Portraits of sea creatures

Portraits of sea creatures

What’s the best way to create up-close images of sea life? Photographer Mark Laita built an aquarium in his Los Angeles studio and shot more than 80 species borrowed from aquariums across the country for his new book “Sea” (Abrams). View more of Laita’s fascinating photographs in this slideshow.


Pink and purple nudibranch. Image courtesy of “Sea” by Mark Laita (Abrams).


Blue blubber jellyfish. Image courtesy of “Sea” by Mark Laita (Abrams).


Map puffer. Image courtesy of “Sea” by Mark Laita (Abrams).


Twinspot lionfish. Image courtesy of “Sea” by Mark Laita (Abrams).


Violetline maori wrasse. Image courtesy of“Sea” by Mark Laita (Abrams).


Tigertail seahorse. Image courtesy of “Sea” by Mark Laita (Abrams).


Pinnatus batfish. Image courtesy of “Sea” by Mark Laita (Abrams).


Japanese sea nettle. Image courtesy of “Sea” by Mark Laita (Abrams).



Canadian Arctic nearly loses entire ice shelf

Canadian Arctic nearly loses entire ice shelf

APBy CHARMAINE NORONHA – Associated Press | AP – 12 hrs ago

TORONTO (AP) — Two ice shelves that existed before Canada was settled by Europeans diminished significantly this summer, one nearly disappearing altogether, Canadian scientists say in newly published research.

FILE - In this April 1, 2008 file photo, Canadian Ranger Samson Ejanqiaq looks along the length of one of the gaping new cracks in the Ward Hunt Ice Shelf, the largest ice shelf left in the Arctic, du

FILE – In this April 1, 2008 file photo, Canadian Ranger Samson Ejanqiaq looks along the length of one of the gaping new cracks in the Ward Hunt Ice Shelf, the largest ice shelf left in the Arctic, during a patrol of the area. This past summer, Ward Hunt Ice Shelf’s central area disintegrated into drifting ice masses, leaving two separate ice shelves measuring 87.65 and 28.75 square miles (227 and 74 square kilometers) respectively, reduced from 131.7 square miles (340 square kilometers) the previous year. (AP Photo/The Canadian Press, Bob Weber, File)

The loss is important as a marker of global warming, returning the Canadian Arctic to conditions that date back thousands of years, scientists say. Floating icebergs that have broken free as a result pose a risk to offshore oil facilities and potentially to shipping lanes. The breaking apart of the ice shelves also reduces the environment that supports microbial life and changes the look of Canada’s coastline.

In this July 27, 2008 file photo, a chunk of ice is shown drifting after it separated from the Ward Hunt Ice Shelf off the north coast of Ellesmere Island in Canada's far north. This past summer, Ward

In this July 27, 2008 file photo, a chunk of ice is shown drifting after it separated from the Ward Hunt Ice Shelf off the north coast of Ellesmere Island in Canada’s far north. This past summer, Ward Hunt Ice Shelf’s central area disintegrated into drifting ice masses, leaving two separate ice shelves measuring 87.65 and 28.75 square miles (227 and 74 square kilometers) respectively, reduced from 131.7 square miles (340 square kilometers) the previous year. (AP Photo/The Canadian Press, Sam Soja, File)

Luke Copland is an associate professor in the geography department at the University of Ottawa who co-authored the research published on Carleton University’s website. He said the Serson Ice Shelf shrank from 79.15 square miles (205 square kilometers) to two remnant sections five years ago, and was further diminished this past summer.

Copland said the shelf went from a 16-square-mile (42-square-kilometer) floating glacier tongue to 9.65 square miles (25 square kilometers), and the second section from 13.51 square miles (35 square kilometers) to 2 square miles (7 square kilometers), offEllesmere Island’s northern coastline.

This past summer, Ward Hunt Ice Shelf’s central area disintegrated into drifting ice masses, leaving two separate ice shelves measuring 87.65 and 28.75 square miles (227 and 74 square kilometers) respectively, reduced from 131.7 square miles (340 square kilometers) the previous year.

“It has dramatically broken apart in two separate areas and there’s nothing in between now but water,” said Copland.

Copland said those two losses are significant, especially since the Ward Hunt Ice Shelf has always been the biggest, the farthest north and the one scientists thought might have been the most stable.

“Recent (ice shelf) loss has been very rapid, and goes hand-in-hand with the rapid sea ice decline we have seen in this decade and the increasing warmth and extensive melt in the Arctic regions,” said Ted Scambos, lead scientist at the National Snow and Ice Data Center at the University of Colorado, remarking on the research.

Copland, who uses satellite imagery and who has conducted field work in the Arctic every May for the past five years, said since the end of July, pieces equaling one and a half times the size of Manhattan Island have broken off. Co-researcher Derek Mueller, an assistant professor at Carleton University’s geography and environmental studies department, said the loss this past summer equals up to three billion tons. Copland said their findings have not yet been peer reviewed since the research is new, but a number of scientists contacted by The Associated Press reviewed the findings, agreeing the loss in volume of ice shelves is significant.

Scambos said the loss of the Arctic shelves is significant because they are old and their rapid loss underscores the severity of the warming trend scientists see now relative to past fluctuations such as the Medieval Warm Period or the warmer times in the pre-Current Era (B.C.).

Ice shelves, which began forming at least 4,500 years ago, are much thicker than sea ice, which is typically less than a few feet (meters) thick and survives up to several years.

Canada has the most extensive ice shelves in the Arctic along the northern coast of Ellesmere Island. These floating ice masses are typically 131 feet (40 meters) thick (equivalent to a 10-story building), but can be as much as 328 feet (100 meters) thick. They thickened over time via snow and sea ice accumulation, along with glacier inflow in certain places.

The northern coast of Ellesmere Island contains the last remaining ice shelves in Canada, with an estimated area of 402 square miles (1,043 square kilometers), said Mueller.

Between 1906 and 1982, there has been a 90 percent reduction in the areal extent of ice shelves along the entire coastline, according to data published by W.F. Vincent at Quebec’s Laval University. The former extensive “Ellesmere Island Ice Sheet” was reduced to six smaller, separate ice shelves: Serson, Petersen, Milne, Ayles, Ward Hunt and Markham. In 2005, the Ayles Ice Shelf whittled almost completely away, as did the Markham Ice Shelf in 2008 and the Serson this year.

“The impact is significant and yet only a piece of the ongoing and accelerating response to warming of the Arctic,” said Dr. Robert Bindschadler, emeritus scientist at the Hydrospheric and Biospheric Sciences Laboratory at the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center in Maryland.

Bindschadler said the loss is an indication of another threshold being passed, as well as the likely acceleration of buttressed glaciers able to flow faster into the ocean, which accelerates their contribution to global sea level.

Copland said mean winter temperatures have risen by about 1 degree Celsius (1.8 degrees Fahrenheit) per decade for the past five to six decades on northern Ellesmere Island.

9 Things You Didn’t Know About Your Ears

9 Things You Didn’t Know About Your Ears

Alexandra Gekas, Woman’s Day

Wednesday, September 28, 2011
Discover interesting facts about cleaning your ears, what ear pain really means and more

Our ears are easy to take for granted: When you’re free of pain and your hearing is fine, you barely pay them any attention. But that doesn’t mean there aren’t best practices you should follow when it comes to your ears. In order to avoid any kind of permanent damage, it’s important to be informed about everything from ear candling to the dangers of flying with a head cold. Read on to learn what you need to know about ear health.

1. Cleaning out earwax is easier than you think.

Though many of us reach for cotton swabs to remove earwax, the old adage, “Don’t put anything smaller than your elbow in your ear,” is actually true. “You can use cotton swabs to clean around the [outside folds] of your ears, but you should be very careful not to do what I call the ‘search and destroy,’ because you can inadvertently push the wax in further or you can damage the eardrum,” says J. Randolph Schnitman, MD, a board-certified otolaryngologist (an ear, nose and throat specialist aka an ENT) in Beverly Hills, California. “Wax is produced by the lining of the ear canal and in normal amounts it doesn’t cause a problem.”

For most people, cleaning your inner ear in the shower should be more than adequate when it comes to removing excess wax. “The best thing is just to let the water go in your ear (make sure the water is warm, as cold and hot water can cause you to have vertigo), and [then tilt your head to the side] and dump it out,” says Brett Levine, MD, an ENT in Torrance, California. If earwax build-up is an issue for you, Dr. Levine recommends using an over-the-counter earwax remover that, when applied as directed, will help soften the wax so it washes out easier. You can also try tilting your head to one side and adding a few drops of mineral, baby or olive oil to your ear while in the shower. Wait 1 to 2 seconds for it to dislodge and dissolve the wax, and then tilt your head in the opposite direction, so it can run out of the ear. If neither of these methods work, make an appointment to see a doctor. “Sometimes the wax is just very hard and the drops don’t help make it soft. An ENT doctor can [better] see what he or she is doing [in order to] suction, scoop or grab something that isn’t washing out on its own,” Dr. Levine says.

2. The purpose of earwax is unknown.

Doctors don’t exactly know why we have earwax, but it’s generally believed to be part of the ear’s self-cleaning process. “Whether it helps balance the PH or has antibacterial properties, it’s not known for certain. Some people don’t make any wax and some people make a lot of wax, and it’s not really known why,” says Dr. Levine. It does have several practical purposes, however. “We should have some wax because wax is poisonous to [small] bugs…when people used to sleep on the ground or on the floor, bugs couldn’t get very far into their ears,” explains Sheri Billing, AuD, an otologist in Wheaton, Illinois. Wax also catches dirt and debris, preventing it from entering your inner ear.

3. The bones in your ear are the three smallest in the body.

You may have learned this one in grade school, but the three bones in your middle ear—the malleus, incus and stapes (aka the hammer, anvil and stirrup)—are the three smallest bones in your body. “They’re amplifiers; they serve to translate the energy of sound waves in the air from your eardrum to your inner ear,” which then triggers nerve stimulation to the brain. They also help enhance what’s being heard, Dr. Levine says. Although small, they’re mighty, and damage to them can be quite serious. “They can be dislocated or…break. Or you can have an infection and they erode and disappear,” Dr. Levine says. “If they broke, you’d have significant hearing loss, called conductive hearing loss. But they can be repaired with surgery and you can have artificial prosthesis to replace the bone.” These bones can also become fixated, Dr. Levine says, which can be caused by scarring from surgery, infection or, most commonly, a disease called otosclerosis. When that happens, surgery can be done “to either remove or replace one of the bones and your hearing can be dramatically improved.”

4. Candling is ineffective and dangerous.

“Ear candling” or “ear coning” is a practice in alternative medicine by which a hollow candle is lit on one end while the other end is placed in the ear in order to remove wax. “When it is subjected to Western evaluation, candling has shown itself to be absolutely ineffective; it doesn’t seem to do anything,” says Dr. Schnitman. Not only is there zero evidence that it actually works, but it can also be dangerous. According to the American Academy of Audiology, a survey conducted in the United Kingdom notes that otolaryngologists reported treating injuries from ear candling that included burns, ear canal occlusions, eardrum perforations and secondary ear canal infections with temporary hearing loss. In addition, in February 2010, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration warned consumers against using ear candles due to reported injuries.

5. Flying with stuffy ears can be dangerous.

Flying may be commonplace these days, but it should be taken seriously—especially when traveling with a head cold. According to Dr. Levine, your Eustachian tubes, which run from the middle of each ear cavity to the back of the throat, act like a pressure-release valve when you experience altitude changes on a plane. If your ears are clear, they can naturally readjust to the pressure, though swallowing or chewing gum usually helps the process along. But when the tubes are full of liquid, which sometimes occurs when you’re congested due to a head cold, they can’t release the pressure. If that happens, “you can rupture an ear drum,” Dr. Schnitman warns. “It’s the descent, when they pressurize the cabin. It causes the eardrums to implode and pinch inwards so it won’t equalize the pressure and you can cause damage to your eardrum.” To be safe, Dr. Schnitman recommends speaking with a doctor before you travel if you’re stuffy and using a decongestant while on the aircraft. He also recommends a product called EarPlane. “It’s a rubber plug that has a pressure filter so if you place it in your ear before the descent it can minimize that pressure.”

6. Your ears contribute to your sense of taste.

We’re not saying you can actually taste food with your ears, but they do play a role in transmitting taste signals to your brain. Dr. Levine explains that there is a branch of nerves called the chorda tympani that just happens to run through the middle ear as it connects the taste buds on the front of the tongue to the brain. Because of this, if something happens to your ear it can potentially impact your ability to perceive flavor. “Sometimes ear surgery can affect your taste from a complication; or sometimes, an infection in your ear can affect taste,” says Dr. Levine.

7. Your eardrum is only three cell-layers thick.

Aside from making earwax removal more difficult, there’s another reason to avoid sticking things in your ear: your eardrum is extremely fragile. “There are three layers of membrane: there’s a lining on the outside, there’s a lining on the inside and there’s a fibrous layer in the middle,” Dr. Levine says. “It is probably as thin as a piece of paper or your fingernail.” That’s why the eardrum can be damaged so easily. Unfortunately, it also doesn’t heal properly if ruptured. “The inner layer [cannot] heal; it becomes thinner and more easily broken,” Dr. Levine says. “You can visualize that as a sandwich, it’d be a lot easier to pop a hole through two pieces of bread without the roast beef in there.”

8. Ear pain can point to a problem elsewhere in your body.

While ear pain is often a symptom of an ear infection, sinus infection, TMJ or even earwax blockage, it can also be due to something completely unrelated to your ear. Michael Morris, MD, an ENT in private practice in Rockville, Maryland, and former faculty member at Georgetown University, notes that pain around the ear can be a symptom of a health issue occurring anywhere between the ears and the abdomen. “I’ve seen a patient who had a kidney tumor with ear pain. You get what’s called ‘referred pain.'” According to Dr. Morris, this can be caused by issues that affect the vagus nerve, which runs from your brain through your ear and continues down through the nose, throat and into your chest and abdomen. “I would strongly suggest that if someone has ear pain, make certain the doctor looks around for the cause, because he may find it’s from elsewhere,” he says.

9. Hairspray can have a negative effect on earwax.

If you regularly use hairspray, it could cause some uncomfortable problems…in your ears. Dr. Levine explains that, because your ears are so close to your hair, when hairspray is applied, over time it can get into the ear, causing earwax that would naturally fall out to get stuck. Luckily, prevention is easy. Carefully place cotton or tissue in your ears before using hairspray to avoid getting any in the ear. “Everyone using hair products doesn’t need to put cotton in their ears, it’s an individualized situation,” says Dr. Schnitman. “For people who are sensitive or who identify that they might be sensitive to this product, then protecting the ears is what we recommend.”

What would really happen if you nuked a volcano?

By Keith Veronese

What would really happen if you nuked a volcano?

What would really happen if you nuked a volcano?

Internet lore and science fiction tales suggest that dropping a nuclear weapon on an erupting volcano would halt the eruption. But would that really be the case? Would it just make the eruption worse by opening up more magma tubes? Would it alter the lava flows? Would it send reverberations through the earth’s core and crack the world in half (as suggested by the 1965 classic, Crack in the World)? Since no country is likely to drop a nuclear bomb on a volcano in the near future (well, at least Italy and the U.S. didn’t take that train of advice withMount Etna), let’s take a look at the possibilities for what might really happen, to the best of our scientific knowledge.

Where do we put the nuclear device?

What would really happen if you nuked a volcano?

I’ll present two options for the placement of the nuclear device – 1) the base of the volcano, causing an explosion to give the magma another place to go, and 2) the mouth of the volcano, caving in or sealing off the opening of the volcano, or in a more extreme case, turning the volcano from a pimple on the crust of the earth to a crater. Also, we’ll not specify which type of nuclear weapon being used, as an A, H, or neutron bomb should all have the same general characteristics (extreme heat and an air burst) in the early stages, which are what we’ll be concerned with. We’ll let later generations deal with the radioactive fallout.

Magma vs. Nuclear Fission – What Wins? The temperature at the core of the nuclear detonation could be as much as several million degrees Celsius. This temperature would fall off with distance, but would still be over 6000 degrees Celsius dozens of meters away. This temperature would decrease quickly, and be followed by a shock wave. Magma (and once it is exposed to the air, lava), on the other hand, is typically 600 – 1300 degrees Celsius and mainly composed ofsilicon dioxide, with this also being the approximate temperature at the mouth of a volcano. Silicon dioxide boils at around 4000 degrees Celsius. The nuclear blast should provide a sufficient temperature to boil the magma, vaporizing it along with enough heat to cause a phase transition of the surrounding rock to vaporize it as well.

Logistics There is a logistical issue with the nuclear detonation, however. One would have to ensure that the fission reaction within the nuclear warhead occurred prior to it coming in contact with the lava, which would likely melt the warhead and the radioactive material inside and prevent a full detonation. Also, a detonation that happens too early and too high above the volcano would only result in an air blast rushing onto the volcano. This delicate timing situation would call for remote detonation, as the surface tension of the lava will doubtfully be considerable enough to initiate detonation.

What happens after the initial explosion?

So, we probably have enough heat to vaporize a fair amount of the magma and rock making up the volcano. If the nuclear device is placed at the base of the volcano, the first of the two possibilities we’ll look at, the heat accompanying the blast and the following air burst would likely bore a hole into the side of the volcano, if only for a moment prior to a cave in, alleviating pressure on the magma chamber. This would allow more magma to flow out afterward. With careful placement, this would prevent an “unplanned” eruption and at the same time causing an eruption in an alternate direction that would be somewhat controlled. If the nuclear device is detonated at the opening of the erupting volcano, the lava and a portion of the protruding side wall would likely be vaporized. This is where the variables come into play. Previous test explosions, like the 1962 Sedan nuclear test (which aimed to use nuclear weapons in large scale earth moving), formed a crater approximately 100 meters deep and 400 meters wide (an image of the crater can be seen above). If the detonation occurred with enough force, it could possibly extend its force down to the magma chamber and “plug” the chamber, halting eruption. However, taking into account the amount of material moved in the Sedan test and comparing it to the height of a volcano (often several thousand meters high), this would seem highly unlikely. A blast at the mouth of the volcano would likely just crush part of the top of the volcano. Even if the blast was strong enough the pressure in the magma chamber would have been alleviated temporarily, but I would think it would be likely return over time, causing another volcanic event. The evil magma just has to get out.

What would really happen if you nuked a volcano?

Cracking the world in half and controlled eruptions

While we’re on the subject of the uncanny and since I mentioned the idea of cracking the earth in half earlier, the earth’s diameter is just too large as well to reach a point where cracking would occur in the later air blast – the depth of blast penetration is not sufficient, and the area underneath the surface of the volcano is substantially magma, which would help distribute the heat from the blast over time. This might work in the case of a small planetoid object or a rock in space with volcanic activity, but the Earth is just too large to crack in two. Either way, I’m not sure you could stop an eruption by using a well-placed nuclear device – you would simply allowing magma to seep forth and go in another direction and hasten an eruption. Both detonation methods, however, could be used for a situation where a controlled eruption was desired, but there are too many unknown variables to sufficiently diagram what would happen in the moments following the initial blast.

We’ve got heat and a blast, but how do we clean this up?

And this is the million dollar question. Volcanoes are known to put enough ash into the atmosphere to alter temperatures in parts of the world, and when accompanied by a nuclear blast, there would be considerably more ash, and this time it would be radioactive. This part of the aftermath, in itself, would be reason enough to steer clear of using nuclear devices to halt (if possible) or control an eruption. The accompanying lava flow could also be radioactive, but no one has been crazy enough to try this, so I’d argue that only the leading edge of the post-blast lava flow would be radioactive, as more magma would come to the surface and renew the lava flow.

Has anyone bombed a volcano before?

What would really happen if you nuked a volcano?

Conventional bombs have been used to divert lava flow, as the US Air Force did with flows emanating from the Mauna Loa volcano in Hawaii, sufficiently diverting the lava flow away from the city of Hilo.  Using convention bombs to disrupt volcanoes inJapan was suggested by a Colgate University Geology professor as a means of hastening the end of WW II as well. The idea hinged on causing a string of eruptions that would devastate Japanese several cities and was published in a 1944 Popular Science article. Nuclear devices don’t appear to be an option to halt an eruption, just an option by which to cause an eruption. So, if you want to see someone take a nuclear warhead to the crust of the earth, check out this clip from the 1965 hit, Crack in the World, and be glad we don’t make movies like this anymore. Wait, I just said this as a person who went to see Armageddontwice in the theaters and own the Criterion DVD version. Let’s just keep nuclear weapons away from volcanoes (even if your intentions are solely humanitarian), ok? Images courtesy of the BBC, Olive Films and the U.S. Geological Survey. Sources are linked within the article.

Naomi Campbell’s Eye-Catching Fantasy Home

Naomi Campbell’s Eye-Catching Fantasy Home

 By Colleen Kane, CNBC.com

September 27, 2011
This eco-friendly house on Cleopatra’s Island in Turkey was a gift from Naomi Campbell’s Russian billionaire boyfriend.
Photo: Luis de Garrido


As lavish birthday gifts go, it’s hard to top this one: Naomi Campbell received an island vacation home for her 41st birthday from her Russian billionaire boyfriend Vladislav Doronin, according to numerous online reports.

Slideshow: Naomi Campbell’s Eco HouseSlideshow: Naomi Campbell's Eco HouseIt’s shaped like the Egyptian Eye of Horus on a location known as Cleopatra Island in Turkey’s Gulf of Gökova.


The glass-domed, 25-bedroom, “horus” eye-shaped home invites natural light to illuminate and warm the home.
Photo: Luis de Garrido

Spanish Architect Luis de Garrido, who specializes in sustainable building, designed Eco-House Horus to be completely energy, water, and food self-sufficient. As with his other projects, he relied on careful bioclimatic design to solve efficiency challenges.

The resulting eye-shaped, dome-shaped house has no less than 25 bedrooms and five lounges. If the world ends, Campbell and Doronin and a few dozen of their lucky friends just might be able to survive.

This exotic yet eco-friendly home has an innovative, photovoltaic-equipped lighting system.
Photo: Luis de Garrido

Campbell and Doronin are small potatoes in comparison to the island’s vastly more famous couple (hint: the island is named after one of them). As it turns out, Eco-House Horus isn’t the first time a grand gesture has been made for a ladylove on this island. A long-ago romance might have also changed the landscape of this island.

A representative of architect Luis de Garrido’s firm noted that the structure is “not an expensive house, compared with the level of this kind of house. That is, we can demonstrate that a completely sustainable building [might] be really inexpensive, and also that a self-sufficient building could be obtained by a not too much additional cost (due to a well-studied bioclimatic design).”

Turkey’s Sedir Island, aka Cleopatra Island, has been a resort destination in the Gulf of Gökova since ancient Roman times. The sand on Cleopatra Beach is said to be exceptional, and different from other nearby beaches. Local legend has it that Mark Antony imported the sand especially for Cleopatra herself, who would not set foot on any land that wasn’t Egyptian.

The black outline making up most of the eye design is comprised of photovoltaic panels, which works in combination with the geothermal system to provide all of the energy needed for the house.

Winter Mornings, This overhead-view rendering explains the structure functions as a greenhouse to heat with solar radiation.

Summer Mornings

This overhead-view rendering shows how the house manages to stay cool in summer without using air conditioning.

Sniper Rifle

Sniper rifle

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In military and law enforcement terminology, a sniper rifle is a precision-rifle used to ensure more accurate placement of bullets at longer ranges than other small arms. A typical sniper rifle is built for optimal levels ofaccuracy, fitted with a telescopic sight and chambered for a military centerfire cartridge. The term is often used in the media to describe any type ofaccurized firearm fitted with a telescopic sight that is employed against human targets, although “sniping rifle” or “sniper’s rifle” is the technically correct fashion to refer to such a rifle. File:M-40A3.jpg The 7.62x51mm M40United States Marine Corps standard-issue sniper rifle. The M-40A3 is the new precision fire weapon used by Marine snipers. Photo by: Gunnery Sgt Matt Hevezi The military role of sniper (a term derived from thesnipe, a bird which was difficult to hunt and shoot) dates back to the turn of the 18th century, but the true sniper rifle is a much more recent development. Advances in technology, specifically that of telescopic sights and more accurate manufacturing, allowed armies to equip specially trained soldiers with rifles that enable them to deliver precise shots over greater distances than regular infantry weapons. The rifle itself could be based on a standard rifle (at first, a bolt-action rifle); however, when fitted with a telescopic sight, it becomes a sniper rifle.
File:G22 ohne Schalldaempfer.jpg
The Accuracy International Arctic Warfare series of sniper rifles is standard issue in the armies of many countries, including those of Britain and Germany (picture shows a rifle of the German Army).


n the American Civil War Confederate troops equipped with barrel-length three power scopes mounted on the exceptionally accurate BritishWhitworth rifle had been known to kill Union officers at ranges of about 800 yards (731.5m), an unheard-of distance at that time. File:Sniper Rifle Mosin 1891 30.jpg

During World War II, the (7.62x54mmR)Mosin-Nagant rifle mounted with a telescopic sight was commonly used as a sniper rifle by Russian snipers.
The earliest sniper rifles were little more than conventional military or target rifles with long-range “peep sights” and Galilean ‘open telescope’ front and rear sights, designed for use on the target range. Only from the beginning of World War I did specially adapted sniper rifles come to the fore. Germany deployed military caliber hunting rifles with telescopic sights, and the British used Aldis, Winchester and Periscopic Prism Co. sights fitted by gunsmiths to regulation SMLE Mk III and Mk III* or Enfield Pattern 1914 rifles; the Canadian Ross rifle was also employed by snipers after it had been withdrawn from general issue.
File:Rifle Alex.jpg
Bor – the 7.62×51 mm Polish bolt-action sniper rifle.
Typical World War II-era sniper rifles were generally standard-issue battle rifles, selected for accuracy, with a 2.5x or 3x telescopic sight and cheek-rest fitted and the bolt turned down if necessary to allow operation with the scope fitted. Australia’s No.1 Mk III* (HT) rifle was a later conversion of the SMLE fitted with the Lithgow heavy target barrel at the end of WW2. By the end of the war, forces on all sides had specially trained soldiers equipped with sniper rifles, and they have played an increasingly important role in military operations ever since.
File:Sniper Rifles M40 XM21.jpg
Vietnam War era sniper rifles, US ArmyXM21 (top) and USMC M40 (bottom)
Modern sniper rifles can be divided into two basic classes: military and law enforcement.


Sniper rifles aimed at military service are often designed for very high durability, range, reliability, sturdiness, serviceability and repairability under adverse environmental and combat conditions, at the sacrifice of a small degree of accuracy. Military snipers and sharpshooters may also be required to carry their rifles and other equipment for long distances, making it important to minimize weight. Military organizations often operate under strict budget constraints, which influences the type and quality of sniper rifles they purchase. File:USMC Sniper M24.jpg Special Reaction Team (SRT) members US Marine Corps (USMC) Sergeant Shannon C. Moye (foreground), sites through the scope on his 7.62mm M-86 sniper rifle as Corporal Eddie L. Tesch, uses a spotting scope to read targets taken out during sniper. (Released to Public)

Law enforcement

Sniper rifles built or modified for use in law enforcement are generally required to have the greatest possible accuracy, more than military rifles, but do not need to have as long a range. As law enforcement-specific rifles are usually used in non-combat (often urban) environments, they do not have the requirement to be as hardy or portable as military versions; nevertheless they may be smaller, as they do not need very long range. Some of the first sniper rifles designed specifically to meet police and other law-enforcement requirements were developed for West German police after the Munich massacre at the 1972 Summer Olympics. Many police services and law enforcement organizations (such as the U.S. Secret Service) now use rifles designed for law enforcement purposes. The Heckler & Koch PSG1 is one rifle specifically designed to meet these criteria and is often referred to as an ideal example of this type of sniper rifle. The FN Special Police Rifle was built for and is marketed to law enforcement rather than military agencies.

Distinguishing characteristics

The features of a sniper rifle can vary widely depending on the specific tasks it is intended to perform. Features that may distinguish a sniper rifle from other weapons are the presence of a telescopic sight, unusually long overall length, a stock designed for firing from a prone position, and the presence of abipod and other accessories. File:Sniperscope.jpg

Telescopic sight

The single most important characteristic that sets a sniper rifle apart from other military or police small arms is the mounting of a telescopic sight, which is relatively easy to distinguish from smaller optical aiming devices found on some modern assault riflesand submachine guns. This also allows the user to see farther. The telescopic sights used on sniper rifles differ from other optical sights in that they offer much greater magnification (more than 4x and up to 40x), and have a much larger objective lens (40 to 50 mm in diameter) for a brighter image. Most telescopic lenses employed in military or police roles have special reticles to aid with judgment of distance, which is an important factor in accurate shot placement due to the bullet’s trajectory.

File:Pso-1 grid.png

PSO-1 Sniper Scope Reticle
1 – Lead/deflection scale
2 – Main targeting chevron
3 – Bullet drop chevrons
4 – Rangefinder


The choice between bolt-action and semi-automatic(more commonly known as recoil or gas operation) is usually determined by specific requirements of the sniper’s role as envisioned in a particular organization, with each design having advantages and disadvantages. For a given cartridge, a bolt-action rifle is cheaper to build and maintain, more reliable, and lighter, due to fewer moving parts in the mechanism. In addition, the lack of an external magazine allows for more versatile fire-positioning, and the absence of uncontrolled automatic cartridge case ejection helped to avoid revealing the firer’s position. Semi-automatic weapons can serve both as battle rifle and sniper rifle, and allow for a greater rate (and hence volume) of fire. As such rifles may be modified service rifles, an additional benefit can be commonality of operation with the issued infantry rifle. A bolt action is most commonly used in both military and police roles due to its higher accuracy and ease of maintenance. Anti-materiel applications such as mine clearing and special forces operations tend to use semi-automatics. File:Rackandchamber.jpg

A Marine manually extracts an empty cartridge and chambers a new 7.62x51mm round in his bolt-action M40A3 sniper rifle. The bolt handle is held in the shooter’s hand and is not visible in this photo.
designated marksman rifle (DMR) is less specialized than a typical military sniper rifle, often only intended to extend the range of a group of soldiers. Therefore, when a semi-automatic action is used it is due to its ability to cross over into roles similar to the roles of standard issue weapons. There may also be additional logistical advantages if the DMR uses the same ammunition as the more common standard issue weapons. These rifles enable a higher volume of fire, but sacrifice some long range accuracy. They are frequently built from existingselective fire battle rifles or assault rifles, often simply by adding a telescopic sight and adjustable stock.
A police semi-automatic sniper rifle may be used in situations that require a single sniper to engage multiple targets in quick succession, and military semi-automatics such as the M110 SASS are used in similar “target-rich” environments.


In a military setting, logistical concerns are the primary determinant of the cartridge used, so sniper rifles are usually limited to rifle cartridges commonly used by the military force employing the rifle and match grade ammunition. Since large national militaries generally change slowly, military rifle ammunition is frequently battle-tested and well-studied by ammunition and firearms experts. Consequently, police forces tend to follow military practices in choosing a sniper rifle cartridge instead of trying to break new ground with less-perfected (but possibly better) ammunition. Before the introduction of the standard 7.62x51mm NATO cartridge in the 1950s, standard military cartridges were the .30-06 Springfield or 7.62x63mm (United States), .303 British(7.7x56mmR) (United Kingdom) and 7.92x57mm (8mm Mauser) (Germany). The .30-06 Springfield continued in service with U.S. Marine Corps snipers during the Vietnam War in the 1970s, well after general adoption of the 7.62x51mm. At the present time, in both the Western world and within NATO7.62x51mm is currently the primary cartridge of choice for military and police sniper rifles. Worldwide, the trend is similar. The preferred sniper cartridge in Russia is another .30 calibre military cartridge, the 7.62 x 54 mm R, which has similar performance to the 7.62x51mm. This cartridge was introduced in 1891, and both Russian sniper rifles of the modern era, the Mosin-Nagant and the Dragunov sniper rifle, are chambered for it. Certain commercial cartridges designed with only performance in mind, without the logistical constraints of most armies, have also gained popularity in the 1990s. These include the 7 mm Remington Magnum (7.2x64mm), .300 Winchester Magnum (7.8/7.62x67mm), and the .338 Lapua Magnum (8.6x70mm). These cartridges offer better ballistic performance and greater effective range than the 7.62x51mm. Though they are not as powerful as .50 calibre cartridges they are not as heavy as rifles chambered for .50 calibre ammunition, and are significantly more powerful than rifles chambered for 7.62x51mm. File:M82rifle.jpg M82A1 SASR (Special Applications Scoped Rifle or Semi-Automatic Sniper Rifle), a .50 calibre sniper rifle used as ananti-materiel rifle. Snipers may also employ anti-materiel rifles in sniping roles against targets such as vehicles, equipment and structures, or for the long-range destruction of explosive devices; these rifles may also be used against personnel. Anti-materiel rifles tend to be semi-automatic and of a larger calibre than anti-personnel rifles, using cartridges such as the .50 BMG12.7x108mm Russian or even 14.5x114mm Russian and 20mm. These large cartridges are required to be able to fire projectiles containing payloads such as explosives, armour piercing cores, incendiaries or combinations of these, such as the Raufoss Mk211 projectile. Due to the considerable size and weight of anti-materiel rifles, 2- or 3-man sniper teams become necessary.


Barrels are normally of precise manufacture and of a heavier cross section than more traditional barrels in order to reduce the change in impact points between a first shot from a cold barrel and a follow-up shot from a warm barrel. Unlike many battle and assault rifles, the bores are usually not chromed to avoid inaccuracy due to an uneven treatment. When installed, barrels are often free-floatedi.e., installed so that the barrel only contacts the rest of the rifle at the receiver, to minimise the effects on impact point of pressure on the fore-end by slings, bipods, or the sniper’s hands. The end of the barrel is usually crowned or machined to form a rebated area around the muzzle proper to avoid asymmetry or damage, and consequent inaccuracy. Alternatively, some rifles such as the Dragunov or Walther WA2000 provide structures at the fore-end to provide tension on the barrel in order to counteract barrel drop and other alterations in barrel shape. External longitudinal fluting that contributes to heat dissipation by increasing surface area while simultaneously decreasing the weight of the barrel is sometimes used on sniper-rifle barrels. Sniper-rifle barrels may also utilise a threaded muzzle or combination device (muzzle brake or flash suppressor and attachment mount) to allow the fitting of a sound suppressor. These suppressors often have means of adjusting the point of impact while fitted. Military sniper rifles tend to have barrel lengths of 609.6 mm (24 inches) or longer, to allow the cartridge propellant to fully burn, reducing revealing muzzle flash and increasing bullet velocity. Police sniper rifles may use shorter barrels to improve handling characteristics. The shorter barrels’ velocity loss is unimportant at closer ranges; projectile energy is more than sufficient.


The most common special feature of a sniper rifle stock is the adjustable cheek piece, where the shooter’s cheek meets the rear of the stock. For most rifles equipped with a telescopic sight, this area is raised slightly, because the telescope is positioned higher than iron sights. A cheek piece is simply a section of the stock that can be adjusted up or down to suit the individual shooter. To further aid this individual fitting, the stock can sometimes also be adjusted for length, often by varying the number of inserts at the rear of the stock where it meets the shooter’s shoulder. Sniper stocks are typically designed to avoid making contact with the barrel of the weapon.


An adjustable sling is often fitted on the rifle, used by the sniper to achieve better stability when standing, kneeling, or sitting. The sniper uses the sling to “lock-in” by wrapping his non-firing arm into the sling forcing his arm to be still. Non-static weapon mounts such as bipodsmonopodsand shooting sticks are also regularly used to aid and improve stability and reduce operator fatigue.



Comparison of 0.5, 1, and 3 MOA extreme spread levels against a human torso at 800 m (left) and a human head at 100 m (right)

A military-issue battle rifle or assault rifle is usually capable of between 3-6 minute of angle (MOA) (1-2 mrad) accuracy. A standard-issue military sniper rifle is typically capable of 1-3 MOA (0.3-1 mrad) accuracy, with a police sniper rifle capable of 0.25-1.5 MOA (0.1-0.5 mrad) accuracy. For comparison, a competition target orbenchrest rifle may be capable of accuracy up to 0.15-0.3 MOA (0.05-0.1 mrad). A 1 MOA (0.3 mrad) average extreme spread for a 5-shot group (meaning the center-to-center distance between the two most distant bullet holes in a shot-group) translates into 69% probability that the bullet’s point of impact will be in the circle with center in point of aim and diameter of 25 cm at 800 m (about 8 inches at 800 yards), which is considered sufficient to ensure a high probability of hitting a human shape at that distance. In 1982 a U.S. Army draft requirement for a Sniper Weapon System was: “The System will: (6) Have an accuracy of no more than 0.75 MOA (0.2 mrad) for a 5-shot group at 1,500 meters when fired from a supported, non-benchrest position”. Actual Sniper Weapon System (M24) adopted in 1988 has stated maximum effective range of 800 meters and a maximum allowed average mean radius (AMR) of 1.9 inches at 300 yards from a machine rest, what corresponds to a 0.6 MOA (0.5 mrad) extreme spread for a 5-shot group when using 7.62 x 51 mm M118 Special Ball cartridges.

Precision Weapon Engagement Ranges & Dispersion according to the US Army.

A 2008 United States military market survey for a Precision Sniper Rifle (PSR) calls for 1 MOA (0.3 mrad) extreme vertical spread for all shots in a 5-round group fired at targets at 300, 600, 900, 1,200 and 1,500 meters. In 2009 a United States Special Operations Command market survey calls for 1 MOA (0.3 mrad) extreme vertical spread for all shots in a 10-round group fired at targets at 300, 600, 900, 1,200 and 1,500 meters. The 2009 Precession Sniper Rifle requirements state that the PSR when fired without suppressor shall provide a confidence factor of 80% that the weapon and ammunition combination is capable of holding 1 MOA extreme vertical spread. This shall be calculated from 150 ten (10) round groups that were fired unsuppressed. No individual group shall exceed 1.5 MOA (0.5 mrad) extreme vertical spread. All accuracy will be taken at the 1,500 meter point. In 2008 the US military adopted the M110 Semi-Automatic Sniper System which has corresponding maximum allowed extreme spread of 1.8 MOA (0.5 mrad) for a 5-shot group on 300 feet, using M118LR ammunition or equivalent. In 2010 maximum bullet dispersion requirement for M24 .300 Winchester Magnum corresponds 1.4MOA extreme spread for 5 shot group on 100 meters. Although accuracy standards for police rifles do not widely exist, rifles are frequently seen with accuracy levels from 0.5-1.5 MOA (0.2-0.5 mrad). For typical policing situations an extreme spread accuracy level no better than 1 MOA (0.3 mrad) is usually all that is required. This is because police typically employ their rifles at short ranges. At 100 m or less, a rifle with a relatively low accuracy of only 1 MOA (0.3 mrad) should be able to repeatedly hit a 3 cm (1.2 inch) target. A 3 cm diameter target is smaller than the brain stem which is targeted by police snipers for its quick killing effect.

Maximum effective range

Cartridge Maximum effective range
7.62x39mm 350 m
5.56x45mm 800 m
7.62x51mm (.308 Winchester) 800 m
7.62x54mm R 800 m
.30-06 Springfield 800 m
7 mm Remington Magnum 900–1,100 m
.300 Winchester Magnum 900–1,200 m
.338 Lapua Magnum 1,200-1,500 m
.50 BMG (12.7x99mm NATO) 12.7x108mm (Russian) 1,500–2,000 m
14.5x114mm 1,800–2,300 m
.408 Chey Tac 2,000–2,500 m
20mm Anzio Sniper Rifle 5000 m

The listed maximum ranges are mainly consistent with the claims made by military organizations and materiel manufacturers, but not based on consistent or strictly scientific criteria. The problem is only the bullet interacts with the target (can also be a materiel target for a sniper bullet). This implies that the properties of the target, properties and velocity of the employed bullet (parts) and desired effect are the most relevant factors. Unlike police sniper rifles, military sniper rifles tend to be employed at the greatest possible distances so that range advantages like the increased difficulty to spot and engage the sniper can be exploited. The most popular military sniper rifles (in terms of numbers in service) are chambered for 7.62 mm (0.30 inch) caliber ammunition, such as 7.62x51mm and 7.62x54mm R. Since sniper rifles of this class must compete with several other types of military weapons with similar range, snipers invariably must employ skilled fieldcraft to conceal their position. The recent trend in specialised military sniper rifles is towards larger calibres that offer relatively favorable hit probabilities at greater range, such as the anti-personnel .338 Lapua Magnumcartridge and anti-materiel cartridges like the .50 BMG and the 14.5x114mm. This allows snipers to take fewer risks, and spend less time finding concealment when facing enemies that are not equipped with similar weapons. File:Royal Marines snipers displaying their L115A1 rifles.jpg Royal Marines snipers with L115A1 rifles. These rifles are similar to the L115A3Long Range Rifle used by Craig Harrison but outfitted with Schmidt & Bender 3-12×50 PM II telescopic sights.Maximum range claims made by military organizations and materiel manufacturers regarding sniper weapon systems are not based on consistent or strictly scientific criteria. The problem is only the bullet interacts after a relatively long flight path with the target (can also be a materiel target for a sniper bullet). This implies that variables such as the minimal required hit probability, local atmospheric conditions, properties and velocity of the employed bullet (parts), properties of the target and the desired terminal effect are major relevant factors that determine the maximum effective range of the employed system.

Longest recorded sniper kills

Longest recorded sniper kills
Reports regarding the longest recorded sniper killthat contain information regarding the shooting distance and the identity of the sniper have been presented to the general public since 1967. Snipers in modern warfare have had a long history since the development of long distance weaponry. As weapons,ammunition, and aids to determine ballistic solutions improved, so too did the distance a kill could be targeted from. The modern methodology of long-distance sniping (over 1.25-kilometre (0.8 mi) shots) requires intense training and practice. A sniper must have the ability to accurately estimate the various factors that influence a bullet‘s trajectory and point of impact, such as range to the target, wind direction, wind velocity, air density and elevation of the sniper and target. Mistakes in estimation compound over distance and can cause a shot to only injure, or to miss completely.Devices such as laser rangefinders, handheld meteorological measuring equipment, handheld computers, and ballistic-prediction software can contribute to increased accuracy.
The science of long-range sniping came to fruition in the Vietnam WarCarlos Hathcock held the record from 1967 to 2002 at 2,286 m (2,500 yd)  He recorded 93 official kills before an injury halted his service on the front lines.  After returning to the U.S., Hathcock helped to establish a school for training Marine snipers, the Marine Corps Scout Sniper School, at the Marine base at Quantico, Virginia. It took over thirty years for Canadian Master Corporal Arron Perry of Princess Patricia’s Canadian Light Infantry to beat Hathcock’s record. Perry held the title for only a few days as another man in his unit (Corporal Rob Furlong) bested Perry’s distance with a 2,430 m (2,657 yd) shot in March 2002. Furlong took the shot while supporting American soldiers during Operation Anaconda in the beginning years of the latest War in Afghanistan. The current record is held by United Kingdom‘s Corporal of Horse (CoH) Craig Harrison, who in November of 2009 recorded a 2,475 m (2,707 yd) shot in the War in Afghanistan.

Confirmed kills 1,250 m (1,367 yd) or greater

Sgt. Brian Kremer March 2004 2,300 m (2,515 yd) Barrett M82A1 Raufoss NM140 MP(12.7 mm multi-purpose ammunition)  USA 2nd Ranger Battalion Iraq War
Gunnery Sergeant Carlos Hathcock Febr1967 2,286 m (2,500 yd) M2 Browning machine gun .50 BMG  USA United States Marine Corps Vietnam War

Carlos Hathcock in 1996

Carlos Hathcock in 1996
Corporal Christopher Reynolds August 2009 1,853 m (2,026 yd) Accuracy International L115A3 .338 Lapua MagnumLockBase B408 bullets  UK 3 Scots – The Black Watch War in Afghanistan
Unknown Norwegian sniper Nov2007 1,380 m (1,509 yd) Barrett M82A1 Raufoss NM140 MP(12.7 mm multi-purpose ammunition)  Norway Norwegian Army 2nd Battalion War in Afghanistan
Staff Sergeant Jim Gilliland Sept27, 2005 1,250 m (1,367 yd) M24 rifle 7.62x51mm NATO  USA 2nd Battalion, 69th Armored Regiment, 3rd Infantry DivisionSniper Shadow Team Iraq War – Ramadi
  1. ^ 93 kills was not an especially high number; otherAmerican snipers would best it and it pales in comparison to World War II snipers like Simo Häyhä. Häyhä was credited with over 500 kills during the Winter War but mostly shot at close range. In fact, Häyhä was famous for not using a scope, preferring to use the iron-sights on his rifles. What separated Hathcock and made him famous was his long distance ability and accuracy.
  2. ^ Longest confirmed kill using 12.7 mm multi-purpose ammunition
  3. ^ Longest confirmed kill with a 7.62x51mm NATOchambered rifle

Vasily Zaytsev – aSoviet sniper during World War II,

Vasily Zaytsev

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Vasily Grigoryevich Zaytsev (Russian:Василий Григорьевич Зайцев, IPA: [vʌˈsʲilʲɪj ɡrʲɪˈɡorʲjevʲɪtɕ ˈzajtsɨf]; March 23, 1915 – December 15, 1991) was aSoviet sniper during World War II, notable particularly for his activities between November 10 and December 17, 1942, during the Battle of Stalingrad. He killed 225 soldiers and officers of theWehrmacht and other Axis armies, including 11 enemy snipers.

Prior to November 10, he had already killed 32 Axis soldiers with the standard-issue Mosin–Nagant rifle. Between October 1942 and January 1943, Zaytsev made 242 verified kills.

Vasily Grigoryevich Zaytsev
March 23, 1915 – December 15, 1991 (aged 76)
Zaytsev with his Mosin-Nagant rifle in Stalingrad, October 1942
Nickname Vasya
Place of birth YeleninskoyeRussian Empire
Place of death KievSoviet Union
Allegiance  Soviet Union
Years of service 1937–1945
Rank Captain
Battles/wars Great Patriotic War

Awards Hero of the Soviet Union
Order of Lenin
Order of the Red Banner, 2 times
Order of the Patriotic War, 1st Class
Medal for the Defence of Stalingrad
Medal For the Victory Over Germany

Early life

Zaytsev was born in Yeleninskoye and grew up in the Ural Mountains, where he learned marksmanship by hunting deer and wolf with his grandfather and younger brother. When he was 5 years old, he killed his first wolf. His surnameis based on the Russian word zayats(заяц) meaning “hare“. He was nicknamed ‘Vasya’ by his friends.

War career

Zaytsev served in the Soviet Navy as a clerk in Vladivostok. When Nazi forces invaded the Soviet Union, Zaytsev, like many of his comrades, volunteered to be transferred to the front line. At the time he had already reached the rank of Sergeant Major.

World War II

On 22 September 1942, Zaytsev crossed the Volga River and joined the 1047th Rifle Regiment of the 284th Rifle Division of the 62nd Army, headed by General Nikolai Batyuk. One day, Zaytsev’s commanding officer called him up and pointed at an enemy soldier in a window 800 meters away. Zaytsev took aim from his standard-issue Mosin-Nagant rifle, and with one shot, the soldier was down. In less than a few moments, two other German soldiers appeared in the window, checking their fallen officer. Vasily fired two more shots, and they were killed. For this, together with theMedal for Valor, Vasily was also awarded a sniper rifle. He is notable for having been elevated by propaganda to a virtual status of hero and served as an example and inspiration to other soldiers. His skill as a sniper allowed him to establish and run a snipers’ training school in the Metiz factory. Zaytsev-trained apprentices were nicknamed zaichata, meaning “leverets” (baby hares). Antony Beevor wrote in Stalingrad that this was the start of the “sniper movement” in the 62nd Army. Conferences were arranged to spread the doctrine of “sniperism” and exchange ideas on technique and principles that were not limited to marksmanship skills. It is estimated that snipers trained by Zaytsev killed more than 6000 enemy soldiers during World War II.

File:Zajcev rifle.jpg

 Vasili Grigorevich Zaitsev’s scope modified Mosin Nagant rifle

During Zaytsev’s career as a sniper, he would hide in all sorts of locations – on high ground, under rubble, in water pipes. After a few kills he would change his position. Together with his partner Nikolay Kulikov, Zaytsev would hide and sting. One of Zaytsev’s common tactics was to cover one large area from three positions with two men at each point – a sniper and scout. This tactic, known as the “sixes”, is still in use today and was implemented during the war in Chechnya.

Zaytsev took part in the battle for Stalingrad until January 1943, when he suffered an injury to his eyes from a mortar attack. He was attended to by Professor Filatov, who is credited with restoring his sight. On February 22, 1943, Zaytsev was awarded the title Hero of the Soviet Union. He then returned to the front and finished the war in Seelow Heights in Germany with the military rank of Captain.

After the war, Zaitsev settled in Kiev, where he studied at a textile university before he obtained employment as engineer. He rose to become the director of a textile factory in Kiev, and remained in that city until he died in 1991 at the age of 76, just 10 days before the finaldissolution of the Soviet Union. He was initially buried in Kiev despite his final request to be buried at Stalingrad.


On January 31, 2006, Vasily Zaytsev was reburied onMamayev Kurgan with full military honors. Zaytsev’s dying wish was to be buried at the monument to the defenders of Stalingrad. His coffin was carried next to a monument where his famous quote is written: “For us there was no land beyond (the) Volga“. Colonel Donald Paquette of the US Sniper School was present and laid a wreath as a sign of respect to a legendary sniper. US Army News quoted Colonel Paquette: “Vasily Zaytsev is a legend and every USA sniper must memorize his tactics and methods. He is a legend in the sniper community. May he rest in peace.

In popular culture

In 2001, a feature length film, Enemy at the Gates, starring Jude Law as Zaytsev, was loosely based on part of William Craig’s book Enemy at the Gates: The Battle for Stalingrad, which includes a “sniper’s duel” between Zaytsev and a Wehrmacht sniper school director, Major Erwin König. The movie was mostly a work of fiction. Zaytsev himself indicates in his own memoirs that a three-day duel did indeed occur and that the sniper he killed was the head of a sniper school near Berlin. However, there is no evidence that any Major Erwin König ever existed, despite the claim made by the Armed Forces Museum of Moscow that they are in possession of his telescopic sight.