Does someone want to explain the thought process of this design to me?

Does someone want to explain the thought process of this design to me? Obviously it is retarded because they decided to go with sights similar to the 1917 enfield on the m1 garand, m1 carbine and 1903a3 springfield, despite giving all of the m1917s away as military aid
There are no fewer than 5 fucking pints of aim on here.
There is the main battle sight, which I am not a fan of but whatever it is similar to the rifles of the time and I guess the peep sight, though there is a peep sight, was considered fragile or restricted sight too much, but it is weird because it is zeroed for 547 yards, which is 500 meters, but the entire rest of the sight is in yards so why the fuck is the the main battle sight in meters and 500 meters seems like a long way for a maximum point blank with open sights, how big was the vertical dispersion? Is this due to the change from .30-03 to .30-06?
The peep sight is fine, it isn't too dissimilar to the sights used with the 1917, no 4 mk1, target rifles of the time and arisaka. I think a 2 position like an M1 carbine, No 4 Mk1* or M16A1 is makes more sense, but the sight itself is fine if not more expensive than it needed to be. The graduations are dumb as fuck though as the peep goes from 100-2,350 yards in 25 yard increments. Who the fuck is shooting a 1903 in combat to 1 and a third miles unmagnified? The fucking drift correction for the spin of the bullet is funny as fuck and the fact they did the math wrong and it doesn't work correct past like 600 yards, but they didn't realize because no one is shooting that far anyway. Then on top of the peep we have a u notch for 100-2,450 yards and a "field view". What the fuck is the "field view" triangle and why have this and the peep? If it is for better battle field awareness why not just use the main battle sight?

  1. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    And then on top of the main battle sight is a second (third?) u notch volly sight for 1,400-2,740 yards. Did they really need a 3rd sight just for shooting past 1 and 1/3rd miles? And then there is a 4th, non adjustable volley sight for 2,850 yards at the top of the sight, incase you need to shoot 1 and 2/3rds miles, unmagnified.
    Like I get they got rid of most of this superfluous shit and I even get having the peep graduated in 25 yard increments due to the muh marksmanship culture that lead to M16A2 sights and lead to other rifles at the time having similar target sights on a military rifle, but I still don't fucking get the "field view" and its u notch or the fact that they decided they needed 2 sets of volly sights for shooting between 1 1/3 and 1 2/3 miles.
    Are there any documentaries or documentation about why they went with these sights? Were they really used that much and found to be useful on the trapdoor and krag rifles?

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Volley shooting in a group at long ranges.
      Next time just google it you retard.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Why do you need 4 different fucking volley sights on the same fucking gun? The top sight only gives you like 100 more yards, the second top sight only gives you 300 yards after you are already over 1.3 miles and the 2nd from the bottom sight only adds 100 yards over the peep and the peep itself goes to 1.3 miles if you want to volley shoot. How much fucking volley shooting are they doing at a mile and a half?

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          It was a big deal in the Boer wars. Boers could outrange the British with their 7mm Mausers. They would get defilade behind a hill a mile or so away and target a British infantry column on a pre-ranged road. A company or two of men would let loose and the Brits would sustain moderate to heavy casualties from a literal rain of bullets from enemies they couldn’t see. It was thought at the turn of the 20th century that these tactics would be a broadly applicable infantry tactic in most wars. It wasn’t. But they ddin’t know.

  2. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Because infantry needed standoff capability against cavalry (which was still in common use all the way up to WWI, with the last cavalry saber adopted by the US intended for actual use being adopted in 1913) and direct fire artillery, and machine guns still weren't mature enough to do the job in all cases.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It was a big deal in the Boer wars. Boers could outrange the British with their 7mm Mausers. They would get defilade behind a hill a mile or so away and target a British infantry column on a pre-ranged road. A company or two of men would let loose and the Brits would sustain moderate to heavy casualties from a literal rain of bullets from enemies they couldn’t see. It was thought at the turn of the 20th century that these tactics would be a broadly applicable infantry tactic in most wars. It wasn’t. But they ddin’t know.

      I get the need for volley sights, I don't get why you need 4 different volley sights on the same gun

      https://i.imgur.com/b3ILnh4.png

      here ya go
      https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3vgQuY3vA0FMlVOcmE3NS1Lbkk/view?resourcekey=0-4HA55yldF4qJwkFEiDnKtg

      thanks

      how many more times are you going to remake this thread

      God forbid someone makes a thread about something other than ukraine

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        and in your artlessly retarded way you managed to make a thread that is significantly less useful than the 5000th thread about ukraine

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          cope, seethe and dial 8 chud

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          This thread is fine, I learned about m1903 sights.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            why would I need to cope or seethe? I already knew how springfield sights worked

            cope, seethe and dial 8 chud

            t. noguns pleb

            I just wonder what the answer is that you're waiting for someone to tell you

            when gays like you constantly make the same thread or post the same question you guys are always fishing for someone to tell you the answer you want to hear but I don't see what answer you're looking for in this situation

            do you take any prescription medications by chance

            some people just enjoy the thought that they have successfully conned anonymous strangers on the internet into believing that they are retarded.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I just wonder what the answer is that you're waiting for someone to tell you

        when gays like you constantly make the same thread or post the same question you guys are always fishing for someone to tell you the answer you want to hear but I don't see what answer you're looking for in this situation

        do you take any prescription medications by chance

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          why would I need to cope or seethe? I already knew how springfield sights worked
          [...]
          t. noguns pleb
          [...]
          some people just enjoy the thought that they have successfully conned anonymous strangers on the internet into believing that they are retarded.

          I own guns. I am looking for a primary source or at least a secondary source that explains why they needed 4 volley sights and not just 1 volley sight. Cope seethe and dilate you no gunz chud

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I highly doubt you've ever even seen a gun in real life before, let alone own any

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              well then you would be both wrong and a homosexual

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >pic of my guns i definitely own.jpg

                kid, just go ahead and give it a rest

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                sure thing there reddit spacing, ATF agent Chang Goldenstieneburg

                The 547 yard battle sight zero was because it's the same zero as with the 220 grain M1903 cartridge. They updated the ladder, but not the battle sight.

                Tbh, the Army always cared more about Camp Perry than actual combat.

                weird that it works out to 500 meters

  3. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It’s a rifleman thing, you wouldn’t get it.

  4. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    here ya go
    https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3vgQuY3vA0FMlVOcmE3NS1Lbkk/view?resourcekey=0-4HA55yldF4qJwkFEiDnKtg

  5. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    how many more times are you going to remake this thread

  6. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The 547 yard battle sight zero was because it's the same zero as with the 220 grain M1903 cartridge. They updated the ladder, but not the battle sight.

    Tbh, the Army always cared more about Camp Perry than actual combat.

  7. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Does someone want to explain the thought process of this design to me?
    It's form is just the result of wanting two different types of apertures for aiming on a flip-up ladder. The original M1903 sight was pic related, a pretty typical tangent-leaf sight with both a open "U"-notch and a pivoting plate with a "O"-aperture that could be rotated up behind the "U" notch.

    The problem was that the US Cavalry was insistent that the M1903 sight was prone to getting stuck in their rifle scabbards because of the way it sticks up. So the M1905 sight was designed, which sits very flat on the rifle and can be folded in either direction.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      So the M1905 is the Ordnance Department's answer to how to fit two apertures on a flat folding leaf. The "U" notches on the sight slider and at the very top of the leaf are just a case of "better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it". It added a theoretical capability to the rifle without inhibiting any of its other capabilities.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/LLLnhXF.jpg

      So the M1905 is the Ordnance Department's answer to how to fit two apertures on a flat folding leaf. The "U" notches on the sight slider and at the very top of the leaf are just a case of "better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it". It added a theoretical capability to the rifle without inhibiting any of its other capabilities.

      Were blind fags who are incapable of using peep sights that big an issue back in 1903 times?

  8. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    wasn't the 1903 sight just a slightly modified buffington sight from a trapdoor springfield?

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      You have the M1901 sight on the Krags between the original "Buffington" M1884 sight and the M1905 sight.

Your email address will not be published.