the phrase "turning point" was to emphasize the origin of acceptance of snipers by GI. Again, I have never been in field with GI's to know the reality about the acceptance level. My source is purely the history channel program. Alternate sources where GI's of 'nam time. <P>Raj,<BR>Could you please outline the assumptions used in writing that piece? If you were to explicitly add a note on the first line saying that you have zero input on the reality and the piece is purely fictional, I would applaud it as a terrific!<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Incidentally as discussed above I have always wondered what prevented the army from effective use of present 7.62 mm Isapore by adding a scope. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Aren't you being presumptuous of the things that are happening in the field? <P>I was under the impression that the discussion on sniping would revolve around individual level (i.e., scout sniper) rather that using 105's and RCL's! Let me know if I missed your point (which is very much possible).
Well I m just quoting from an very old issue of "The Week" (you know there was life before the Internet too.) I could be totally wrong about the the length of time..but somehow "weeks" rather than "days" sticks in my mind.<P>I really dont know how accurate the LTTE cadres were but there were pics of this jig and how one person can sit on it...and from what i read about the LTTE they may not have been good marksmen but they sure know how to pick off important folks...they targetted the radio operator and officers first. <P>Now from the disbelief being expressed by folks here to my statement...all i can say is its your word against mine. Its your ignorance on this subject versus my recollections on this subject. <P>Lets just hope that its my memory that is fading...shall we?
George,<P>It's not LTTE, any force that ambushes goes for the communications and leaders first. That is a standard doctrine in GI operation from may be prehistoric time?<P>The comm guys have these antenna's which in a GI's word are like Please_hit_me sign! If you let loose a volley, you are most likely to kill him but importantly you cut of radio contact. As far officers, none that I know off would dare carry anything that would give them away. In fact, they take pains to follow a discipline of not letting out the info of who the lead of a patrol is. Ofcourse once an engagement starts, it would be but obvious who the leader is.
Sorry George:<P>It has nothing to do with your recollections. The Week might have had the same hogwash. Babui,Jagan and I have dug into a lot of IPKF info including talking to people who were in Sri Lanka. While LTTE snipers did get some important folks and held up units causing confusion it was never a matter of weeks.
Re: Chakaya<P>I am glad to know that you believe in demonstrating that commonsense and literacy is not a universal phenomenon.<P>Off course alternatively I assume/presume that you are a Government of India representative and all your posts are based on personal on field experience. <P>If you have read the post (another presumption) you would have noted (another presumption) that it refers to the fact (another presumption) that OFB-DRDO has not used the present capabilities to manufacture a sniper rifle of 7.62mm caliber (another presumption based on limited facts that their numerous sites do not contain reference to any such activity, though I concede that this presumption is negated by another possible presumption that it is top secret project.)<P>Assuming for the sake of your argument that IA has used a jerry-rigged rifle for sniper duties then it helps my argument/post not detracts from it. (This is presuming you can understand my post, the argument therein and the same being applicable for this post.)<BR> <BR>The context of RCLs and 105mm is not evident to geniuses (another presumption) like you because it was meant for lay BRites.<P>Also I am waiting and presuming that you will specify your version of “reality” and “things happening on the field”.<P>Incidentally it is off course beside the fact that you have no facts to add or detract from my post <P><BR>I am also presuming that you can read and understand English, presuming that you will read this and presuming that adm will not be deleting it.<P>I would have asked you to read my/others earlier posts but that would also be presumptous on my part<P>I am also presuming that you are not suffering from last stages of some disease that affects the social skills or understanding. If I am incorrect please accept my apologies for your sad condition. (you may presume it that I mean it).<P><BR>>>>Let me know if I missed your point (which is very much possible).<<<<P>I can only presume that it is the matter of inherent incapacity for you and you did not do anything intentionally.<P><BR>Of I almost forgot to fulfill your polite request. I hereby decree that all my posts should be presumed to carry the following and the same be read herein and hereto and is not being reproduced everywhere for the sake of preventing repetition and for preserving the brevity/bandwidth.<P><BR>“You” have zero input on the reality and “the post is purely f**lish”.<P>
Raj & Chanakya:<P>Cease and desist. <P>Raj - just answer Chanakya's question as if you are defending a thesis. <P>Chanakya - I understand where you are coming from but a 3 line post conveys it differently<P>Raj: Please email me at email@example.com and cc JEM at firstname.lastname@example.org<BR>_____________________________<BR>LNS - I added my email instead of posting it again. No offence meant.<p>[This message has been edited by JE Menon (edited 23-06-2001).]
Unless I've missed it (a distinct possibility), I don't think I've seen a discussion of the IA's doctrine on sniper use. For example: just like each section may have an AT guy and a comm guy, is there any <U>standard</U> for the use of snipers? Does a typical Infantry battalion consider snipers as an effective weapon, and distribute them around? Do the tactics call for their use? Are the troops trained to work in tandem with snipers?<BR>If some of these questions sound way off base, please ignore them! <BR>
Subra,<P>Seems like you got here a tad early that I did. Albeit Raj has made the acrimonious post, which deserves a response in kind I will desist it. <P>Manavendra,<P>I don't think you have missed anything. The doctrine on sniper use in IA has not been discussed. I'm still eagerly awaiting someone giving a summation on sniper doctrine.<P>To answer your question from whatever I've heard, there are no marked snipers for all sections (atleast not in regiments that I've heard off). However, I'm under the impression that mission specific special assets are brought in. Irrespective of their rank, they report to the CO or company commander and work more or less like angels looking out for the mission.<P>Coming to this, what is the standard equipment for a section (or a squad if you would want to call it that way). I understand that different outfits have different way of organizing a squad. However, would it be way off the mark to assume that a "normal" patrol squad (in COIN ops) would be 10-12 strong and will have its members armed with assault riffles and at least one weapon with higher rate of fire (say, LMG)?
George - your recollection is not altogether wrong. There have been accounts of LTTE snipers firing from treetops (and rooftops) -though I've not seen any authoritative ones (i.e., journalists have written accounts from second hand sources).<BR>The LTTE were technically not good snipers because, primarily, ammunition was at a premium with the LTTE. Furthermore, they did not have a dedicated sniper rifle. Their main handheld was the AK. They did aim for officers, nco's and comm. jawans. However, casualties from sniper shots was few. Far more casualties occurred in mines and booby traps and in the initial battles of the IPKF. After a few mths, veteran units of the IPKF were more than a match for the LTTE cadres and pretty much swept them deep into the jungles.
This has been discusssed before. <P>Nevertheless - check it out<P>"Sounding out snipers"<P> <A HREF="http://www.sciam.com/2001/0701issue/0701patents.html" TARGET=_blank>http://www.sciam.com/2001/0701issue/0701patents.html</A>
Ok I stand corrected. Not a coin at a km but a human head sized target at a km which is coin sized at that range. This is only under range condition. Nigh impossible in field conditions<P>Also reconfirmed about LTTTE snipers - few hours maybe a day but never more than that
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests