I have read several of the postes here and everybody wants to say that the scope itself is the reason that the experiment failed, that could be part of it. I'm sure that the production process has changed a bit in the past sixty years. My thought would be more along the lines of the amunition used in the experiment. I have several rounds of 30 06 military amunition circa 1945 that is FMJ armor piercing these have been in my family since my grand father returned home from WW II and is my understanding that they were standard military issue sniper amo.
The sniper rounds for Vietnam-era USMC snipers were hand made and were boat-tailed making the round more stable in flight. So the rounds were a little different than your grandfathers rounds.
i say it's totally the scope. from the diagrams i see at my dad's work thay make the scopes much thicker then back in WW II or Veiinam. the mythbusters just never thought it was the scope not the sniper.
[quote]i entered every thing right and like me you probably saw scopes on the side. and if you did then i typed it in right[/quote]
This is totally strange. I went there before posting the link, to make sure it was still there, now the site is down, and I can't even get the main page.The Mythbusters.aspx took you right to the revisit.
It's really too bad, Sgt Normandy had some great info on what how and why the various projectiles did what they did.
Edit: now it's back, and works fine.
Edit: Try this, go to www.kalinkaoptics.com scroll down until you see in red print, "Kalinka Special Message" It is right under "Welcome to Kalinka Optics." then click on "(Click Here For More Info)"
This message has been edited. Last edited by: rick4070,
the more i go to this site the more i belive it's the scope that made the problem. the only way they made it go through the scope is that they used a stronger bullet. they never changed the scope on the sniper
[quote]the more i go to this site the more i belive it's the scope that made the problem. the only way they made it go through the scope is that they used a stronger bullet. they never changed the scope on the sniper[/quote]
O.K. Heres what happened. Carlos Hathcock saw the glint of light off of the enemy snipers rifle and made a snap shot. The projectile went down the tube of the enemy snipers scope, and he died. The scope was a Russian PU35 scope, a scope that was used on the Mosin-Nagant rifle that was common in Vietnam at the time.
This is fact.He did it.
The rifle he used was a Pre-'64 Winchester Model 70, in .30-'06 caliber.
There has been some discussion as to what ammunition Carlos used.
In the revisit, which was actually filmed on Tuesday, the 28th. of November, 2006, the day BEFORE the original episode aired, various projectiles were tried, the only one that they could get to shoot through the PU35 scope was the AP projectile. They used an M1 Garand in .30-'06 caliber.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: rick4070,
The round used by SSG. Hathcock was a 168-grain, full metal jacket, steel-core,Boat-tail, .30-'06 round. That is the type of round used by Hathcock an all his fellow USC snipers during Vietnam.
[quote]The round used by SSG. Hathcock was a 168-grain, full metal jacket, steel-core,Boat-tail, .30-'06 round. That is the type of round used by Hathcock an all his fellow USC snipers during Vietnam.[/quote]
Not necessarily. Many historians believe that Carlos Hathcock used M72 .30-'06 173 gr. Lake City match ammo.
The use of this ammo is documented in "Marine Sniper," and "Silent Warrior."
This being said, the AP ammo was more accurate than the L.C. ammo.
Carlos probably knew this.
Some have conjectured that he loaded his own.
Nobody knows for sure what ammo he used for the shot through the scope.
Sniper rounds lets see, if a person was a Marine Corps sniper in real life. I would say he would be using a 7.62 amour piercing round for the grains of powder and consistency of weight and casing length and primers used, are and do have grater tolerances in mill specs. I would also add that I could be wrong but am under the impression that using an amour piercing round as a sniper round is against the Geneva Convention as well. On another note a sniper could be using the round to go after a piece of equipment on the Tangos person.
I see it this way.if your a sniper and want to kill someone.doesn't matter how you kill them.shoot them through the scope or not.with what ever ammo you want.your job is to kill the enemy.if you shoot him dead through the scope of his gun or what ever.great. people want to know is it possible.why wouldn't it be? its a lucky shot a sniper can make.or any one could make if they trained to be a sniper.and praticed alot.
First I agree that it was probaly a AP round that was used. But the most important things is the person behind the weapon. I have saw some amzing hits at 100 yrs with open sights with an AR-15, these were done by people who shoot the same rifle day after day for years. A sniper trains with the same weapon for months, knowing the projectile paths by heart. An 1/8 inch would make a great deal of difference as the out come of the shooting through the scope. Simply lining up the shot with what ever means could give grave errors in the shot placement. Your'e not even sure about the trajectory, weither is was shot off the right, or if the shot was from an elevated postion. All affect the shot and could aid in getting the bullet through the scope. I see this one as not proven. Just because you could not do it, dosn't mean it can't be done. It would be like you doing a heart transplanet, just because you couldn't do, it just means that you don't have the knowledge to do it correctly. I know I could not make a shot like that. Maybe less that a dozen people in the world could, somethings are more than just lines and physics, but an art.
Mythbusters declared such shots to be impossible outside of a Million To One Chance, but recently repealed this verdict. Using an archaic Vietnam-era scope (since the original real life story was supposed to have happened in Vietnam, see below), and an armor piercing bullet, it was indeed, very possible, and extremely lethal. Their earlier "busting" of the myth was because modern rifle scopes have enough lenses and other internal workings inside of them to stop non-specialized ammunition from making it all the way through.
it had to do with using era equipment used in the myth. the show that aired on the 12th was the first attempt, apparently some time later they go back with the scope and rounds used during the time... and well as ya can see above in the quote.
As a former Marine Corp Sharp shooter I can tell you that the entire reason that the mythbusters did not get the roung through the scope was 3 reasons
1. Scope: the scope used in the erra of Gunny Hatchcock in Vietnam were crafted differant 2. Ammo: back then the snipers used rounds that they crafted them selves 3. Weapon: The weapon of choice in the vietnam erra was a 30-06 Winchester
They didnt do a bad job trying to prove it but they just didnt have there facts together..
1. Scope: the scope used in the erra of Gunny Hatchcock in Vietnam were crafted differant 2. Ammo: back then the snipers used rounds that they crafted them selves 3. Weapon: The weapon of choice in the vietnam erra was a 30-06 Winchester
They didnt do a bad job trying to prove it but they just didnt have there facts together..
1: In the revisit they used a period correct PU 35 scope to shoot through.
2: Carlos Hathcock has been quoted as saying that he did not load his own ammo.
3: True, Carlos did use a pre-'64 mod. 70 Winchester in .30-'06 caliber.
In the revisit, they got a .30-'06 AP projectile to go through the PU scope and into the ballistics gel dummies head.
For the most part, in the revisit, they DID get their facts straight.
