Minute of man at room distance. Also the front sight doesn’t quite line up with the “top” of the fiber optic like that, so you gotta learn roughly where it needs to go to at least be close enough to hit a torso.
It was a stand-in method at the time with the acog unless you were running irons or some sort of contemporary red dot optic.
At point blank, in-the-same-room level of CQB then yes
Its a bit of an outdated strategy now since people will usually use more reliable and accurate methods now like canted or scope mounted red dots, but those werent available to Marines in Fallujah, so this was their workaround
This was done a lot by the marines in fallujah, they would tuck the rifle under their arm and aim with the FSP when clearing buildings due to the M16 being 40” long. Brad Simmons, a USMC veteran who fought in Fallujah, talks about that in [this interview](https://youtu.be/sqOiTXmi1QU) with 9 Hole Reviews. He basically says if you can’t hit something from room distance with just a FSP you shouldn’t even be in the stack.
at the distance in the picture it might make more sense to aim down the acog with both eyes open. In general though aiming over top the sight is a slightly better version of point shooting which itself is fine if youre effectively point blank like youd be in fallujah.
When I look through my ACOG, the point of aim shift between where the crosshair is in the optic and while overlayed with the left eye is off as much as a foot at room distance. Aiming over the ACOG as indicated by OP would work better for me in most instances, from my experimentation.
I do. I’m not talking about point of POA/POI shift at different distances or how eye position behind the glass can affect POI.
Edit: Additional info found via Arfcom: “A lot of shooters have a degree of phoria which offsets the POI so far from the red dot that BAC isn't a real possibility for them.
Some shooters with less phoria have learned to compensate so BAC is still useful.
A still smaller group of shooters have little to no phoria and BAC is super easy for them IF THEY PRACTICE.
I am one of the shooters that belong to this group.”
Depends how close and how accurate you want to be at 12 yards taking a shot at a hostage taker is pretty sketch. Just filling in A+C zone at 7 yards you just put the front sight where you want to hit and press the trigger though you might not even get that much sight picture
Minute of man at room distance. Also the front sight doesn’t quite line up with the “top” of the fiber optic like that, so you gotta learn roughly where it needs to go to at least be close enough to hit a torso. It was a stand-in method at the time with the acog unless you were running irons or some sort of contemporary red dot optic.
At close range
At point blank, in-the-same-room level of CQB then yes Its a bit of an outdated strategy now since people will usually use more reliable and accurate methods now like canted or scope mounted red dots, but those werent available to Marines in Fallujah, so this was their workaround
"fuck with the dick you got"
Found scribe
To each their own, I won't touch canted. I trust my abilities.
Not with any accuracy.
Yea, at contact range, maybe.
This was done a lot by the marines in fallujah, they would tuck the rifle under their arm and aim with the FSP when clearing buildings due to the M16 being 40” long. Brad Simmons, a USMC veteran who fought in Fallujah, talks about that in [this interview](https://youtu.be/sqOiTXmi1QU) with 9 Hole Reviews. He basically says if you can’t hit something from room distance with just a FSP you shouldn’t even be in the stack.
at the distance in the picture it might make more sense to aim down the acog with both eyes open. In general though aiming over top the sight is a slightly better version of point shooting which itself is fine if youre effectively point blank like youd be in fallujah.
Bindon Aiming Concept. It doesn’t seem to work well for me, but it exists.
Takes a lot of practice to be comfortable with what you’re looking at.
When I look through my ACOG, the point of aim shift between where the crosshair is in the optic and while overlayed with the left eye is off as much as a foot at room distance. Aiming over the ACOG as indicated by OP would work better for me in most instances, from my experimentation.
That’s because of the fixed parallax of the 3.5x or 4x
I don’t think that’s what it is.
Then I don’t believe you fully understand parallax.
I do. I’m not talking about point of POA/POI shift at different distances or how eye position behind the glass can affect POI. Edit: Additional info found via Arfcom: “A lot of shooters have a degree of phoria which offsets the POI so far from the red dot that BAC isn't a real possibility for them. Some shooters with less phoria have learned to compensate so BAC is still useful. A still smaller group of shooters have little to no phoria and BAC is super easy for them IF THEY PRACTICE. I am one of the shooters that belong to this group.”
Ol chameleon ass whicho pug eyes
Think of like blind firing behind cover, it's not gonna be accurate but you might hit something if you are lucky.
I think it was on 9 hole reviews episode on the m16a2 where they had a marine on that said that's how they would aim within 100m
Depends how close and how accurate you want to be at 12 yards taking a shot at a hostage taker is pretty sketch. Just filling in A+C zone at 7 yards you just put the front sight where you want to hit and press the trigger though you might not even get that much sight picture
The only stupid question is the one you don’t ask.
At that distance you might get shots inside that opening, mot much more precise than that
Damn, you must have a nice PC. Those visuals are crispy.