Location: Firearms Training/Safety Issues

Discussion: Does anyone know the statistics concerning...

Category: Discussion Forum / General Discussion

Report thread
Watch thread
Share this

1 2 3 | Next

White76Knight	Does anyone know the statistics concerning... Sep 10 2010, 8:36 AM EDT \| Post edited: Sep 10 2010, 8:38 AM EDT ... the number of rounds that are likely to actually hit a target in combat? The reason I ask is because my weapon of choice has a 25 round mag, and my backup has a 32 round mag. Now I'm not naive enough to think that 25 rounds fired means 25 dead zeds, as accuracy when punching holes in paper targets and accuracy when your life is at stake are two different things. So I'm wondering if anyone knows (or knows where to find) any numbers that will give me some idea about this. My criteria are as follows: A) For purposes of this discussion, I am presupposing any of the "shoot-em-in-the-head" style of zombies, body shots won't do it, so I'm aiming at a smaller target by default. B) I have read statistics saying that in Viet Nam (and elsewhere) it averaged thousands of rounds to kill each enemy combatant. As much of that ammo would have been expended on suppressive fire, and suppressive fire would accomplish precisely squat against zombies, these sorts of statistics don't count. C) I am presupposing a shooter who has moderate training and moderate practice, but little or no actual combat experience. Granted, some elite shooters such as Delta Force, Spetznatz and other Bada$$es might be able to do better (WAY better) than average, but they ain't me. D) If possible, I would like data for standard ranges of engagement for both pistols and assault rifles. Any assistance in this matter would be greatly appreciated. Post reply Do you find this valuable? Keyword tags: Ammunition Firearms Guns Safety Skills Training
AlexHigginbotham	1. RE: Does anyone know the statistics concerning... Sep 10 2010, 8:53 AM EDT Vietnam is a horrible example. A bunch of men were dropped into the jungle with improper training and fully automatic weapons. Things were really frigging scary, and a lot of rounds went down range that didnt have to. A properly trained soldier, Marine, sailor, or airmen would NOT take the shot unless they were confident it would hit its mark. Aside from specialty fire like suppression and whatnot. Realistically, I carry a weapon that holds 30 round mags, and as long as my shots were unobstructed and within the effective range of the weapon, I would say that 23-24 of the 30 rounds would be mortally wounding hits. With an assault rifle, it is better to aim center mass on the chest. Post reply Do you find this valuable?
2WheeledSpeed	2. RE: Does anyone know the statistics concerning... Sep 10 2010, 9:34 AM EDT \| Post edited: Sep 10 2010, 9:35 AM EDT In combat? I don't think there's a whole lot of very good data available, most of it is educated guesses, or a bunch of compiled numbers (One zillion rounds fired in Vietnam divided by X number of soldiers). Though I believe that the average engagement range for most modern conflicts is/was under 300 meters, someone correct me if I'm wrong there (Not including the current conflict in Afghanistan). I've never heard of a "standard" engagement range for pistols, but it's safe to say that outside of 25 yards I wouldn't plan on hitting a badguy with a handgun. Various police departments tend to keep very good records on shooting statistics involving their officers. For example from 1990-2000 the NYPD average hit probability was 15% overall, with about 10.3 shots fired per encounter. They also broke it down by distance, and from 0-2 yards they were only hitting the target 38% of the time. Imagine going to the range with your handgun, and only hitting the paper 6 feet away less than half of the time! I'm only offering that as an illustration to prove what you already said, that hitting a paper target doesn't translate to hitting a bad guy. You can't take those statistics and apply them directly to yourself, but it's helpful to get a dose of reality. Here's the link to that if you're interested. http://www.theppsc.org/Staff_Views/Aveni/OIS.pdf Post reply Do you find this valuable?
PedroAsani	3. RE: Does anyone know the statistics concerning... Sep 10 2010, 1:47 PM EDT Police shootouts with criminals have a miss rate of 70-90% by both sides. Several studies have been commissioned and completed for both police and armed forces over the years, but because of the wildly varying conditions in each one, they will never come up with the same number twice. http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=271575 The only way to know how much ammo you need is to carry as much as you can. I have done some rough numbers for how many zombies you might encounter, and average of one miss in three if yuu are safe behind a wall in a secure position, taking your time with each shot. Do the same. If you have access to a range where you can take shots at headsized targets at different distances, do it and see how good your rate is. Post reply Do you find this valuable?
DonovanRichter	4. RE: Does anyone know the statistics concerning... Sep 10 2010, 2:20 PM EDT \| Post edited: Sep 10 2010, 2:22 PM EDT Would zombies really be all that similar? In a shootout cops and robbers are most frequently using handguns which are more difficult to aim than a rifle. But they're also being fired upon themselves, or being charged by some assailant. With zombies, the likelihood of you needing to use your gun up close an personal, with only a split second to point it in the general direction, is lessened unless you're indoors or another poor visibility, high cover area. To which I should add, most shots hit the body, not the head, making me think that such a small brain sized target would be awfully tough to hit if freaking out in close range with a short amount of time. So why put yourself in such a high stress situation? You could shoot most zombies before they even notice you in many circumstances... I could see that, after a lil conditioning, as being similar to a day at the shooting range for plenty of people. Also, if the zombies were approaching, different people would react differently I'm sure. The zombie would be a moving target but it would be moving somewhat unusually, making the shot less predictable. But I think the closer they get the tougher it's going to be to fight off panic... =_= I'm used to striking at a moment's notice in melee even when hyped up on adrenaline but if I were to try and level a gun calmly while I'm freaking out and watching the bullets miss or simply not do enough damage as the thing gets closer to me.... There's no way I'd be able to shoot the thing. =O_O= In short, I don't think the outcome obtained from a firefight would apply to zombies and I do think that such things as accuracy when it really really counts would be intensely varied amongst different people. I'd try to limit my gun use to a safe distance with maneuvering room. Post reply Do you find this valuable?
Frag-12	5. RE: Does anyone know the statistics concerning... Sep 10 2010, 2:26 PM EDT \| Post edited: Sep 10 2010, 2:30 PM EDT The best thing to do is training and mental preparation. Expect to be surprised and know how to react. If you train often enough, your skills and talents will become second nature. When you have to think of what move you need to make next is when you loose. Karatekas who think loose tournaments. Karatekas who train often and do not think win tournaments. Too many minds always equals delay and/or failure. Post reply Do you find this valuable?
OutlawJames	6. RE: Does anyone know the statistics concerning... Sep 10 2010, 3:10 PM EDT I know that in Viet Nam the kill ratio was 200,000 rounds of ordnance of all types expended for each verified kill. Pretty sad when you think on it. Post reply Do you find this valuable?
Filadog	7. RE: Does anyone know the statistics concerning... Sep 10 2010, 5:12 PM EDT Interesting question.... Of course in Vietnam and WWII it took many 1,000s or rounds for one enemy killed but alot of that was probably soldiers just shooting down range Another thing the military did research after WWII and they found out that only 15-20 % of combat troops would even shoot an an enemy when given the chance, even when being charged. My uncle was a paratrooper in WWII and saw a good bit of action and he tells the story about missing a German at about 25 yards with his Thompson SMG shooting an entire clip, as the German missed him using an MP40 !...They both then ran in opersite directions Will point out that my uncle was and is a very good shot but he said when the target is shooting back things are a little different I think it's sort of like deer hunting, Ive seen guys that were excellent target shots miss a close shot at a deer that was running past or even just standing there because of "buck" fever or what ever. Most deer hunters probably carry at least 10 rounds even though they can only shoot one deer Of course shooting slow zombies would not really be "combat" since they are not shooting back so as long as you kept your head you should have a pretty high ratio of hits to misses Post reply Do you find this valuable?
MajorDamage	8. RE: Does anyone know the statistics concerning... Sep 10 2010, 7:19 PM EDT I have read/heard that the majority of casualties is from indirect fire such as artillery, mortars and area bombardment. I've always tried to stress that firing weapons under stress will be neither enjoyable nor clean-cut. http://www.zombiesurvivalwiki.com/thread/3714556/Accuracy+Experiment%2FPractice I tried to address this concern in the above thread. Please also remember that modern military weapons/ammo is meant to maim/wound and not necessarily 'kill' due to our wonderful international 'humane' laws of armed conflict. After all, wounding several enemy takes out more resources than killing a smaller amount. Not in my book but that's just me apparently. In a real firefight, whatever amount of ammo you have with you will soon become 'not enough' and that's why a decision to go 'light' will have to have more escape built in than fight. Police shootings (and war examples) can be studied but with context and realization that only so much will apply to Z-day scenarios. Post reply 2 out of 2 found this valuable. Do you find this valuable? Do you?
BigLoki	9. RE: Does anyone know the statistics concerning... Oct 12 2010, 6:31 PM EDT I don't think there is going to be any information out there (statisticly) that would help you. In Vietnam, and most any other war, the enemy is ALSO trying not to get shot. They dip, duck, dodge, hide, and shoot back. Zombies won't (I hope) So that factored in, it does become more akin to paper targets. If you have 30 rounds, and hit the target 24 times, your accuracy is around 80% (give or take a few). Factor in the distance you are accurate at. For sake of a number to put up, I'll give you 80 yards, and hope that you don't take it as an insult. Now in a "live fire" situation. You are nervous, and full of adrenaline, because you are untrained, and this is unfamiliar. Also the targets are now moving, even if it IS slowly. Reduce your accuracy by 25% (conservative, may only be 15%, depends on the individual) Reduce your range by 25% also, same side not as above. This gives you a 55% accuracy, and an effective range of around 60 or so yards. SO 25 rounds will get you 14-15 dead zeds within a 60 yard killzone. Reduce accuracy by 5% per 10 yards. These are averages, and won't "hold up in court" but it's a good guideline. Post reply Do you find this valuable?
Bias-P11	10. RE: Does anyone know the statistics concerning... Oct 12 2010, 7:15 PM EDT \| Post edited: Oct 12 2010, 7:18 PM EDT Well, assuming you have sufficient training and are intelligent enough to fire in short burst and or strong enough to withstand recoil, at least 50% at a normal safe range to shoot a target that small (and assuming you use guns from after 1900). for more accurate guns with mounted scopes, well trained shots that are fired slowly and carefully should be almost a 100% hit at optimal function range of the scope and gun. However, in a dangerous, pressured situation, you can expect to fail miserably unless you are calm and ready. This is just from what Ive seen, in real life, personal experience, and media. Post reply Do you find this valuable?
jdi35	11. RE: Does anyone know the statistics concerning... Oct 12 2010, 7:49 PM EDT "Reduce accuracy by 5% per 10 yards." increasing distance or decreasing it? i ask cause if your in that sort of situation, you may possibly panic as they are getting closer which will erode accuracy. counter-intuitive i know, but its possible. Post reply Do you find this valuable?
BigLoki	12. RE: Does anyone know the statistics concerning... Oct 12 2010, 7:53 PM EDT ""Reduce accuracy by 5% per 10 yards." increasing distance or decreasing it? i ask cause if your in that sort of situation, you may possibly panic as they are getting closer which will erode accuracy. counter-intuitive i know, but its possible." 5% per 10 yards increasing distance. This is accounting for trembling hands, rushed shots, ect. If you panic even more the closer they get, then there really isn't a scale for that that I'm aware of, I would just be cold guessing. Post reply Do you find this valuable?
hilo890	13. RE: Does anyone know the statistics concerning... Oct 12 2010, 8:02 PM EDT I know the odds of different pistol calibers making a "one shot" kill based on stopping power. .22LR (37fr. lhp) ~ 25% .38ACP (108gr. JHP) ~ 69% .45ACP (230 FMJ) ~ 63% That is considering that you have a 100% chance of hitting the target, which is never true. That may not be very helpful though... As far as I am concerned with actually hitting the target, the particular model of gun has a lot to do with accuracy as well, like, how well you can grip the weapon, etc. Post reply Do you find this valuable?
Zombiestomper	14. RE: Does anyone know the statistics concerning... Oct 14 2010, 8:14 AM EDT The FBI keeps all sorts of stats on gun crimes, and combat stats probably won't apply to zombies, as they are more obstacles than combatants.(They can kill you, but they don't combat you. A zombie is more like a mobile land-mine.) It all comes down to using a reliable weapon proficiently under the circumstances, and the circumstances are always changing. Post reply Do you find this valuable?
demsmine	15. RE: Does anyone know the statistics concerning... Oct 14 2010, 5:42 PM EDT " Interesting question.... Of course in Vietnam and WWII it took many 1,000s or rounds for one enemy killed but alot of that was probably soldiers just shooting down range Another thing the military did research after WWII and they found out that only 15-20 % of combat troops would even shoot an an enemy when given the chance, even when being charged. My uncle was a paratrooper in WWII and saw a good bit of action and he tells the story about missing a German at about 25 yards with his Thompson SMG shooting an entire clip, as the German missed him using an MP40 !...They both then ran in opersite directions Will point out that my uncle was and is a very good shot but he said when the target is shooting back things are a little different I think it's sort of like deer hunting, Ive seen guys that were excellent target shots miss a close shot at a deer that was running past or even just standing there because of "buck" fever or what ever. Most deer hunters probably carry at least 10 rounds even though they can only shoot one deer Of course shooting slow zombies would not really be "combat" since they are not shooting back so as long as you kept your head you should have a pretty high ratio of hits to misses " As a hunter it amazing to see how many people are excellent when it comes to shooting paper, but once the target starts moving and breathing how bad some people can become behind the trigger. On the flip side, I've also seen a few people that were adequate at best at shooting paper, but could drop game like no ones business. Post reply Do you find this valuable?
MajorDamage	16. RE: Does anyone know the statistics concerning... Oct 14 2010, 6:53 PM EDT "As a hunter it amazing to see how many people are excellent when it comes to shooting paper, but once the target starts moving and breathing how bad some people can become behind the trigger. On the flip side, I've also seen a few people that were adequate at best at shooting paper, but could drop game like no ones business. " demsmine: don't confuse the occasional punching paper on a controlled range to say, shootin' trap 'n skeet and then in the field. Post reply Do you find this valuable?
demsmine	17. RE: Does anyone know the statistics concerning... Oct 14 2010, 8:09 PM EDT "demsmine: don't confuse the occasional punching paper on a controlled range to say, shootin' trap 'n skeet and then in the field. " Never have, never will. Shooting at game is a shooting under stress, it is far less stress than being in a fire fight but stress none the less. It just amazes me that some guys can drop a 900 pound six point bull elk with out batting eye, while others can look like they are have a seizure when pulling up on a little forked horn buck. Post reply Do you find this valuable?
BigLoki	18. RE: Does anyone know the statistics concerning... Oct 14 2010, 10:22 PM EDT That's 100% mental. They get in their own head because now it counts for something. Paper target means nothing, buck means trophy, bragging rights. It takes all kinds of us. Some function under pressure, others don't. If that weren't true we'd ALL be world class marksmen, and there's be no big game left....lol Post reply Do you find this valuable?
White76Knight	19. RE: Does anyone know the statistics concerning... Oct 15 2010, 8:28 AM EDT "That's 100% mental. They get in their own head because now it counts for something. Paper target means nothing, buck means trophy, bragging rights. It takes all kinds of us. Some function under pressure, others don't. If that weren't true we'd ALL be world class marksmen, and there's be no big game left....lol" That being the case, the ones who can't get the job done when "it counts for something" might be in for a whole world of hurt come Z-Day. I'd rather be just adequate on the range and in the field, rather than being a marksman god on the range but useless in the field. I've never had a problem with hunting, but then I've never felt that hunting "counts for something". I don't hunt for trophies or for bragging rights, I hunt to put food on the table, if I miss I get my food at the grocery store, so there's no big life and death pressure. Now if there were no grocery stores, and that animal in front of me meant the difference between my family being fed and starving, then "counts for something" takes on a whole new meaning, to say nothing of engaging Zeds. Post reply Do you find this valuable?

1 2 3 | Next

A realistic solution to a "Zombie Gun".	Martial Arts	Top 10 Rifles for the Apocalypse
What would be the official-issue weapons of ZSDW?	The story of a man and his wheelgun. (Please read.)	zombie loadout
weight misconecptions.	Battle Music???????	Making guns and bullets post z day
in the UK?	Range Report	Loadouts

Location: Firearms Training/Safety Issues

Discussion: Does anyone know the statistics concerning...

Related Content