Categories
Phillosoph

A Different Angle on Accuracy and Precision

The other night, I had a dream that insisited that I should go back and re-read a webpage I had encountered about a week ago. This article was the key to a new way to look at accuracy, my dream told me. (Even my subconscious tries to sell me on clickbait, it seems!)

Firing from a squat position

I am not sure this article actually does that, but it makes for interesting reading, the little that I think I understand. Since I do not read Cyrillic and some of the translation choices are unusual, I am missing certain parts.
AKM Golden Ratio
One part that was very clear was:

…monograph of the Central Research Institute of Information “The effectiveness of automatic firing weapons”:“ 3.5. The degree of combining the midpoint of hits with the center of the target ..determines the accuracy of shooting”

This reminds me that the effective range of a weapon system is a product of target size and weapon system accuracy and precision.
Accuracy and Precision Explained

How Accurate Do You Need?

For an example, let us consider a system of a shooter, firearm and ammunition.
Firing semi-automatically, this system manages groups of about two and three-quarter minutes of angle/arc (MOA). This will not impress many of you, but we are considering this system shooting in combat conditions rather than on the target range.
2.75 MOA may be treated as three inches at 100 metres. (It is actually 2.858 inches at 100 yards/91 metres, but we will treat it as the former for purposes of illustration)
A human head is about six inches wide. Providing our shooter can aim and shoot competently, we can expect our shooter to make most head shots within 200 metres. Not too shabby!
Most decisive rifle combat takes place at under 200 metres. Most likely targets will not expose an area much larger than a head. Our three MOA shooter’s accuracy and precision is quite adequate.
As an aside, would it not be more realistic to make all combat targets head-sized? Since targets would only need to be A4-size, this would save paper and money!
The vital area of a deer is also around six inches or more. And most hunters try to take deer at well under 200 metres.
Make things even simpler for yourself by zeroing your rifle to 200 metres. 72% of rifle engagements occur at 200 metres or less.
Learn the correct holdover/aiming point for the rare times you will need a longer shot. There is unlikely to be time to fiddle with your sights and dial up the range.
What about torso shots? A human is about 18 inches across the shoulders, about three times the width of the head. Our shooter should be able to put bullets within a torso out to about 600 metres. 
It is worth remembering, however, that a bullet takes around a second to reach 600 metres. Even if you are a trained sniper, you will have to make a shot like this as a surprise attack.
If the enemy is aware of you and dodging, ducking and dashing, hits are going to be more a product of luck than skill. Might be better to save ammo until it may be used more effectively?
Shots against active, distant targets are best left to the machine guns, mortars and artillery. A machine gun that was firing at 2.75 MOA would probably be well regarded. At 600 metres it would put most of its burst into an area less than man-sized.
Full frontal torso shots may actually be rare under certain combat conditions. Many targets will be in cover and not exposing much more than their heads. What torso shots can be made, will be against targets crossing your line of sight or moving obliquely.
If we consider the apparent average torso width here as about twelve inches, we can expect our shooter to make hits out to 400 metres, should targets be actually visible at this distance. 97% of rifle engagements do not exceed 400 metres.
Our shooter should keep his rifle at a 200 metre zero and aim somewhere between armpit- and chin-height. This will produce a hit somewhere on the torso from 200 metres+. A higher aim point may be needed as range approaches 400 metres and beyond. The bullet will hit about 30 cm low of the aim point at 300 metres, three-quarters of a metre low at 400 metres.
Time of flight to 300 or 400 metres will be about a third of a second, so he should lead his target a little, but not too much.
So far we have only considered semi-automatic fire. If our shooter fires on fully automatic and measures the diameter of the group produced, effective range for automatic fire against head and torso targets may be calculated.

Conclusion

The Russian article makes the point that there is little point in adopting a more accurate/precise rifle if the sights are flawed.
The small group the AN-94’s hyperburst produces just makes it more probable for both rounds to miss the intended target if the aim point is wrong.
Generally, it is the shooter rather than the weapon or ammo that is the limiting factor.
Many of you reading this are capable of shooting a rifle better than 2.75 MOA.
If so, you are have adequate precision for realistic combat/defensive scenarios, which are most likely at less than 200 metres.
The ideal iron sight for combat would probably be an L-flip sight with a 5mm aperture zeroed to 200m and a 1.75mm aperture zeroed to 400m.
But, for such an application, does even higher precision actually contribute to a real increase in functionality?
As long as the group we shoot is smaller than the area of the likely target, at likely engagement ranges, is a smaller group actually a practical advantage?
Is it even possible that a tighter group may decrease our chances of hitting the intended target if our aim is slightly off?
Something to ponder before you hand over your hard-earned cash for the latest customization or accessory to give your defensive or deer rifle even greater sub-MOA performance?
Categories
Phillosoph

Leading Targets for Lead

If some field manuals are to be believed, determining the lead for a moving target involves:
• Correctly determining the range to the target.
• Remembering the time a bullet will take to reach that distance.
• Estimating the speed of movement of the target. For added complexity estimate this in miles per hour and convert.
• Calculate how far the target will move in the time the bullet gets to reach it, and aim that distance ahead.
• Don't forget to halve the value if the target is moving obliquely.
You will probably have under a second to do this as the target dashes between cover.
Andrew G. Elliot, “Shooting to Kill”:
“The impossibility of judging this consciously will be realized when it is explained that a target moving at this range and speed scarcely allows time to place the rifle to the shoulder without making complicated mathematical calculations.
“In war, as distinct from print, there is hardly time to aim at all, and that is why the whole technique must become so natural that it is carried out without thought.
“…The secret of hitting a moving target is simple. Follow the target with your aim for a few seconds to judge its speed, then just before firing, quite instinctively and without any conscious allowance, you will find that you swing a little in front of the enemy.
Always keep your eye on the target, and for a moving one, on the front of it, so that- if you are shooting a running Nazi, focus the front buttons of his tunic.
“…In shooting moving targets, one need not worry about the sights. The Nazis will rarely give you any time for that!
“To prove that instinctive allowance is easier than conscious effort, it has been found that many men can shoot better in the semi-darkness than in daylight. I myself have often shot running rabbits with a rifle when the light was such that I could only just see the animal’s outline.”
Elliot was a big advocate of soldiers spending time practising raising, swinging through and dry-firing their rifles. This was time much better spent than squarebashing.
Note that swinging through is not the same as the tracking of a target that some manuals describe. Swing through overtakes the target.
The swing-through method of leading a target cannot always be used. From certain postures or firing positions it is difficult to use. In such an instance one must use the ambush method. Aim at a point in space and fire when the moving target is the correct lead distance from your aim point.
For simplicity, the following will assume targets are dismounted personnel. Shooting at drones, aircraft and vehicles will not be covered today.
Note that if you need to quantify a target's velocity, it is more useful to judge it in metres per second than units such as miles per hour or km/h. This is something that you can observe and make use of in the field.

Depths of Lead

Possibly the easiest technique to learn is found in field manuals for the M14. The M14 was zeroed to 250 metres so the nearer aim point is also lower to allow for hold-under.
Depth of Lead for Moving Target
The method is based around a measure I call a “depth of lead”. This is approximately the depth of a human torso, from sternum to spine. It is also roughly a foot if you are viewing your target side on. If the target is moving at an angle to you, the depth will appear smaller and the amount of lead you apply will be automatically reduced.
Bear in mind that lead is often overestimated. At less than 50 metres most moving targets will not need leading. Those that will will only need aim shifted towards the leading edge.
For targets that are more distant, or moving fast:
• If the target is moving slowly (less than 2 metres per second), and within 200m, aim at the leading edge or the button-line/belt-buckle.
• If speed is slow but range greater than 200m, add one depth of lead.
• If moving fast, but within 200 m, add one depth of lead.
• If moving fast AND beyond 200 m, add two depths of lead.
The amount of lead this gives may differ somewhat from a calculated value. Given all the other factors in play during combat, it is generally “close enough for government work”.
Two complimentary systems will be mentioned:

USMC Points of Aim

This first is that given in USMC MCRP 3.01A Rifle Marksmanship.
This is an excellent work for fundamentals and how to utilize iron sights.
The “point of aim” system appears to resemble the “point of depth” method, but has differences.
Marine Point of Aim for Lead
“One point of Aim” in the marine manual is actually aiming directly at the target's leading edge. (The above illustration could be clearer on this.)
“Two points of Aim” is placing the top corner of the trailing edge of the front post on the target's leading edge. Two points of aim is used for a fast-walking (2 m/s) target at 300 metres or a running (3+ m/s) target at 200 m.
These leads are reduced for targets not moving perpendicularly.
The actual offset this will produce will depend on the apparent width of the front post.

US Army Single Lead Rule

Single Lead Rule
The technique given for leading a target in US Army FM 3-22.9 (August 2008) at first glance seems the same as MCRP 3.01A.
The army “Single Lead Rule” actually uses the trailing edge corner of the post to sight with.
Unlike the marine method, the corner of the post is targeted on the centre rather than the leading edge. This technique automatically increases the amount of lead as distance increases. Lead is approximately 5 MOA. If you miss, increase lead.
7 mph is about 3 m/sec.
The manual notes: “At 100 meters, the rule begins to break down for targets moving at slight and large angles.”
Despite this, it seems a useful technique to get in the ballpark.
AT4 Slow TargetAT4 Fast Target
This aiming technique is very similar to that used for the AT4/M136 anti-tank weapon.
For a slow target the post is placed on the leading edge of the vehicle.
For faster targets one of the “horns” is placed on the centre of the target.
Aiming at faster targets such as jeeps and technicals does not yet seem to have made it into the copies of the manuals I have. Placing the horn on the leading edge seems like a logical place to start.
Amusingly, the copy of FM3-22.9 I have insists that iron sights on the M16/M4 are now only for backup. The entire section on leading a target only refers to the use of iron sights!
Below is an example of using the ACOG sight with a depth of lead-type method. Using frontal silhouettes is misleading.
Depth of lead with ACOG reticle
Categories
Phillosoph

Selecting a Handgun

When choosing a handgun it is easy to be swamped in opinion.
If you wish to be logical about your choice, there are several strategies that you can adopt.

Choice of Model

Hollywood, video games and even some writers often tell us one model of pistol has a superior performance to another, despite that in real life the two may use the same ammunition!
The chambering of your handgun is probably the first aspect that you should consider.
Once this decision is made, you can select a model based on size, mass, capacity, budget and other factors.
Ideally, you want an automatic pistol of about 7"/180 mm overall length.
As a primary weapon for concealed carry, you want a weapon of small bulk.
As a secondary weapon for overt carry, a weapon of low weight is desirable, since you probably have a rifle or shotgun and enough other things to carry.
Hence the recommended handgun is of compact/sub-compact size.

Performance

If you are shooting someone in defence of your life, you want to make a big, deep hole in them.
Yup, size does matter!
The optimal pistol round for this is the .45 ACP.
The .45 ACP is compatible with a semi-automatic action, allowing for easy and fast reloading.
There was a time when it was hard to find a .45 that was not a large, single-action weapon with a single-figure magazine capacity.
Now we have a variety of compact and sub-compact double-action weapons, with useful magazine capacities.
Thanks to US military aid, .45 ACP ammunition is reasonably easy to find in many parts of the world.
The standard load of the .45 is subsonic, making it a good choice for general military applications that may include the requirement for weapons to be suppressed.
A .45 round that fails to mushroom will often make a wider wound channel than many 9mm and other medium-calibre rounds that do mushroom. .45s that do mushroom make very big wound channels.
The Textbook of Small Arms, 1929 notes:
“Rapidity of fire is an essential in pistol shooting, and though the double action of a revolver may well be ignored when it is considered as a target arm, it is of the highest importance when the pistol is considered from the active service point of view as a weapon…
“The value of the calibre of self-loading pistols and revolvers has been much obscured by theory, but practice of recent years has amply proved that small calibre plus high velocity, although developing many foot-pounds of energy, yet lacks stopping or shocking value. There have been many attempts to substitute a high-velocity cartridge of ·38 calibre, as a Service equivalent to the traditional ·455. In practice it has been found that the small calibre sometimes fails to stop its man and that the large-diameter leaden plug of the ·455, moving even 300 or 400 feet a second slower than the high-velocity, small-calibre projectile, is yet far more effective. Recent experiment has, however, developed a new experimental ·38 cartridge [.38/200 of 200 gr] whose efficiency is, so far as ballistic tests can ascertain, not less than that of the ·455.
A hit with a ·455 anywhere literally [sic] knocks an adversary over. This quality of efficiency depends to some extent on the massive soft-lead bullet and the relatively low velocity rather than on any inherent magic in the calibre, for the ·455 or ·45 self-loading pistol firing a lighter nickel-covered bullet at a higher velocity cannot be depended on to produce equal shock effect.
The efficiency of the ·455 revolver cartridge is due to combination of the large calibre with the soft material, the mass, and the relatively low velocity of the projectile. These combine in such a way that the adversary experiences in his body the maximum development of shocking as distinct from penetrative effect. This is just what is wanted in an active service revolver. ”
It is interesting that nearly a hundred years later, this passage remains a good account of the issue, superior to many things written since.
I am well aware some readers will get distracted by the semantics of some of the terminology used.
Perhaps the most significant change since this was written has been the creation of jacketed hollow-point (JHP) ammunition that will feed reliably through an automatic. This has narrowed the gap in terminal effect between large-bore revolvers and large-bire self-loaders.
Advances in bullet design intended to improve the performance of light, medium calibre, high-velocity bullets are even better applied to heavy, large-calibre rounds.

Logistics

You may regard logistic considerations over effectiveness.
The most common combat pistol round is the 9mm Luger, also known as the 9 x 19mm or 9mm Parabellum.
The 9mm Luger is the NATO standard pistol round, but its military and civilian use dates back to the 1900s. It was the round of the German, and other armies, for two world wars.
The majority of sub-machine guns are chambered for this round.
There are very few countries in the world where 9mm Luger cannot be found.
The medium-calibre 9 x 19mm is not as effective as the large bore .45, although many try to convince themselves it is.
If you have very small hands, a 9mm model may offer a slimmer grip without compromising magazine size.
Guns like the Berretta M9/92 are too big for roles other than as a primary overt weapon.
As for 45s, a compact or sub-compact model is preferable.
In nations that have received Soviet or Chinese military aid, the 9mm Makarov round, aka 9 x 18mm, may be more readily found than the 9mm Luger.
The 9mm Makarov is designed to be the most potent load that can be accommodated by a light, blowback-action pistol. Velocity and bullet weights are lower than the more powerful 9mm Luger.
The 7.62 x 25mm round may also be common in countries that use Soviet or Chinese weapons.
Most Soviet sub-machine guns, and their Chinese copies, are chambered in this round.
In handguns, it is usually found in the TT33 Tokarev/Type 51/Type 54 and a few other Warsaw Pact designs, such as the Czech vz.52. Some of these weapons are still in use in certain parts of the world.
The round is effectively identical to the 7.63mm Mauser round, so may be encountered in countries where the C96 Mauser “Broomhandle” was popular.
The 7.63mm Mauser/7.62 x 25mm/7.62nn Tokarev is a high-velocity round noted for its high penetration and flat trajectory. The small calibre creates a narrower wound channel than many other combat pistol rounds.
W.E. Fairbairn was familiar with the round from his time with the Shanghai Police. He suggested that the round was more effectively used if aimed at shoulder level, where the high-velocity round was most likely to shatter bones and create secondary missiles.
This is fairly good advice for using any pistol round.

Convenience

Automatics

The gun you have with you will always been more effective than the one you left at home because the latter was inconvenient to carry.
There are some lightweight, low volume automatics in 9mm Luger. The 9mm Luger round requires a locked breech.
Many smaller automatic pistols are simple, blowback weapons and therefore use cartridges other than the 9mm Luger.
If you opt for a pocket automatic, the best choice is a weapon in either .380 ACP or 9mm Makarov.
Pocket pistols in 9mm Makarov are fairly rare, but many duty weapons, like the Makarov PM/Type 59, may be compact enough.
A wider choice will be found in .380 ACP, also known as 9 x 17mm, 9mm Short or 9mm Kurtz.
The .380 is slightly weaker than the 9 x 18mm. Like the Makarov round, it is well suited to small, blowback pistols and is a better choice than smaller calibre options such as the 7.65mm/.32 ACP and 6.35mm/.25 ACP.
Having less energy and momentum than a 9mm Luger or .45 ACP, hollow-point ammunition in .380 or 9 x 18mm may be less reliable.

Revolvers

Many small-frame models of revolver such as the Smith & Wesson J-frames and Colt Detective weigh under a pound, but only have five or six shots.
Small medium-calibre revolvers in .38 Special, .357 Magnum and 9mm Luger are preferable to smaller-calibre weapons in .32 or .22.
The 9mm Luger in a revolver has the edge over the .38 in velocity, but the merit of revolver rounds is that they can use rounds that would not reliably feed through an automatic.
The .38 and .357 cases can be loaded with wide-mouthed, soft, malleable, hollow-points, ideally of 200 gr or more, that are likely to be more effective than any medium-calibre round an automatic can fire.
If fired in an emergency from within a pocket, a pocket revolver has no slide to catch in the pocket lining. For similar reasons, models with concealed or internal hammers are preferable.

Special Purpose

.25 ACP, .32 ACP, .380 ACP, 9 x 18mm and .45 ACP are all subsonic in standard loadings. The smaller rounds are sometimes preferred since they allow the use of a smaller weapon and suppressor.
Most .22 rounds are subsonic when fired from pistols, so are also suited to suppressed applications.
.22 weapons are also useful for target practice or for foraging.
.22 revolvers often offer the option of switching between .22LR and .22 magnum by exchanging cylinders.
Some .22 revolvers can chamber more than six rounds.

Non-Runners

Other than the exceptions already suggested, revolvers are not recommended.
After more than a century of military service, it is finally being accepted that claims that revolvers are more reliable than automatics are more theoretical than practical.
Possibly, only in the instance of a misfire, does a revolver offer an advantage.
This is offset by the greater ease in reloading and the usually larger ammunition capacities of automatics.
For a given calibre, an automatic tends to be lighter and more compact than the equivalent revolver.
You may be adept at quick wheel-gun reloads on the range, but under the stress of real combat it is better to keep dexterous actions as simple as possible.
Rounds such as the much hyped .40 S&W, .375 SIG and 10mm Auto are not recommended.
These are all medium-calibre rounds, most loads trying to emulate the performance of the .357/125 gr. Essentially just faster 9mm Luger.
Unsurprisingly, performance is inferior to the .45.
Logistically, ammunition in these chamberings may be difficult to find outside the US.
If a big deep hole is better, why the .45 ACP and not rounds such as the .44 magnum or .50 AE you may ask?
The answer is that we need control as well as power.
For many shooters. a quick follow-up shot with a .44 magnum or similar may be difficult.
No round can be guaranteed to always neutralize a threat first hit, or to always hit, for that matter.
Another reason for using the .45 ACP is that most of the loads that exceed the .45 ACP in power are primarily revolver loads.
For many reasons, not least its mass and bulk, the Desert Eagle is not recommended as a defence gun.
The .45 Long Colt and .44 Special are more manageable, but usually found in revolvers, so the .45 ACP remains the best choice.
Both “Attack, Avoid, Survive” and “Survival Weapons” have advice on the use of firearms.
Categories
Phillosoph

Defending Against the Rush

A couple of years back I came across a Youtube video that was called something like “Close Range Knife Defense”.
This one was notable since it involved several young men having a great time fast-drawing their guns and shooting down imaginary attackers. Their speed and skills were impressive, their tactics deplorable.
Even if you can kill a charging attacker instantly, he is still likely to travel several metres.
This may be enough to knock you down.
If he had a knife this may arrive point first, resulting in you being injured or killed by a man already dead.
The chances are you will not achieve an instant kill every time. Even if your attacker is fatally wounded, he may use the final seconds to knock you down, stick his knife in you or thrust his thumb in your eye.
Remember, many victims of knife attacks are not aware of the knife until stabbed or cut. Always treat an aggressor as though they are armed.
You may not fatally wound him. Even the best of us miss occasionally when shooting under stress, drawing gets caught up on clothing or weapons misfire or malfunction.
If the charger was unarmed, you are still in trouble. If he knocks you down he can stomp you to death or take your weapon to use against you.
I have tried to emphasize in my book that defence and evasion must come before counter-attack.
If you have a weapon sheathed and you are attacked, your first response should not be to try and attempt to draw the weapon. You cannot outdraw him if his weapon is already drawn.
In a fast-draw competition, the odds are not good either since the attacker will have the advantage of initiative.
Even if your weapon is already in hand, it is prudent to combine using it with some evasive/ defensive action.
If an enemy appears suddenly before you, you don’t have time to see if he is going to charge you or open fire on you. Don’t stand were you are, move! Better a moving target than a sitting duck.
Let us return to our original example of the young men with pistols.
If their drill had been realistic, they would have executed some form of evasive action before they drew and fired. By having one of their number play the aggressor, and using some toy guns, this could prove a fun but very useful practice session.
In martial arts, considerable attention is paid to blocking and parrying techniques but generally these are concentrated on defending against hand strikes and kicks.
Some attackers will not move into a set distance and start throwing kicks and blows.
In our example above, we considered a knife-armed attacker charging a gun-man, but there are many other situations where one party may try to rush and overwhelm another.
Fighters who favour groundwork will want to get close to their opponent and get them to the ground as quick as possible.
Defending against an enemy that charges seems to be something some martial arts would rather not think about.
Yes it is crude and brutal. Whether it is unskilled or not is irrelevant.
It is a real and likely threat and can be very effective, particularly if you have never bothered to practice against it.
What defences are there against a rush? The primary defence remains the use of evasion.
The ginga movement from Capoeira that is included in my book is very good for teaching side-stepping and other evasive footwork.
Also useful is the hip-twist move that is the basis of in-quartata and certain kicking actions.
If your dodge does not take you sufficiently out of harm, you must combine it with a parrying action.
A charging opponent will have a lot of momentum, so blocking his force directly is not a practical option. We need to parry to redirect it.
Parrying his hands or forearms is not likely to have much effect. There is no point in knocking these aside if the body behind still knocks you down.
Parry against the upper arm, shoulder and torso regions. Use both your arms to make contact.
The p’eng hinge action detailed in the book can be easily adapted for this action, as can several other techniques such as the double-handed push, the shoulder check and the outside crane