Harrasment Missions by Snipers

last SG · 2004-09-23T01:00:31+00:00

That would be costly. Each matched round costs S$1 or so.

SpecOps87 SG

Hey,can anyone share what a sniper team does when they do a harrasment mission?During Army Open House this 3SG from Snipers told me that for this type of missions they are usually equipped with the MSG90.So can anyone share?What is the objective of harrasment missions and what is done to ensure the enemy is harrased?

sgFish SG

they strip the enemy and touch their privates

sbst275 SG

This is Israel style

Ito_^ SG

Right, and the Americans taught them that. Laughing

John Ching SG

To know more about harrasment missions by a sniper, it would be best if you read this book "Marine sniper 93 confirmed kills" by Charles Henderson. Its an unofficial auto biography on the exploits of, the late, Master Gunnery Sergeant Carlos Hathcock in Vietnam.

He is a legend among U.S military sniper community. He has done some wild things that no sniper today has been able to accomplish, even in the current Iraq situation.

However, the short version of what harrasment missions is about, it is to put the FEAR of GOD from an unseen distance into the enemy through a 7.62. Twisted Evil

pie SG

Well…my guess is…if you’ve got something that you can’t touch that’s picking off soldiers one by one, you’d be pretty scared to move about…definitely affects morale. Harrasment would probably be a shoot and scoot to avoid detection.

|-|05| SG

kill the medic….and kill the officer…that shld work ehhe

chunyong SG

he has more than 93, many are unconfirmed kills in vietnam. he got a purple heart cos he saved his pal when the vehicle caught fire, he suffered severe burns dat plague him throughout his life. i got a Carlos hathcock ballcap. Smile

basically, the sniper just gun down 1-2 people every few hours to drain the morale of the enemy and to deprive the enemy of rest and sleep. it also serves as a diversion for a follow up by others.

Johnston SG

Not so.
"Late in his life, he was awarded a Silver Star, the third-highest military honor, for an incident that happened nearly 30 years earlier, Hathcock's career as a sniper came to sudden end outside Queson in 1969, when the amphibious tractor he was riding on was ambushed and hit a 500-pound box mine. Hathcock pulled seven marines off the flame-engulfed vehicle before jumping to safety. As was his way, he rejected any commendation for his bravery.?

http://www.angelfire.com/rant/military/2222/page7index.html

He is the MAN. Smile

zenden9 SG

If I not wrong,the vietcong sniper gunned down more US than US down North Vietnamese after the end of US commitment in vietnam in 1973! Most vietnamese communist casualties r caused by bombers!

Johnston SG

Not so, after the Tet offensive, the VC were more or less burned out.

I have no idea what your post is trying to imply. Really.
Um, do you mean US servicemen, or US citizens?
Either way, after the Great Saigon HeliCasEvac, there wouldn't have been too many Yanks around for them to kill.

The official US vs Vietnam Casualty ratio is 50K: 1 Million. Or so i remember, it's been too long since i refreshed myself.
But a million - fifty thousand. hmm. That's a very large number.

crosshairs SG

Carlos Hathcock a.k.a. Long Thrang(White Feather) is a person who is proud of his skill, looks up to the image of a marine, and not a man of many words, a simple man, simple and effective. Only under that classification can I rationalise his actions in vietnam. In reality a sniper is a cold blooded killer with a very powerful weapon. They all have a conscience, and the only way to prevent themselves from being victims of their own conscience is to not talk about who they killed. I have seen it in the eyes of a Royal Marine sniper.

A harrasment mission is one whereby no member of the offensive is taken down, though it may not be the case all the time. It is a mission to affect a large force using minimal personnel with the objective of delay or diversion while a larger force is gathered. It is not an end, but a means to an end. Its key to success is the confusion and fear that it generates. It lowers the moral of the enemy, it irritates them as the delay continues.

The effective harrassment range is between 800 to 1000 metres. Anything closer than that warrants a kill, though not a confirmed kill. A confirmed kill is most likely at 400m. Anything closer than that puts the sniper in unnecessary danger and should not be attempted.

Question: You are a sniper. You are travelling with your infantry company when you encounter suppressive fire from an MG post. What do you do?

Johnston SG

Clap clap!
Give that man a Cognac, he's earned it!

A refreshing break from the usual joking-type answers.

I was never a sniper, nor anywhere near there. Care to furnish us the answer?

Well, what requirements are there for a kill to be confirmed? Witnesses?

Johnston SG

Lightly educated guess:
Seek cover, and try to locate said MG post. After which, neutralise, or note co-ords, and call for fire.

12qwaszx SG

read that hathcock guy biography before.
if i remembered correctly, he nearly got sniped once.
in the end, he put his round into the vietcong's scope Shocked

crosshairs SG

You don't really have to locate it, it should be quite obvious. If unsure, note the delay between the thump (round impact) and the start of the crack (from the MG), for every half a second, multiply by 300 to get the approximate range of the MG post. Set range on rifle.

You don't call for fire. You ARE the fire.

And you don't take out the personnel. You take out the gun by taking out the breech. That is one humane example I have for this profession. If not possible, try again. There is no such thing as "cannot hit".

crosshairs SG

He fired up an elevation, the vietcong was on higher ground. Hathcock assumed that his life was in danger bacause the VC had spotted him. If that were to be true, then the round should not have passed through the scope of the VC into his eye, due to the highly curved tragectory of an uphill shot.

He probably did not think of this: The VC was trying to locate him, or have already found him, but was not aiming at him, but rather his rifle was pointed far behind Hathcock.

But then again it may not have been that much of an elevation. Anyway he blamed his white feather for giving him away.

John Ching SG

FYI, by right a confirmed kill requires the witness of an officer. However, due to the fact that an officer can't be every where at 1 time, the next person to witness( on be half of an officer ) the kill would be the sniper's spotter. But signing off on the kill record still requires an officer.

BTW, snipers aren't really cold blooded or anti-social, they're just trying to suppress the horror that they have seen through the scope without pissing anyone off. Honestly, the civilise world doesn't think to highly of a sniper being able to kill from an extended range. Especially girls don't like the ideal of the guy they know, being able to kill another man with 1 shot. Strangely they prefer guys who kill another man up close & personal, eg Commandos, Special Forces, etc.

Johnston SG

You got that right, MG fire. Smile The only thing less obvious might be artillery bombardment.

Lightly educated guess:
The MG post, upon spotting an Inf Coy, would have radioed it in, before engaging, wouldnt it?
So calling in fire, esp arty, would allow the guns to "get their bearings", just in case armor or inf start showing up in huge numbers.

No offense, but wouldn't making the MG blow up also cause grave hurt to the crew? And the possibility of crippling them? Would it be more humane to let them be invalids for life?

Johnston SG

Because as snipers, they hunt the greatest game a civilian could think of.
That is, a living, breathing, armed human.
That's unsettling.

Personally, i've yet to meet a gal who likes anything military.

In the civilian world, any one with a rifle + a telescopic sight is automatically a sniper.