The Role of Snipers... In Stalingrad.
- Thread starter Kolya Belenky
- Start date
real snipers were rather scarce in WW2, most of them were *insert apropriate english word here*
in german we have a word called Heckensch
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Back then they were probably consider marksman. The rifles they used back then were far more limited in range and accuracy compared to the rifles they use today.
Upvote
0
Er, they really weren't. At best they were slightly less accurate, due to things like manufacturing consistency, optics quality, etc. The Mauser 98k and Mosin are both accurate, long range rifles, and the cartriges they shoot are more or less very similar to those used in most NATO and Russian sniper systems today. In fact, the Dragonov, while technically a designated marksman's rifle, is chambered in the exact same 7.62x54R that the Mosin is chambered. Unless you're talking about the crazy .50 BMG rifles that aren't used that often, the rifles are very comparable.
The real difference between a sniper and a marksman is how they're deployed. The sniper works alone or with a spotter, independent of organized squads or platoons. They're more of a recon/harassment force. The marksman works WITH a squad or platoon to provide direct, long range fire during a normal engagement. This wasn't so clear back in WW II as the terminology hadn't been standardized yet, but the rolls were still there.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
I think the dragonov is much more of a continuation of putting a scope on a rifle like the k98 and the nagant. While dedicated rifles like the m40 are new developments.
Upvote
0
Actually, it's exactly the opposite, the Dragonov was an original design for a DMR, and the m40 is more or less a reworked Remington 700 deer rifle. Moreover, the m40 also shoots a fairly common cartridge, 7.62x51 NATO, aka .308 Winchester, which is a round introduced in the early 50's and very similar in characteristics to .30-06, which was the standard US rifle cartridge through WWI and WWII. This includes the Springfield 1903's used in the sniper/DMR roles in WWII.
The only thing that really differentiates most "sniper rifles" from normal scoped rifles are some finer details, like heavier barrels, better optics, very tight manufactuing standards, and some other bells and whistles. These help make the rifles more accurate on a very small scale, for very long range shots. Like I said before, modern rifles that are purpose built for the sniper/DMR roles are slightly more accurate and better fitting to thier jobs than the old service-rifle-with-a-scope in WWII. However they weren't "far more limited in range and accuracy" like Ermac suggested.
Upvote
0
Yeah. Like stated k98 and m91/30 were accurate rifles. Though at least Soviets chose the best and most accurate rifles to be sniper rifles (that
Upvote
0
I think it would be cool if snipers would get spawns others won't spawn at. Like in high buildings and such. And maybe they could be countered by making their spawns destroyable by sapers or arty.
Upvote
0
i hope that in the english naming (aka the non original naming) they just call the sniper not a sniper but a marksman or something.
Upvote
0
Oh no. The sniper rifles today have heavy barrels which are glass bedded and free floating. The optics they use today are much more advanced then what was used back then. They also didn't have match grade ammo for their rifles back then like they do today. A M24 will out shoot a Mosin Nagant by far. So yes, snipers/marksman were more limited in range and accuracy compared to today.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
I like this. Changing the class name to Marksman is something I could get behind, too.
Also, those old rifles are more than capable in the right hands. Have a look:
YouTube - WWII German 98K rifle at 900 yards
Upvote
0
This video at the end points out the major difference: quality and consistency of the ammunition. The ammunition he was firing was handcrafted for exactly this purpose, and using much higher quality (and consistently high quality) bullets. Additionally, modern powders burn much faster and cleaner than what a beleaguered force of 60 years ago would have been using...
Upvote
0
Going a bit off topic:
From everything I had read, a Mosin is rather inaccurate for a bolt action rifle.
Yeah, it is more accurate than an AK, but WWII guns don't touch modern bolt guns.
Also, I am not expert, but that K98K does not look like it has the original scope or stock. A modernized stock set and scope can really help with accuracy.
From everything I had read, a Mosin is rather inaccurate for a bolt action rifle.
Yeah, it is more accurate than an AK, but WWII guns don't touch modern bolt guns.
Also, I am not expert, but that K98K does not look like it has the original scope or stock. A modernized stock set and scope can really help with accuracy.
Upvote
0
Now lets not start assuming things.
Ammunition is one thing, but for the most part that rifle was original. Of course there would be few WWII snipers making shots at 900 yards, but the video shows that it can be done.
Those weapons were by no means incapable.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
I'm not doubting the rifles... I've got a 1946 91/30 that shoots just as true as my 1911 m/96 Mauser. I'm just questioning the quality of the ammunition available to either force during the siege of Stalingrad.
Upvote
0
yup i brought that up too once or twice
i once had a can of 1973 eastern german 8x57
they had around 1 meter of spray at 130m with a rifle that shoots perfectly fine at up to 300m with normal factory ammo (it wasnt the best shooter, but it was ok)
so if the 1970's peacetime production was that horrible, i can only imagine how bad the 1940's wartime production was (i once had a 100 round can of 1944 WH ammo, they were even worse than the DDR rounds, but i guess partly due to age)
Upvote
0