Using a mildot reticle for corrections

[Roe]

Have lately seen a few explanations on how to use a speciality reticle such as the mildot, TMR, P4, P4Fine, MLR or whatever the manufacturers call them.

A couple of the explanations are a bit theoretical. Here is a practical rundown. For this explanation to be valid, the reticle needs to be in the 1st focal plane or at the calibrated magnification with a 2nd focal plane.

This explanation was a response to a guy stating an example with shooting range 782 meters, the bullet striking 30 cm (about 12") high and 60 cm (about 24") to the right and then proceeding with the theoretical calculations.

This is what the bullet strike would look like under practical shooting

Don't involve any math or theory in the shooting.
Below you see a red line between two posts, or 1 MIL.
Regardless of actual shooting distance this gap corresponds to
10 clicks on a MIL scope (1cm or 0.1MRAD clicks)
14 clicks on a MOA scope (1/4" or MOA clicks)
(For a hunting scope reticle, you simply measure your reticle and get your click values that way)

So this hit would ALWAYS generate this correction:
4 down, 8 left (MIL scope)
or
6 down, 12 left (MOA scope)
... and again: this is regardless of shooting distance.

The strenght of speciality reticles in the "mildot family" are making corrections for the second shot. It really is as easy to use as described above.

If contemplating a speciality reticle, choose one of the above and disregard RapidZ etc...

 

[NateHaler]

Have lately seen a few explanations on how to use a speciality reticle such as the mildot, TMR, P4, P4Fine, MLR or whatever the manufacturers call them.

The strenght of speciality reticles in the "mildot family" are making corrections for the second shot. It really is as easy to use as described above.

If contemplating a speciality reticle, choose one of the above and disregard RapidZ etc...

If the shooter knows by how much the POI deviated from POA, then correcting for the second shot -- presuming the conditions are the same -- is simple, regardless of reticle type. I don't understand what your point your post is trying to make.

To hit a target, the shooter needs to accurately estimate the distance, and know the ballistics of the load, and understand how to compensate for conditions like wind. That's regardless of reticle type. Some reticles can help the shooter estimate distance, and potentially assist in holding off rather than dialing in adjustments.

There's very little magic. It's mostly about understanding your equipment and its/your capabilities in the conditions present.

Regarding the hypothetical scenario, the shooter won't be able to see the bullet strike at 800+ yards, let alone be able to know how far POI deviated from POA, unless they have a target puller in the pits or a camera system communicating that info. Or am I missing something in all of this?

 

[Roe]

Or am I missing something in all of this?

Well... my stance is if I didn't get my point through I didn't make a good enough argument, so I'll try again and hopefully from the other persons viewpoint.

Regarding the hypothetical scenario, the shooter won't be able to see the bullet strike at 800+ yards, let alone be able to know how far POI deviated from POA, unless they have a target puller in the pits or a camera system communicating that info.

Below is my target area at 1200 meters, or more than 1300 yards. I have never had any trouble spotting bullet strike or tracking bullet trace down to the strike. Very easy to see the bullet strike.

I will however support your argument that it can be hard to accurately follow the trace all the way down and place the strike when the bullet dives down in front of a non-reactive paper target.

We haven't used puit crew/ target pullers for at least 10 years over here. The camera technology you are refering to is stone-age. Acousttic sensors & wireless transmitters is what's used here and the targets will give you any information you like. Picture shows a standard 300m target placed at 800 transmitting the results back to the monitor.

If the shooter knows by how much the POI deviated from POA, then correcting for the second shot -- presuming the conditions are the same -- is simple, regardless of reticle type. I don't understand what your point your post is trying to make.

Yes, and here is my argument:

The theoretical approach is "Hmm... 800 yards, 1/4" clicks, that's about 8/4" a click.... 24" miss to the right by 2" clicks equals 12 clicks correction..." That's a fairly long mental excercise.
vs
the practical approach which is: (observing bullet strike in reticle) " Correct 12 clicks left!"

To hit a target, the shooter needs to accurately estimate the distance, and know the ballistics of the load, and understand how to compensate for conditions like wind. That's regardless of reticle type. Some reticles can help the shooter estimate distance, and potentially assist in holding off rather than dialing in adjustments.

Agreed. Or at least estimate the distance as accurately as his trajectory/target requires etc. I'm concerned with the second shot and how to use the reticle for that.

There's very little magic. It's mostly about understanding your equipment and its/your capabilities in the conditions present.

Absolutely!

 

[sscoyote]

That is a pretty good system for follow-up shots Roe--never thought of that. I use reticle most of the time though and rarely dial (i don't go out to ranges beyond 600-700 though).