- Thread starter
- #41
Scoped K98k and Mosin Nagant at the range
- Thread starter Soren
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
CharlesBronson
Senior Master Sergeant
It does look like XIX century actually, compared with other devices like the " mule ear" binocular trench telescope, in my it was the best tool because it allowed full obserbation without the risk of you head been blown off.
drgondog
Major
What barrel length? 29"?
drgondog
Major
Marine and army snipers in VietNam used 700 Remington BDL actions with McMillan Barrels made frequently by Bill Wiseman - ultimtely this rifle in 7.62x51 was the M-24. Carlos Hatcock used this, a match M-14 and .50 cal sighting round/scope on the 106MM recoilless to make some of his spectacular shots.
LRRP, SOG, Marine Snipers were pretty much equipped the same way for two man shooter/spotter teams.
B-17engineer
Colonel
I heard on a show about the Battle of Stalingrad that the German Scopes needed more matinence then the Mosin Nagant.
- Thread starter
- #46
No 600mm (23.6").
- Thread starter
- #47
That's total BS. Why ?
1.) There were no German snipers in Stalingrad.
2.) Maintenance of a scope just involves cleaning the exterior.
So what'ever show you claimed you heard this in knew nothing of what it was talking about.
So are you sure you heard this B17engineer ??
Matt308
Glock Perfection
Not sure what that means. Subject to losing zero? Or scope repeatability? Or scope failure?
- Thread starter
- #49
CharlesBronson
Senior Master Sergeant
There was some guys with scopes in their rifles but no snipers in all the sence of the word.
Probably you are talking about a episode of "Battlefield Detectives" in wich Martin Pegler ( british weapons expert) zeroed both the Mosin with PU, and the K-98K with ZF-42. It was not more "reliable" but simplier to manipulate because for the PU sight you dont need a screwdrider, just simply adjust the knurled drums for windage and elevation.
Probably you are talking about a episode of "Battlefield Detectives" in wich Martin Pegler ( british weapons expert) zeroed both the Mosin with PU, and the K-98K with ZF-42. It was not more "reliable" but simplier to manipulate because for the PU sight you dont need a screwdrider, just simply adjust the knurled drums for windage and elevation.
CharlesBronson
Senior Master Sergeant
Matt308
Glock Perfection
There are multiple "maintenance" areas that might need to be addressed for a particular scope arrangement. These "maintenace" areas might be easily addressable by the operator or require an armourer to perform.
1) The scope mount might be susceptible to mechanical loss of zero. This can be caused by insufficient structural integrity while on the battlefield. Specifically, bumps, bangs, hits, drops, and other blows to the rifle/scope combination can possibly result in loss of zero. This can be either permanent (bent scope base and inability to compensate with scope adjustments) or temporary (scope adjustments allowed are within structural change of zero).
2) The scope adjustments are not repeatable. Scopes with windage (L-R) and/or elevation (U-D) adjustment turrets can sometimes result in inability to repeat zero. It is common practice for snipers to zero their scope, then perform a box adjustment to scope extremes via known turret adjustments (1/2X up... X Right... X down... X left... 1/2X up). Crappy scopes will not be back to zero. This is not an easy test and more scopes fail this test in civil use than not.
3) Scope failure. During field use scopes may need maintenance for many reasons. Most common are reticle damage from recoil (more common than you think). Scope internal integrity comprimised (resulting in fogging/condensation) is another. Lenses scratched/cracked is yet another. However, these are likely considered catastrophic and would result in the need to replace the scope, as opposed to repair. This is usually not a field expedient repair item.
1) The scope mount might be susceptible to mechanical loss of zero. This can be caused by insufficient structural integrity while on the battlefield. Specifically, bumps, bangs, hits, drops, and other blows to the rifle/scope combination can possibly result in loss of zero. This can be either permanent (bent scope base and inability to compensate with scope adjustments) or temporary (scope adjustments allowed are within structural change of zero).
2) The scope adjustments are not repeatable. Scopes with windage (L-R) and/or elevation (U-D) adjustment turrets can sometimes result in inability to repeat zero. It is common practice for snipers to zero their scope, then perform a box adjustment to scope extremes via known turret adjustments (1/2X up... X Right... X down... X left... 1/2X up). Crappy scopes will not be back to zero. This is not an easy test and more scopes fail this test in civil use than not.
3) Scope failure. During field use scopes may need maintenance for many reasons. Most common are reticle damage from recoil (more common than you think). Scope internal integrity comprimised (resulting in fogging/condensation) is another. Lenses scratched/cracked is yet another. However, these are likely considered catastrophic and would result in the need to replace the scope, as opposed to repair. This is usually not a field expedient repair item.
- Thread starter
- #54
Charles,
The above picture might very well be of a ScharfSchütze, they wore all sorts of camouflage, and some even used their own hunting rifles from home.
Here's some pictures of actual Scharfschützen:
As you can see their clothing seems very similar to that worn by the individual in the picture you posted - which was a staged photo btw (hence the safety being on), I have the other one taken at the same spot (Below).
And the picture you posted:
The Germans didn't employ any Scharfschützen in Stalingard however, which was a mistake and one of the reasons the Soviet snipers became such an irritation factor there.
Note that the guy in the picture you posted is armed with a Gewehr 98b which features a longer barrel than the K98k, it was prefered by some because of its higher muzzle velocity.
Juha,
Read Peter Senich's book if in doubt. There were no Scharfschützen in Stalingrad, which is but one of the reasons that the encounter between "Hr. Major König" and Vasilli Zaitsev couldn't have happened, pure propoganda that's all.
The above picture might very well be of a ScharfSchütze, they wore all sorts of camouflage, and some even used their own hunting rifles from home.
Here's some pictures of actual Scharfschützen:
As you can see their clothing seems very similar to that worn by the individual in the picture you posted - which was a staged photo btw (hence the safety being on), I have the other one taken at the same spot (Below).
And the picture you posted:
The Germans didn't employ any Scharfschützen in Stalingard however, which was a mistake and one of the reasons the Soviet snipers became such an irritation factor there.
Note that the guy in the picture you posted is armed with a Gewehr 98b which features a longer barrel than the K98k, it was prefered by some because of its higher muzzle velocity.
Juha,
Read Peter Senich's book if in doubt. There were no Scharfschützen in Stalingrad, which is but one of the reasons that the encounter between "Hr. Major König" and Vasilli Zaitsev couldn't have happened, pure propoganda that's all.
- Thread starter
- #55
Maintenance in the field is cleaning the scope and zeroing it in if perhaps it gets hit loose by a fall or something, but this is the same for all scopes. German scopes were filled with gas to make them more reliable in varying climates and keeping them free from condensation.
CharlesBronson
Senior Master Sergeant
I think the soldier use a Gew 98 , not "B" because it was a shorter variant, aniway the shooter in the pic is a Waffen SS soldier.
Is possible that he was a proper scharfschutzen as you said but in the Heer I had seen in training films and in the "Deustche Wochenschau" the use of a far more intrincated cammo.
German Sniper - Der Deutsche Scharfschtze 1944
Nice pictures by the way.
Is possible that he was a proper scharfschutzen as you said but in the Heer I had seen in training films and in the "Deustche Wochenschau" the use of a far more intrincated cammo.
German Sniper - Der Deutsche Scharfschtze 1944
Nice pictures by the way.
- Thread starter
- #57
Reread my post Charles, I added some pictures.
I've seen the German sniper training films, I was infact the one who presented them earlier on on this forum.
Remember that snipers adapt according to their surroundings, so there is no "standard" uniform, they sometimes wore just the same as the regular troops except they had that little sharpshooter batch on their left shoulder, or they wore different types of camoflage clothing. Sometimes they wore entire body suits designed so they were easy to attach branches and other types of vegetation to. They also used masks sometimes. Like I said it varies with the inviroment.
Furthermore it IS a Gewehr 98b on the picture, there's no doubt about it, the lenght and flat rear sight gives it away.
Here are the different versions (As you can see it is a Gew 98b on the pic):
PS: The devices on the muzzle on some of them are just metal flaps to prevent dirt from getting inside the barrel in the field, I have them on my examples as-well.
I've seen the German sniper training films, I was infact the one who presented them earlier on on this forum.
Remember that snipers adapt according to their surroundings, so there is no "standard" uniform, they sometimes wore just the same as the regular troops except they had that little sharpshooter batch on their left shoulder, or they wore different types of camoflage clothing. Sometimes they wore entire body suits designed so they were easy to attach branches and other types of vegetation to. They also used masks sometimes. Like I said it varies with the inviroment.
Furthermore it IS a Gewehr 98b on the picture, there's no doubt about it, the lenght and flat rear sight gives it away.
Here are the different versions (As you can see it is a Gew 98b on the pic):
PS: The devices on the muzzle on some of them are just metal flaps to prevent dirt from getting inside the barrel in the field, I have them on my examples as-well.
Soren
I'm not very interested in sniping but IIRC ordinary British infantry battalion had 5 snipers and they were handy in patrol, recon etc duties and also effective against enemy snipers and "snipers" (in latter I mean ordinary enemy die-hards which ordinary soldiers easily called snipers). It sounds strange that 1½ German armies didn't have a single sniper, even more when one thinks how Germans air-transported 5 Pioneer battalions to Stalingrad from Germany or at least from other army groups.
I care even less on "Hr. Major König" and have not seen the film Enemy at the Gates or whatever.
Still, where were German snipers? After all Stalingrad was the main show in autumn 42.
Juha
I'm not very interested in sniping but IIRC ordinary British infantry battalion had 5 snipers and they were handy in patrol, recon etc duties and also effective against enemy snipers and "snipers" (in latter I mean ordinary enemy die-hards which ordinary soldiers easily called snipers). It sounds strange that 1½ German armies didn't have a single sniper, even more when one thinks how Germans air-transported 5 Pioneer battalions to Stalingrad from Germany or at least from other army groups.
I care even less on "Hr. Major König" and have not seen the film Enemy at the Gates or whatever.
Still, where were German snipers? After all Stalingrad was the main show in autumn 42.
Juha
CharlesBronson
Senior Master Sergeant
I did and I modified a bit my post in relation with that, you are too fast to reply
Matt308
Glock Perfection
And thus reinforce my points.
