Hot Finger!

Hotshot sniper in one-and-a-half mile double kill

Two kills at over 8,100 feet:

Craig Harrison, a member of the Household Cavalry, killed the insurgents with consecutive shots — even though they were 3,000ft beyond the most effective range of his rifle.

“The first round hit a machinegunner in the stomach and killed him outright,” said Harrison, a Corporal of Horse. “He went straight down and didn’t move.

“The second insurgent grabbed the weapon and turned as my second shot hit him in the side. He went down, too. They were both dead.”

The shooting — which took place while Harrison’s colleagues came under attack — was at such extreme range that the 8.59mm bullets took almost three seconds to reach their target after leaving the barrel of the rifle at almost three times the speed of sound.

The distance to Harrison’s two targets was measured by a GPS system at 8,120ft, or 1.54 miles. The previous record for a sniper kill is 7,972ft, set by a Canadian soldier who shot dead an Al-Qaeda gunman in March 2002.

Using a L115A3 by Accuracy Arms International. It fires the .338 Lapua.


  1. If a .338 Lapua could hit a man-sized target — TWICE — at this range, it makes you wonder what a .50BMG or .400 CheyTac could accomplish in the same shooting conditions…

    1. ” The previous record for a sniper kill is 7,972ft, set by a Canadian soldier who shot dead an Al-Qaeda gunman in March 2002.”
      … would, I think, be an answer to your question. The rifle was by Macmillan.


  2. Ultimately, success is not measured singly by:

    1) The weapon.

    2) The quality or caliber of the round.

    3) The sniper’s ability.

    4) Weather conditions.

    It’s a combination of all 4.

  3. I was just standin’ there mindin’ mah own bizness, thinkin’ bout torchin’ some mor ‘a them infidel fuel trucks………when all of a sudden………..DDOOHH!!

  4. Guess they’re going to have to edit that episode on best sniper rifles that the Military Channel has been playing a lot lately.

  5. “Harrison killed one machinegunner with his first attempt and felled the other with his next shot. He then let off a final round to knock the enemy weapon out of action.”

    OK, the first two I can believe with a .338, even at that range. But knocking a PKM out of action at that range, with one shot? That’s a bit harder to swallow.

    Other than that, the goofy British way of speccing calibers in mm, but ranges in miles and feet just seems odd. It’s basically the opposite of current US lingo (calibers in inches, (unofficially) and range in meters). But both point to the benefit of metric standardization all around. Or “all round” as they might say over there….

  6. The Brits haven’t bought into the metric system like the rest of the Euroweenies.

    They still use feet, yards and miles for linear measure and pints, quarts and gallons for liquid measure. Cept the gallon is an Imperial gallon (5-quatrs) compared to the U.S. gallon (4-quarts).

    They also, to their credit, didn’t adopt the Euro as the monetary unit. They still stick with the Pound Sterling and pence.

    U.S. caliber in inches???? civilian maybe


    What about 7.62mm, 5.56mm, 9mm, 20mm, 25mm and 30mm?

    About the only exception is the 50-cal. (1/2-inch) where most Euro countries use 12.7mm.

    I think that’s a hold over from WW-II and Korea when the M-1 was 30-cal and the 1911 Colt pistol was 45-cal.

  7. Toejam, but the brits did make their coinage decimal. That’s the first step toward hell.

    I think we should switch to base-12 numbering just to f*ck with metric advocates.

    1. Actually, there is no particular reason for decimal. Other cultures have used Base 4 and Base 8 by counting the spaces between fingers.

      The dozen and Base 12 comes from counting on the finger and knuckle joints of the hand rather than just the whole finger. By including the fingertips, one can also count in Base 16. (Got a headache yet?)

      About the only problem for using Base 12 or Base 16 is that we need to adopt single characters corresponding the decimal numbers of beyond the number nine.

  8. My friend and I, bored at work one summer, came up with a complete base 12 replacement for the metric system. The advantages are that you could retain the traditional 12 inches to the foot, yet your ’10’ would be easily divisible by 2, 3, 4, and 6. Dozens and grosses would be tens and hundreds. We thought that the underlying concept of the metric system was sound, just that, typically, the French had screwed up the implementation. Finding a symbol for 10 and 11 should’t be that hard.

    1. If you really want to have fun, ditch the mks (meters-kilograms-seconds) system for the fsf (furlongs-stone-fortnight) system.

  9. I’m with you buckethead….

    I led a campaign a few years back to make “time” measuring decimal.

    You know a 20-hour day, all 10-months have 30-days and so on…

    But the government wasn’t interested!

    Bet the progressive Europeans pick up the ball and run with it, however.

Comments are closed