norseman Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 two seems to work good if both are well trained. Once you get to 4 or more the big guys don't seem to want to play? Two men is a pretty low number. Something along the lines of a scout/sniper team is mainly used for interdiction against a known objective. Although they can be used for recon work as well. But for more serious recon work, your sending as many 6 man recon teams into adjacent RZ's as you possibly can. (RZ=Recon Zone) Six men can cover the 360 degree battle space better, carry more gear and water and medical supplies and just canvas an area better than a smaller group of men. They are also able to provide better counter fire in case of a ambush or fire fight than a smaller number of men as well as pack wounded better. Most of this aspect though would not be applicable for our purpose directly. Obviously you don't want a small city of people deployed to an area, but I think most people would be very surprised to learn how stealthy six trained "green ghosts" can snoop and poop through the woods. And calling it in long distance with high powered scopes or equipment won't work. JMO Interesting you brought up calling. But I have never advocated long range shots with high powered scopes.........it's just too great of a risk. Back to calling, I'm going to test this ungulate theory with Squatch. Today I ordered a fawn decoy and fawn bleat call. http://www.fntpost.com/Products/Bear+Calls/Primos+Coyote+Bear+Buster+Predator+Mouth+Call I've only used rabbit calls to call in Blacks in the past, it works. I may simply call in a bunch of bear this go around as well. But if Mr. Money maker is correct, and that they follow around herds of ungulates? Then something should be swinging through to take a look a look at my decoy. And if it does? I'll be ready. If not? Then I'm getting in some good practice for bear season........no harm no foul. I could also be calling in bobcats, coyotes, cougar and wolves as well....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 If you got something as "near" as to fully fill a HD camera frame that should be enough to identify it positively. Completely wrong once again? A 1.5 km shot from a .50 cal sniper rifle is a complete stab into the dark. I doubt anyone could make a determination as to whether they are looking at something real or something hoaxed in a 10x rifle scope at that distance. I wanna be close and I would really like to see it do something unhoaxable. Like squat and take a poo, or lift something uber heavy or simply observe it closely and make a no BS determination. It would also be real easy to level the rifle and get it's attention. If it's a human in a monkey suit, I bet they fold real fast. The bottom line is, is that this is risky business and taking responsibility for your actions comes with the territory. If you blow away uncle Bob the prankster nobody is going to give a **** if your sorry and didn't mean too. Your probably looking at a man slaughter charge at least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tracker Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 Two men is a pretty low number. Something along the lines of a scout/sniper team is mainly used for interdiction against a known objective. Although they can be used for recon work as well. But for more serious recon work, your sending as many 6 man recon teams into adjacent RZ's as you possibly can. (RZ=Recon Zone) Six men can cover the 360 degree battle space better, carry more gear and water and medical supplies and just canvas an area better than a smaller group of men. They are also able to provide better counter fire in case of a ambush or fire fight than a smaller number of men as well as pack wounded better. Most of this aspect though would not be applicable for our purpose directly. Obviously you don't want a small city of people deployed to an area, but I think most people would be very surprised to learn how stealthy six trained "green ghosts" can snoop and poop through the woods. Personally I like small teams but I meet you half way and go with 6 if you break them into two teams. Realistically it's hard enough to find 3 let alone 6 in one region. I know of an ex CAF shooter or two I could ask but they are still recovering from PTSD from tours in Afgan. So then add a tech / documentor to round out the search group and maybe a support person at base = 4 But for now it's allot less complicated to just go out alone. IMO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 23, 2011 Share Posted June 23, 2011 A 1.5 km shot from a .50 cal sniper rifle is a complete stab into the dark. I doubt anyone could make a determination as to whether they are looking at something real or something hoaxed in a 10x rifle scope at that distance. I wanna be close and I would really like to see it do something unhoaxable. Like squat and take a poo, or lift something uber heavy or simply observe it closely and make a no BS determination. It would also be real easy to level the rifle and get it's attention. If it's a human in a monkey suit, I bet they fold real fast. The bottom line is, is that this is risky business and taking responsibility for your actions comes with the territory. If you blow away uncle Bob the prankster nobody is going to give a **** if your sorry and didn't mean too. Your probably looking at a man slaughter charge at least. Your surely right if the idea would be to shot the first humanlike figure you spot. The whole idea is about to get good footage in the first place. Good footage means Minutes and it also should involve some uber human activity as well. Good idea about the poo. The point is that you identify the BF first with much better optical and likely thermal gear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest FEATHERSTONE Posted June 23, 2011 Share Posted June 23, 2011 Sorry, but completely wrong. One needs to get up close and dirty to ensure subject isn't an idiot in a hairy suit. Edit: And stop calling me Shirley. (Or in your case, it should be "surely." One thing is for sure, when a idiot in a monkey suit gets his head canoed by a rifle bullet, all monkey suit wearing idiots wont be wearing there monkey suits anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 24, 2011 Share Posted June 24, 2011 One thing is for sure, when a idiot in a monkey suit gets his head canoed by a rifle bullet, all monkey suit wearing idiots wont be wearing there monkey suits anymore. Thats true. I already once though about making a fake (viral) "costume guy get shot" youtube video. To make the pranksters aware. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted June 24, 2011 Share Posted June 24, 2011 One thing is for sure, when a idiot in a monkey suit gets his head canoed by a rifle bullet, all monkey suit wearing idiots wont be wearing there monkey suits anymore. Yah well........when a Sasquatch hunter blows away some idiot in a monkey suit and get's sent to the big house for decades or life? It may drain the woods of Sasquatch hunters as well as idiots in monkey suits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 24, 2011 Share Posted June 24, 2011 Interesting speculaton regarding the best way to hunt down a BF, but really, I still don't understand how it can be possible to get close enough to one's quarry so that you could shoot it, but not close enough to get a picture. Is there any other kind of animal that is successfully hunted that way? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Posted June 24, 2011 Share Posted June 24, 2011 Mine would involve technology and Foo Gas canisters. Uploaded with ImageShack.us Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted June 24, 2011 Share Posted June 24, 2011 Interesting speculaton regarding the best way to hunt down a BF, but really, I still don't understand how it can be possible to get close enough to one's quarry so that you could shoot it, but not close enough to get a picture. The question isn't IF but WHY? I can shoot a camera as well as a rifle, but unfortunately PICTURES do not prove anything to science and a dead Squatch does. It's just that simple. Read my sig line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted June 24, 2011 Share Posted June 24, 2011 Mine would involve technology and Foo Gas canisters. Uploaded with ImageShack.us Our goal is to COLLECT a dead body........not incinerate it. Besides.......the USFS bill for fighting the resulting forest fire would definitely be cost prohibitive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest FEATHERSTONE Posted June 24, 2011 Share Posted June 24, 2011 The question isn't IF but WHY? I can shoot a camera as well as a rifle, but unfortunately PICTURES do not prove anything to science and a dead Squatch does. It's just that simple. Read my sig line. What if after the shooting of a squatch it's found out that a squatch is more man then animal? Manslaughter? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Posted June 24, 2011 Share Posted June 24, 2011 There would still be a body, crisp on the outside, but plenty of identifiable material. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted June 24, 2011 Share Posted June 24, 2011 What if after the shooting of a squatch it's found out that a squatch is more man then animal? Manslaughter? I doubt it. If it's a new archaic species of Homo? It would be the discovery of the century. The only way your getting a man slaughter charge brought against you is if upon examining the "creature" you find a zipper... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted June 24, 2011 Share Posted June 24, 2011 There would still be a body, crisp on the outside, but plenty of identifiable material. I'm a volunteer fire fighter, and I'm not so sure of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts