|
|
Post by the light works on Sept 17, 2014 14:42:11 GMT
just as a note - the first documented telescopic sight made in the US was in 1835. but the principle of telescopic sights is older. without documentation, I can't say that Rockwell had one, but it is not impossible - which would mean a shot that was extreme range for the average rifleman would just be long range for him.
as for "sighting on his belt buckle" - it could just be an idiom - meaning he aimed at center mass.
|
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Sept 18, 2014 8:52:20 GMT
Testing this myth, get friendly with the Military....
The military have long range ranges.
They also have extremely experienced instructors.
We are in the territory of Extreme experienced, people even higher up the tree of experience than any of us, even in our own trade....
The Instructors at a range of that kind have the experience and knowledge to teach 1,000 yd shots.
Just the people we are looking for as the extreme experienced?....
We need extreme experienced, experienced, "Average joe", and novice, to make a fair comparison.
If any can make the same shot, and then do that twice to prove it wasnt just blind luck, we have "Confirmed".
If any can make the shot even once, we have "Plausible"
If any can make the shot twice or more within a foot of the target, we have plausible.
Busted is if no one with period weapons can make the shot even anywhere close......
And then we want to see if that with a little practise, can people use today's weapons to make that shot.....
Personally, I would like to think given a good month of average practise to re-familiarise myself with a Enfield .303, [its been 20 odd years since I even lifted one?..] before I could manage to scare the [bejesh] out of a target at half mile.
On a calm day with good conditions......
I am just experienced, more than "Average joe", but not current military standard.
|
|
|
|
Post by rick4070 on Sept 18, 2014 16:23:16 GMT
Testing this myth, get friendly with the Military.... The military have long range ranges. They also have extremely experienced instructors. We are in the territory of Extreme experienced, people even higher up the tree of experience than any of us, even in our own trade.... The Instructors at a range of that kind have the experience and knowledge to teach 1,000 yd shots. Just the people we are looking for as the extreme experienced?.... We need extreme experienced, experienced, "Average joe", and novice, to make a fair comparison. If any can make the same shot, and then do that twice to prove it wasnt just blind luck, we have "Confirmed". If any can make the shot even once, we have "Plausible" If any can make the shot twice or more within a foot of the target, we have plausible. Busted is if no one with period weapons can make the shot even anywhere close...... And then we want to see if that with a little practise, can people use today's weapons to make that shot..... Personally, I would like to think given a good month of average practise to re-familiarise myself with a Enfield .303, [its been 20 odd years since I even lifted one?..] before I could manage to scare the [bejesh] out of a target at half mile. On a calm day with good conditions...... I am just experienced, more than "Average joe", but not current military standard. The problem is, while the military instructors are familiar with modern firearms, they more than likely don't have a clue about the firearms used in 1845. You would need to find an instructor knowledgeable about the many different types of firearms used then, and being as we don't know what type of firearm was used, nor the range, nor the conditions, I really don't see how this could have good testing results. Also, in the original post, "shouting" distance was mentioned, to me, that would mean a range of 100 or so yards, not anywhere near 1,000 yards. But, we still really don't know the range..... |
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Sept 19, 2014 8:14:20 GMT
Things have changed... the ones I had last century not only knew about Muzzle loaders, they owned a couple each?...
I have always found instructors are instructors because they have a fascination with the subject, more than just passing, and many would own certain notable pieces.
But that aside, Military instructors know Windage, have the ability to adapt, can use multiple weapons, probably have in the past as well.
They are the most likely to be up to date on each weapon.
They will be the ones who can quickly adapt and after a few pounds of lead down the range familiarisation, will be competent with any weapon you ask....
That and the fact they "own" the range, are familiar with the territory, thats just the experience we need.
Unle4ss, of course, you can find someone else more experienced....
Unless, of course, THEY know just the people we are looking for.
When looking for Spark plugs, do you start in the Chicken shop or the Garage?...
The range is a good place to start.
Maybe not the final resting place, but a good place to start from.
|
|
|
|
Post by rick4070 on Sept 19, 2014 15:18:52 GMT
The platforms change, so the instructors change.
20 years ago, who would have thought that shooters would have hand held computers that calculate sight elevations, wind drift, spin drift, humidity,etc.?
Even "experts" like Chris Kyle made mistakes in his last book about the ten firearms that made a historical difference, he said that "Kentucky" (really Pennsylvania) rifles were so accurate because the had adjustable rear sights. I've never seen one with adjustable sights....
Modern day instructors are specialists, some might have an interest in period firearms, but there are SO many different types of firearms that could have been used in 1845, and we have no idea of the range, so even a top of the line firearms instructor would have no idea where to start.
Also, there are more civilian small bore ranges here in the US than military small bore ranges, and there are a lot of civilians who put much more lead down range than the military rifle shooter does.
I would propose that a gun writer such as Mike Venturino would put most military instructors to shame on the range using 1845 period firearms.
Maybe he is a better place to start.
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Sept 20, 2014 1:35:42 GMT
The platforms change, so the instructors change. 20 years ago, who would have thought that shooters would have hand held computers that calculate sight elevations, wind drift, spin drift, humidity,etc.? Even "experts" like Chris Kyle made mistakes in his last book about the ten firearms that made a historical difference, he said that "Kentucky" (really Pennsylvania) rifles were so accurate because the had adjustable rear sights. I've never seen one with adjustable sights.... Modern day instructors are specialists, some might have an interest in period firearms, but there are SO many different types of firearms that could have been used in 1845, and we have no idea of the range, so even a top of the line firearms instructor would have no idea where to start. Also, there are more civilian small bore ranges here in the US than military small bore ranges, and there are a lot of civilians who put much more lead down range than the military rifle shooter does. I would propose that a gun writer such as Mike Venturino would put most military instructors to shame on the range using 1845 period firearms. Maybe he is a better place to start. the "kentucky" rifle was more accurate than its contemporaries because... it was a RIFLE. armies made up of enlisted soldiers still used muskets because they were more idiot resistant. |
|
|
|
Post by tacitus on Dec 2, 2014 1:22:07 GMT
Testing this myth, get friendly with the Military.... The military have long range ranges. For any myth needing a long distance range, the Mythbusters actually have a world-class range complex fairly nearby. The Sacramento Valley Shooting Center, run by the Folsom Shooting Club has ranges up to 1,000 yards. It's located close to where they conducted the trench explosion myth and is closer than the quarry they used in the dump truck myth. Any number of clubs, teams and groups shoot there, including just about every type of small arm (if legal in the People's Republik of Kalifornia), so they have plenty of black powder experts (and weapons) among their users. |
|
