Our Most Lethal Sniper

[Pathfinder1]

Hi...


Here's something that should be of interest to everyone...and especially us Veterans...about Chief Chris Kyle...a Navy Seal. Among his many awards are FIVE Bronze Stars and TWO Silver stars...!!

Man, I'm sure glad he was on our side. You see, he is the "most lethal sniper" in U.S. Military history...having a confirmed 150 kills...!!

He has a new book out, called American Sniper, which should be particularly fascinating, per his January 05 interview with Bill O'reilly.

[oldsarge]

I'll be looking forward to reading his book. It's nice to see snipers used to their full capacity within their assigned duties. Those guys have been racking up the kills big time. Some amazingly long shots have been recorded Too!

[Lamebeaver]

Not to take anthing away from Chris, but I would argue that the title belongs to Carlos Hathcock (USMC).

The problem is the "confirmed kills" in order to qualify, the kill needs to be witnessed by a third party, who also needs to be an officer.

Chris has 160 confirmed kills and 255 unconfirmed kills.

Carlos, who operated in Viet Nam, has 93 confirmed kills, and 360 unconfirmed kills.

[Grandpa]

One of my basic drill sgts had 47 confirmed. He was back in the states undergoing treatment so they were using him as a DI. Great guy too. We loved sitting around him in the evenings listening to his tales. His shrink wanted him to talk about it to get the cobwebs out of his mind.

[catspa]

I also favor Hathcock (RIP, gunny) as more accomplished, because I believe that the SE Asia theatre involved complicating factors that are absent from desert or mountain warfare. In addition, he was working with relatively primitive equipment (IIRC, early on he used a M70 Winchester with an off-the-shelf target scope).

It's difficult to compare between one era and another. However, I will readily admit Kyle's the best living, and certainly may meet or exceed Hathcock's total. I'll read his book with interest, and buy him beer if ever I get the opportunity.

Parker

[Grandpa]

Originally Posted by catspa

In addition, he was working with relatively primitive equipment (IIRC, early on he used a M70 Winchester with an off-the-shelf target scope).

Parker

Our Sgt said his weapon of choice back then was a Rem 742 6mm with a redfield 3x9 wideangle. Each chosen sniper could choose his own config.

[oldsarge]

Originally Posted by catspa

I also favor Hathcock (RIP, gunny) as more accomplished, because I believe that the SE Asia theatre involved complicating factors that are absent from desert or mountain warfare. In addition, he was working with relatively primitive equipment (IIRC, early on he used a M70 Winchester with an off-the-shelf target scope).

It's difficult to compare between one era and another. However, I will readily admit Kyle's the best living, and certainly may meet or exceed Hathcock's total. I'll read his book with interest, and buy him beer if ever I get the opportunity.

Parker

I agree, it is difficult to compare. Each theater of operation has it's own advantages and disadvantages. I would think that being out in the openness of a place like Afghanistan would be harder to conduct tactical movement in as far as being stealthy is concerned. Your shots would be at a greater distance, a little harder I would say. Where as a jungle type environment may be better for masking your movement, movement is harder due to the terrain. Shots are rarely taken out to max distances. Pro's and con's to both, either way, today's snipers are highly trained. Far beyond old school training. It's all because of the past experience of guys like Hathcock, that we can develop such skilled troops.

[jason]

Originally Posted by oldsarge

I agree, it is difficult to compare. Each theater of operation has it's own advantages and disadvantages. I would think that being out in the openness of a place like Afghanistan would be harder to conduct tactical movement in as far as being stealthy is concerned. Your shots would be at a greater distance, a little harder I would say. Where as a jungle type environment may be better for masking your movement, movement is harder due to the terrain. Shots are rarely taken out to max distances. Pro's and con's to both, either way, today's snipers are highly trained. Far beyond old school training. It's all because of the past experience of guys like Hathcock, that we can develop such skilled troops.

I was reading an article about a Sniper during WW2 I think it was. Something like 500 Kills in a less then a year. I want to say he was around Russia. Not at home now or I could have found out for sure.

[oldsarge]

Mikhail Surkov (729 kills), Ivan Sidorenko (542 kills), Vasily Zaytsev(400 kills), Vasilij Shalvovich Kvachantiradze (534 kills), Nikolai Ilyin (494 kills), Nikolai Ilyin (494 kills), Fyodor Okhlopkov (429 kills), These were their top ranking of WWII.

Between Russia and Germany, sniping was greatly developed, not only in weapons, but constructing hides, individual movement techniques, camouflage and counter sniping.

[Pathfinder1]

Hi...


At least one of Russia's top snipers was a woman.

It has also been asserted that one of our GI sniper's bullets went through the scope of a German sniper, killing him, just as he was ready to shoot the GI sniper...!!