Here is a short discussion that I had with someone asking a very good question, that is common. Its not cause anyone with the question is stupid, its because all the information is hard to sort through. Sometimes, it is jumping up to a 10,000 foot view, and then jumping down to the 10 foot view standing behind the shooter.
QUESTION
I am trying to get a buddy to switch to MIL, cause that is what I shoot. Here is why my buddy says: “How do you give a call for shot correction when you’re looking through a spotter after they miss the first round. I don’t measure stuff in centimeters very well”.
So, how to MILs equate/translate the correction value to the shooter?
ANSWER
Our brains can never “click” until we stop thinking in inches or centimeters right left up or down. The reticle is a ruler. You measure in angles, including miss corrections. Everything angles. Angles left, right, up and down. You don’t hold your rifle up 20 inches, you point your barrel up at an increasing angle.
Think about it like this. If you are using a slingshot, you miss low, then you adjust up, and then hit. But, when your brain is aiming later, it isn’t thinking in inches up or down, it is calculating the angle. That’s why thinking in angles is better cause that is how your brain actually works.
So, after a miss, you put the reticle on the point of aim and then look at the impact. You then measure how much of an angle you need to move your barrel. That doesn't matter so much whether it is MIL or MOA.
But, mils are easier during the complex shooting task. Think about it, math is easier with dimes than quarters. Fractions are always taught after basic math to elementary students.
QUESTION
I have no problem with that. But what about when the spotter doesn’t have a reticle in the spotter?
Example. If they shoot 12" in front of the target and 18" left at 634 yard, it seems easier to tell them to the miss in inches. If it is on a deer, could tell them to try and hold on the back quarter, but it changes focus point. What if the deer spins around faces other direction or turns and faces directly towards you. How do you know how many “ mils” if the spotter doesn't have that ruler?
ANSWER
That is a problem. 100% agree. Great question, and shows you are trying to figure it out.
The best solution is the shooter spotting his own shots and the spotter using a reticle in the glass to correct. To get the spotter a reticle, they can get into their riflescope if they don’t have a reticle in their glass. I typically spot from my riflescope because I don’t have a reticle in my spotter.
The next best is to set up a regular communication system between the the shooter and spotter to measure something and tell the spotter the measurement in mils. If it is a steel target, the shooter can MIL the target and then tell the spotter who references off that. Or, spotter jumps into their rifle scope and does the same thing. If shooting long range, there is time and opportunity to do that.
To do that on an animal, “shoulder is 1 MIL wide” “broadside body is 3.25 MIL wide” “lone pine directly to the left is .5 MIL wide”
Using angle adjustments increases the complexity on the spotter, but it decreases complexity for the shooter. Remember, the shooting task is so complex, that saying hold “18” right is a much harder request than “hold .5 MIL/MOA more.” Even that can increase complexity, because the shooter might be holding wind in the reticle. Giving them the miss distance then requires the shooter to add that number to the wind hold. As a dude with ADHD, I know I need to eliminate those chances for error. You might have a photographic memory, but even then, the task is so complex it will always add time and possibility for error.
Communication is very important. Ideally, the spotter should know the wind hold and just tell the spotter the entire wind hold to eliminate thinking on the part of the shooter to execute the shooting task. Or, dial on wind so the wind hold is then only the amount of correction.
I am not very fortunate, because no one else I hunt with knows a fraction of this stuff and I have to rely on myself. It’s why I went to a lower recoiling rifle.
Ultimately, all of the possible the benefits we hear about on the internet of going to MIL and shooting with a partner are only worth it if you put in the time.
It’s why I don’t press on Internet forums like others about MIL being the best. It is the "best" only if the circumstances are there to support it.
Most hunters aren’t able to practice enough to squeeze the benefits out. It’s like getting a Ferrari and thinking it can get me to work faster… the speed of a Ferrari is only useful if the circumstances set it up.
If you are doing what you need with MOA, then maybe you don't need to change. But, just know that there are better and faster ways to do things, IF you have the training to do it.
There are guys out there juggling knives and chainsaws. Just cause I can juggle balls, doesn't mean I have what it takes to juggle chainsaws. No professional juggler is going to tell me to juggle knives without adding to my skills, cause the costs will outweigh the benefits.
QUESTION
I am trying to get a buddy to switch to MIL, cause that is what I shoot. Here is why my buddy says: “How do you give a call for shot correction when you’re looking through a spotter after they miss the first round. I don’t measure stuff in centimeters very well”.
So, how to MILs equate/translate the correction value to the shooter?
ANSWER
Our brains can never “click” until we stop thinking in inches or centimeters right left up or down. The reticle is a ruler. You measure in angles, including miss corrections. Everything angles. Angles left, right, up and down. You don’t hold your rifle up 20 inches, you point your barrel up at an increasing angle.
Think about it like this. If you are using a slingshot, you miss low, then you adjust up, and then hit. But, when your brain is aiming later, it isn’t thinking in inches up or down, it is calculating the angle. That’s why thinking in angles is better cause that is how your brain actually works.
So, after a miss, you put the reticle on the point of aim and then look at the impact. You then measure how much of an angle you need to move your barrel. That doesn't matter so much whether it is MIL or MOA.
But, mils are easier during the complex shooting task. Think about it, math is easier with dimes than quarters. Fractions are always taught after basic math to elementary students.
QUESTION
I have no problem with that. But what about when the spotter doesn’t have a reticle in the spotter?
Example. If they shoot 12" in front of the target and 18" left at 634 yard, it seems easier to tell them to the miss in inches. If it is on a deer, could tell them to try and hold on the back quarter, but it changes focus point. What if the deer spins around faces other direction or turns and faces directly towards you. How do you know how many “ mils” if the spotter doesn't have that ruler?
ANSWER
That is a problem. 100% agree. Great question, and shows you are trying to figure it out.
The best solution is the shooter spotting his own shots and the spotter using a reticle in the glass to correct. To get the spotter a reticle, they can get into their riflescope if they don’t have a reticle in their glass. I typically spot from my riflescope because I don’t have a reticle in my spotter.
The next best is to set up a regular communication system between the the shooter and spotter to measure something and tell the spotter the measurement in mils. If it is a steel target, the shooter can MIL the target and then tell the spotter who references off that. Or, spotter jumps into their rifle scope and does the same thing. If shooting long range, there is time and opportunity to do that.
To do that on an animal, “shoulder is 1 MIL wide” “broadside body is 3.25 MIL wide” “lone pine directly to the left is .5 MIL wide”
Using angle adjustments increases the complexity on the spotter, but it decreases complexity for the shooter. Remember, the shooting task is so complex, that saying hold “18” right is a much harder request than “hold .5 MIL/MOA more.” Even that can increase complexity, because the shooter might be holding wind in the reticle. Giving them the miss distance then requires the shooter to add that number to the wind hold. As a dude with ADHD, I know I need to eliminate those chances for error. You might have a photographic memory, but even then, the task is so complex it will always add time and possibility for error.
Communication is very important. Ideally, the spotter should know the wind hold and just tell the spotter the entire wind hold to eliminate thinking on the part of the shooter to execute the shooting task. Or, dial on wind so the wind hold is then only the amount of correction.
I am not very fortunate, because no one else I hunt with knows a fraction of this stuff and I have to rely on myself. It’s why I went to a lower recoiling rifle.
Ultimately, all of the possible the benefits we hear about on the internet of going to MIL and shooting with a partner are only worth it if you put in the time.
It’s why I don’t press on Internet forums like others about MIL being the best. It is the "best" only if the circumstances are there to support it.
Most hunters aren’t able to practice enough to squeeze the benefits out. It’s like getting a Ferrari and thinking it can get me to work faster… the speed of a Ferrari is only useful if the circumstances set it up.
If you are doing what you need with MOA, then maybe you don't need to change. But, just know that there are better and faster ways to do things, IF you have the training to do it.
There are guys out there juggling knives and chainsaws. Just cause I can juggle balls, doesn't mean I have what it takes to juggle chainsaws. No professional juggler is going to tell me to juggle knives without adding to my skills, cause the costs will outweigh the benefits.
