Stolen Valor: The Truth Behind False Military Claims

  • Thread starter zoobyshoe
  • Start date
In summary, two separate individuals have claimed to have been snipers in the military, one in the Marines and one in the Navy Seals. A conversation at a cafe about bullet caliber prompted the narrator to ask the ex-sniper for clarification, but received a hesitant answer. After consulting Wikipedia, it was discovered that caliber is a measurement of bullet diameter, not length as the ex-sniper had stated. The conversation was then repeated with the other ex-sniper, who also had incorrect knowledge about bullet caliber. The narrator questions their authenticity and suggests asking more specific questions related to their military experience. It is unsure if this lack of knowledge is a result of not being taught or not retaining basic information.
  • #36
ideasrule said:
So what's the answer? If they said that the dropped bullet hits the ground first, would that be 1) wrong, 2) correct for all practical purposes, or 3) correct in theory?

I believe that they are supposed to both hit the ground at approximately the same time, all things being equal. Of course there is no reason that they would have been taught that.

Funny enough I have recently been speaking with a friend about similar topics.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #37
DaveC426913 said:
Wrong in theory.

In theory they should both hit the ground at the same time.

I think you're forgetting the enormous air resistance that a bullet encounters, and the fact that a kv^2 force cannot be broken down into kV_y^2 and kV_x^2. A bullet moving horizontally always experiences a greater upwards force from air resistance than a dropped bullet for any given downward velocity.

I have to go to bed now, but tomorrow I'll see if this makes any appreciable difference to the fall time of the bullet.
 
  • #38
ideasrule said:
So what's the answer? If they said that the dropped bullet hits the ground first, would that be 1) wrong, 2) correct for all practical purposes, or 3) correct in theory?

Every sniper is taught about the bullet drop. Not only the gravity is a factor, but also distance to visible horizon is only about 3 miles from standing height. The longest distance shot therefore was made from a considerable height of 9000 feet, where the bullet dropped down to ground over a 150 feet.
 
  • #39
cronxeh said:
where the bullet dropped down to ground over a 150 feet.
What does this mean?
 
  • #40
DaveC426913 said:
What does this mean?

They had to shoot 150 feet above the head of a person to shoot it?

Let me rephrase: they had to aim 150 feet above the head of a target in order to hit it..

or let me try this one: the bullet would get 150 feet closer to the ground if it was shot tangent to the location of a shooter
 
Last edited:
  • #41
cronxeh said:
They had to shoot 150 feet above the head of a person to shoot it?

I guess I thought the bullet dropped 9000 feet.
 
  • #42
DaveC426913 said:
I guess I thought the bullet dropped 9000 feet.

No you see since the visible distance to horizon is only 3 miles from standing height of 6 feet, you would have to shoot from a height (mountain, tower, building, helicopter) in order to see whatever it is you were shooting at and not have any obstructions in your path (buildings, other heads, structures, cacti). The shooter was at 9000 feet above sea level.
 
  • #43
What I'm trying to figure out is that there is 2 supposed snipers and that both of them get it wrong. What is the chances of 2 separate people with an odd claim that both get the answer wrong?
 
  • #44
cronxeh I am just wondering wtf you are talking about with your 'longest distance shot' and standing at a 9000ft and aiming 150ft above the head of the object etc. etc.

The longest confimred kill was done by a Canadian sniper at 2,430m or about half of your purposed 'visible distance to horizon longest distance shot' (where you say the target is hit). I'm just wondering what exactly you're on about.

And snipers do go through external ballistics and during the time period of the Vietnam war they began pairing up spotters with the snipers themselves. It's pretty much the spotters job to do the external ballistics to calculate how to adjust the scope etc. I'm not sure exactly how much of this snipers in this era would know and understand however. If you do more research into it you can see that they were trained OVER there to become snipers (on the basis they were good marksmen) they received little to no 'formal' sniper training. It's very possible that it was the shooters job to shoot and kill the target on their on skill and spotters job to just pick out the targets and do no calculations what-so-ever, which is how I believe it was.

Your question of which bullet hits the ground is sort of tricky because you don't give any variables... you just ask which bullet hits the ground first. This leads to the assumption (for scientistific minds) that you are talking about in a vacuum on ground that has no curvature and the gun is shot perfectly horizontal in which case both bullets will hit the ground at the same time, you learn this in grade 10 or something. Even better... drop a feather and shoot a bullet what hits the ground first!
 
Last edited:
  • #45
OK Suppose I wanted to shoot you in the head and you are 1.5 miles away. Obviously I can't shoot you from standing height because I can't see you and there are buildings and other people in the way. So I climb up to a skyscraper (Empire State Building is at 1250 feet). Now I have a view to horizon 70 km away, and can see your head from a good vantage point with a great angle. If I was to take a shot I would have to aim 121 meters above your head, and the total time it would take to hit your head is 5.9 seconds.

The longest confimred kill was done by a Canadian sniper at 2,430m or about half of your purposed 'visible distance to horizon longest distance shot' (where you say the target is hit). I'm just wondering what exactly you're on about.

How does that contradict anything that I said? And for that matter, it doesn't matter what distance it was, without the height he would've never made it. He could have made a longer shot if he had better computer instead of a spotter, and a better bullet
 
Last edited:
  • #46
cronxeh said:
How does that contradict anything that I said? And for that matter, it doesn't matter what distance it was, without the height he would've never made it. He could have made a longer shot if he had better computer instead of a spotter, and a better bullet

I assume you've never fired a rifle? That shot is amazing 1.5miles? Jebus Do you know how small the target is at this distance?
 
  • #47
Sorry! said:
I assume you've never fired a rifle? That shot is amazing 1.5miles? Jebus Do you know how small the target is at this distance?

Larger than the bullet?
 
  • #48
I don't share the fascination for lethal weapons at all, maybe having fired far too much of them due to my profession. However, I don't like to see misconceptions. Hence:

cronxeh said:
A higher caliber bullet has a longer length

No, not necessarily:

9mm round versus 7.62mm round.
 
Last edited:
  • #49
cronxeh said:
A higher caliber bullet has a longer length, maybe that was the source of their misconception. To test their basic sniper knowledge you should ask them if you were to drop a bullet at the same time they shot it from a rifle - which bullet would hit the ground first

The one that he dropped, since you'd expect a bullet from a sniper to be embedded in someone/thing and never hit the ground :-pAs for the OP, maybe they are just ignorant. You don't need to know the definition of processor speed to be able to use a computer.
 
  • #50
Caliber means both things.

For small arms, it's a measure of the diameter of the bore. For real guns, it's a measure of the length of the barrel. For example, a 5"/38 has a barrel that's 5 x 38 = 190 inches long. An 16"/50 would have a barrel that's 16 x 50 = 800 inches long.
 
  • #51
taken from militaryphotos.net
I've been taught both ways and with regards to artillery/gunnery but it has a different meaning with hand held weapons. So, caliber can be the ratio between width and length of the barrel, it can be the weight of the shot, or the width of the round; dependent on context. Now, if they are getting mixed up and saying that caliber is just the length? Well, that's only half right on one of 3 possibilities. Gotta toss out the BS flag on this one. Other Marine's here can testify that no matter how old you get there are some things you will not forget.

Ask them what there MOS was, what unit they where in and what year. Division Snipers had Bolt guns. on a company end, a company sniper was not a trained or MOSed sniper, more in the the line of a Designated Marksman. He would have a M14 with iron sights. I run this pass another friend.

Sorry I'm not adhering to the original topic, but I would rather not have someone claiming something that they haven't earned
 
  • #52
Andre said:
I don't share the fascination for lethal weapons at all, maybe having fired far too much of them due to my profession. However, I don't like to see misconceptions. Hence:
No, not necessarily:

9mm round versus 7.62mm round.

You comparing handgun cartridge to a rifle cartridge? Why don't we throw in a shirt gun there for a good measure
 
  • #54
cronxeh said:
You comparing handgun cartridge to a rifle cartridge? Why don't we throw in a shirt gun there for a good measure

What about .22LR and .22 short or .22 long? All are used for revolvers and the last 2 can be used in rifles too... In general however the bullet does increase in length as it goes up in calibre but there are exceptions.
 
  • #55
A lot of people seem to be jumping in late and not bothering to read previous posts wherein we've settled some things (such as that calibre does not refer to length).

Also, there are now two separate threads: the original, about calibre, and an offshoot about bullet-drop.
 
  • #56
DaveC426913 said:
A lot of people seem to be jumping in late and not bothering to read previous posts wherein we've settled some things (such as that calibre does not refer to length).

Also, there are now two separate threads: the original, about calibre, and an offshoot about bullet-drop.
Where is the offshoot thread about bullet drop?
 
  • #57
Evo said:
Where is the offshoot thread about bullet drop?
Forks in post 9. (Actually, I guess the real fook occurs in post 32.) Continues in posts 35-42, 44-47, 49.
 
  • #58
The thread title implies there are 2 people pretending to be snipers, and a bullet drop is a valid form of testing this hypothesis. How is that a separate thread?
 
  • #59
cronxeh said:
The thread title implies there are 2 people pretending to be snipers, and a bullet drop is a valid form of testing this hypothesis. How is that a separate thread?
It certainly is a valid form of testing it. My concern is not with your proposal, but with the follow-up discussion of it (which begins in post 32). It's fine discussion, but it does nothing for the OP except decrease the signal-to-noise ratio, which is nearing 50:50. And that is causing further discussion of the OP to get befuddled, as new contributors are not reading earlier posts before replying.
 
  • #60
just a quick 'aside' post---with the title, the subject, and bullet 'drop'--this reminded me of a visit to a guy's apt. in college where one of his roommates was in the basement throwing a 12 gauge shotgun shell against the wall trying to make it 'go off'--I picked it up and told him what level of intelligence he was.

I just remembered another 'person' in his mind, 'having fun' by throwing live .38 rounds into a bonfire---I didn't stay at that party.
 
Last edited:
  • #61
DaveC426913 said:
It certainly is a valid form of testing it. My concern is not with your proposal, but with the follow-up discussion of it (which begins in post 32). It's fine discussion, but it does nothing for the OP except decrease the signal-to-noise ratio, which is nearing 50:50. And that is causing further discussion of the OP to get befuddled, as new contributors are not reading earlier posts before replying.

I'm sorry I was not aware we forced evolution upon our readers so they could cope with the multiple dimensions of thought in here.

rewebster said:
just a quick 'aside' post---with the title, the subject, and bullet 'drop'--this reminded me of a visit to a guy's apt. in college where one of his roommates was in the basement throwing a 12 gauge shotgun shell against the wall trying to make it 'go off'--I picked it up and told him what level of intelligence he was.

I just remembered another 'person' in his mind, 'having fun' by throwing live .38 rounds into a bonfire---I didn't stay at that party.

Speaking of the Darwin award
 
  • #62
cronxeh said:
A higher caliber bullet has a longer length, maybe that was the source of their misconception. To test their basic sniper knowledge you should ask them if you were to drop a bullet at the same time they shot it from a rifle - which bullet would hit the ground first

From same wiki you referred to: "The bore to barrel length ratio is called caliber in naval gunnery, but is called length in army artillery"

zoobyshoe said:
Yeah, I saw that, too, but there's no reason for them to know that system much less confuse it with bullet caliber.

Shooting is only part of their job.

Snipers are also used as forward air controllers (directing incoming bomb runs) and forward observers (directing incoming artillery). None the less, understanding other characteristics of different weapons would be more important than understanding what the unit of measure stood for.

The bullet drop test would be a better question (even if not quite perfect).

I have no idea what type of training snipers got in the Viet Nam War, but calculating how far a projectile will drop over a given range for a given weapon would be a very necessary skill for any era.
 
  • #63
WOW. Seriously, did you all look right past my post? Don't ask some random question that anyone may know. How about you do this:
Ask them what there MOS was, what unit they were in and what year. Division Snipers had Bolt guns. on a company end, a company sniper was not a trained or MOSed sniper, more in the the line of a Designated Marksman. He would have a M14 with iron sights. I run this pass another friend.

That is the ONLY way you will know if they were an actual sniper in Vietnam.
 
  • #64
For the supposed Seal just find a forum run by Seals and ask if he is legit. Seals were the driving force behind the Stolen Valor Act and take false claims quite serious. For the Marine, ask what type of sniper he was. If he was Division then he should have an MOS designation if Company then he won't and probably was.
 
  • #66
DaveC426913 said:
Forks in post 9. (Actually, I guess the real fook occurs in post 32.) Continues in posts 35-42, 44-47, 49.

Huh? This is GD. I don't see how the posts about the "bullet drop" are offtopic and, besides, the second part of my post is directly related to the OP.
 
  • #67
MotoH said:
This is how you verify SEALs
VeriSEAL | The Original SEAL Verification Project

You could try that, but for random, non-critical confirmation I doubt they'd help. I'm pretty sure the Seal community has a forum much like the Special Forces, where, given a name and time of service they would be happy to verify.
 
  • #68
They had a forum, I can't remember the link, but I believe it is private now because of all the posers joining up.
 
  • #69
MotoH said:
WOW. Seriously, did you all look right past my post? Don't ask some random question that anyone may know. How about you do this:
Ask them what there MOS was, what unit they were in and what year. Division Snipers had Bolt guns. on a company end, a company sniper was not a trained or MOSed sniper, more in the the line of a Designated Marksman. He would have a M14 with iron sights. I run this pass another friend.

That is the ONLY way you will know if they were an actual sniper in Vietnam.

I was just thinking about this too. Maybe they were marksmen but not snipers. The guy I knew who said he was a sniper in Vietnam was special forces, as opposed to a grunt, and from the way he talked about things sounded like he was usually alone or only had one or two people with him in the field.
 
  • #70
The sniper teams would only work in pairs, the sniper with a Remington 700 with a Winchester magazine. And the spotter with an M14. Chambered in 30./06 and 7.62 respectively. There were no M16a1 based DMR's in the Marine corps at the time considering the term DMR didn't come around until a far later period, and is still the M14. There are the MKII Mod.1 and Mod.2 DMR's, but these are mostly used by private contracting firms as the M14 is the mainstay for the DMR in the US Army and Marine Corps.

JUNKHO said:
A friend served in N/75 LRRP with the 173rd at English in 1969. He was sent to in-country sniper school at (?Vung Tau?) for a week or so. Said the school was great and the training and shoots were excellent. Sent him back to the unit with a M-14 all tricked out. Says the last he saw of it was the day he got back and someone took it and put it in a conex for storage. He said he was never on a sniper mission, but believes the other teams pulled some. Says "I thought" they used bolt action rifles.
taken from militaryphotos.net

So basically.
M16 never used as a DMR in Vietnam, still not used as an official DMR on the Marines or the US Army.
***It is possible that the man in question who said it was an M16 could have just gotten a number wrong***
Actual snipers used a Bolt action rifle chambered in 30./06
Marksmen and spotters used the M14 chambered in 7.62

Just thought this might help clarify anything misconceptions
 

Similar threads

Shooting a .45 caliber hand gun on the moon launches you a mile?
Replies
4
Views
6K
News Legal Killing of Enemies in Iraq?
Replies
30
Views
6K
I What is the secret behind Shi Yan Ming's extraordinary punching power?
Replies
5
Views
2K
Close Calls from Falling Objects Out of High Rises
Replies
6
Views
2K
What is the caliber trinity and how does it impact ballistics?
Replies
3
Views
4K
The Doctor B Diet: Evaluating Claims & Results
Replies
1
Views
3K
Sniper Kitty Beats Boyfriend at Rifle Shooting
2
Replies
58
Views
8K
Laugh Out Loud at These Comments: Donald Duck Impersonator & More!
Replies
3
Views
2K
Having extremely hard time letting go (serious viewers only)
Replies
14
Views
3K
News Examining the Motivations Behind the U.S. Detaining Iranians in Iraq
Replies
19
Views
3K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top