An Odd Characteristic of the SMLE

[RJW NZ]

One of the many good things about a forum is that you can air all sorts of ideas and ask all sorts of questions and nobody really gives two hoots. Even if to others they might seem silly, daft or just plain stupid, you'll always get answers. In classrooms, I always say that there's no daft, silly or stupid questions - just questions that deserve answers

But it is better to ask and discuss these things here (or in the class) than to go full steam ahead and publish them. That way, the readers KNOW that you're daft, silly or just plain stupid

Agree 100%, always a pleasure to see brains cells flexing their muscles.

[lngstrt]

I've been sitting here trying to form an answer built around distance and zeroing and ......

Either irons or optics, it's easier to zero at closer distances. 'Zeroed' at 25 yards/meters you shoot a ragged hole you can barely poke your finger through. Zeroed at 50 it opens up a bit. A bit more at 100. My mind sees that the front sight or reticle covers increasingly larger percentage of the helmeted head target.

So, now you're zeroed at 300. If it's like the #4 zeroed means what, get 'em all in a 3x5 target? Now you're asked to hit Herr Offizier at 900 yds/mtrs. Even on a calm day the thickness of the reticle will cover the guy's whole shoulder span, no? Bound to be some lateral offset, I would think. Maybe that's all it is. It's easier to zero and then hit something at closer ranges.

Remember Peter said:

Even if to others they might seem silly, daft or just plain stupid, you'll always get answers.

Oh, and, I have a History degree not physics!

[Rumpelhardt]

What about about spin drift.
I have only read a little about long range shooting and up here 500 yds is long range so I don't know the extent of its effects but the bullets rotation causes horizontal drift that is noticeable enough to be figured into a snipers long range shot calculations.

[eiclan]

As we all know the fall of shot of a smle is affected by the fit of the nose cap and also the "v block" in the barrel opening in the aforesaid nose cap.The nose cap will centralize the barrel as it whips up as the bullet leaves the barrel and any grot at that point will affect the direction of the bullet.Just a thought ! Cheers Ross

[Peter Laidler]

I don't think rotational drive plays any part in the direction of the bullet. I have watched thousands upon thousands of bullets from Vickers guns hitting the target area on an upswept bank on the field firing ranges at 2 miles away. And watching the fall and hits through binos, they all seem to go where the gun is aimed

[Simon]

The only known example of a SMLE Sniper having a point of impact that would coincide at 300 yardsand then open out beyond that is with the Great War Sniping Weapons with the scope offset to the right. The point of zero of the WWI sniper weapons was set at 300 yards, this naturally meant that the point of impact at less than 200 yards was to the left of point of aim, coinciding at 300 yards and beyond that it would move progressively to the right of point of aim. The British sniper would in time learn to use the method of aiming that had cost him so dearly in the America's, namely kentucky windage. The same Kentucky windage/elevation that once learned has served our specialists well from WWI through WWII and Korea to the present day in Afghanistan.

Cheers,

Simon,

P.S. Sorry if the above is a tad incomprehensible, we've actually had a decent days weather in the North West UK today so I may have had the odd one or three beers at the BBQ before posting the above

[Rumpelhardt]

Spindrift does effect bullet travel but further reading puts it at about .5 moa at 1000 yds with a .308 Winchester firing a 168 grain Sierra MatchKing bullet. so for all practical purposes it looks like you are correct. No effect.

[Peter Laidler]

What earthly planet were they on to teach this ludicrous method of zeroing an offset telescope? Is that a recorded fact Simon? Zero an offset foresight (that's all a grat is of course.....) at 300 yards! You'd only ever be able to at BEST, guestimate anything beyond that with the accumulative effect of the error and........ and........................

It's a good job that they didn't utilise that ludicrous notion with the Bren gun - and don't forget, the grat of an optical sight is always a foresight. Just take the Bren Gun........ The rear and foresights are exactly 1" to the left of the mechanical/true axis of the bore. It is sighted at the aiming point and the MPI of the shots must fall 1" to the right of the POA. And it'll hit 1" to the right all the way out to wherever, the bullets fall 1" to the right of where you're aiming. Not that it makes any difference with a Bren of course.

But what it does mean is that from 25 to 1000 yards, you'll be hitting the man 1" to the right of where you actually aimed. But at least if they used the same forumla, even if it's 1.5" offset with the offset telescope you'd still be hitting the man at 600 or even 900 yards albeit 1.5" to the right. Which in my humble opinion is better than guessing a) the range and b) how much to aim off

Or am I missing something?

[Simon]

What earthly planet were they on to teach this ludicrous method of zeroing an offset telescope?

Peter,

I couldn't agree more!!!! Lets face it though the whole concept of offsetting the scope is ludicrous and resulted in British loophole plates having a condiderably "bigger ole" than the German ones. I do recall seeing the zeroing criteria in print in a manual / title of that era, please don't ask which one though as it could take weeks of trawling to find it again.

Out of curiosity perhaps one of our cousins from over the pond can comment on the zeroing criteria of the M1C and M1D as the en-bloc loading of these weapons required the scope to be slightly offset.

Cheers,

Simon.

[Peter Laidler]

I would like to see this if and when you can find it. Reading the 1920 Small Arms reports of a captured German 'swing-turret' mounts made mention of the fact that offset mounting, as close as possibly level with the rifle bore was the best option over a higher mount for several reasons. The principal one being that the eye relief of the sniper is not constant* and for every extra bit of optical height radically alters the relationshipo between......blah blah blah and on it goes.
* I don't understand this either because eye relief is eye relief is eye relief UNLESS they mean comfortable eye position - as with the later cheek rest

As a matter of interest, the zeroing criteria of the AK47 and Dragunov offset telescopes and the Bren on the anti-tank gun and the night vision on all and sundry is all to the left - as is/was the sub calibre round for the Carl Gustav 84mm anti-tank. Mind you, 3" to the left of the aiming point on a tank is a bit academic really. Unless you are one of the tankies and have been hit!