PDA

View Full Version : Georgian Reporter Shot Live On Air! - Link to video


jayteeto
14th Aug 2008, 19:16
Video: Georgian TV reporter shot by Russian sniper during live broadcast carries on with her report with bleeding arm | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1045030/Video-Georgian-TV-reporter-shot-Russian-sniper-live-broadcast-carries-report-bleeding-arm.html)

Good girl!! No Bleating..... :eek:

tony draper
14th Aug 2008, 19:38
Well if the quality of Georgian TV reporting is of the same standard as ours it were probably a Georgian sniper.

sisemen
15th Aug 2008, 02:26
It's only a flesh wound.....

Impressed though!

Howard Hughes
15th Aug 2008, 06:34
Most likely it were a sniper!
Most likely it was an errant bullet, any half decent sniper and you would be DEAD my dear...:rolleyes:

Wod
15th Aug 2008, 07:22
Being shot Live on air is much to be preferred to being shot Dead on air in my opinion.

Farrell
15th Aug 2008, 08:35
Hmmmm....

Not sure about this. Probably just the Georgian propaganda machine at work.
Very low body response to the round - even for a graze.

Could not expect even an average sniper to miss a static target like that.

If it is a real event, I expect it was a stray round well into it's deceleration.

BlueWolf might comment if he is around.

max_cont
15th Aug 2008, 09:17
Farrell a bullet is into its deceleration phase as soon as it leaves the barrel…and yes most likely a stray round.

FWIW I have seen very average shooting from some of my colleagues’ on the sniper team in a past life. In fact I have been guilty of the same level of incompetence. However considering the ranges we are talking about and the environmental factors we had to guestimate, it’s not surprising that misses occurred. In fact any hit was a good result regardless of what Hollywood would have you believe.

Nowadays the optics are better, the ammunition is superior and the ranging is more accurate…but the sniper and spotter has to have the equipment to hand. If not, they do it the old fashioned way and take an educated guess…just like we used to in the 80’s.

It may well have been a deliberate attempt.

tony draper
15th Aug 2008, 09:33
Watched the clip on Sky news,notice she very quickly covered her qualifications up with a flack Jacket after the event.:E

Farrell
15th Aug 2008, 10:12
max_cont

Am aware of that. Just didn't phrase it properly.
My English gets worse by the hour.

SXB
15th Aug 2008, 11:09
I don't know whether that footage was contrived or not but one thing that should be pointed out is that journalists, their support staff and photographers are regularly putting themselves in danger in war zones. This is to feed our insatiable desire for up to the minute news. They are getting killed all the time.

The number of such people killed over the last 20 years is enormous, several thousand.

tony draper
15th Aug 2008, 11:44
We didn't used to have a insatiable desire for endless speculation derived from scant information, in my opinion modern day what is loosely termed journalism spawned by the 24 hour news channels causes more harm than good,what we used to get was information on events on which we could make up our own minds,not be told by some halfwit in a flack jacket what to think,I have absolutely zero respect for today journalists,we have had better information on this thread by your goodself than we get from any of the news channels.
Warfare just like any human misery or tragedy be it famine flood or earthquake crime kidnap or murder is just all part of showbiz now,just something to increase the viewer numbers.
I have been a news junky all my life and I despair at the dumbed down sensationalised news coverage we have inflicted upon us now.

Foss
15th Aug 2008, 12:01
Be realistic. There have been reporters since there have been wars. The only difference now is that instead of waiting weeks for a lengthy written report you can now see it live on your TV. Whoever is creating it is still in danger.

If there wasn't coverage there would be demands of full transparency so that armed forces couldn't be allowed to cover anything up.

Some figures from 1992 onwards.
Statistics: Journalists Killed (http://www.cpj.org/deadly/index.html)
So the Committee for the Protection of Journalists makes it 693.
But that's only updated quarterly.

Their homepage is
CPJ Press Freedom Online (http://www.cpj.org/)

vee-tail-1
15th Aug 2008, 12:38
Reminds me of the old puzzle where you are in jail and there are two people who know how you can get out. But one always lies and the other always tells the truth.
Politicians are like that, and it seems that Western ones always lie so everyone assumes that Putin is lying. Actually his announcements are the only ones that have a ring of truth.

tony draper
15th Aug 2008, 12:40
That may well be true but when you have watched the likes of James Cameron reporting on the Indo Pakistan war, watching this lot is like comparing Shakespeare to a fairground sideshow.

Foss
15th Aug 2008, 12:59
Just got to sort the wheat from the chaff Drapes.
There is an awful lot of [email protected] put out to fill rolling news, but what's worse is the same [email protected] is being reused on what, 20-30 minute cycles, so you see the same rubbish over, and over.

It also spawns the worst thing of all, the armchair expert. 'Oh I see the Russians are sending such and such a tank to seize somewhere' (right enough mate, you wouldn't know a tank if one ran over you head). That right mate, how do you know that then?
'Seen it on TV.'

621andy
15th Aug 2008, 19:15
I found the link to an article about Sharron Davies' legs of more interest:E:E

sispanys ria
15th Aug 2008, 19:25
Usually a bullet has a very typical noise that I can't hear on this video.
Those guys are pretending to be under fire, you can see buildings around where they can find cover but instead they just stay calmly standing in the middle of the street while the girl is elaborating on the type of weapon the "sniper" did use... doesn't look serious at all to me.

Foss
15th Aug 2008, 19:59
Anybody see the footage of the jeep with the camera crew in it being fired on? I can't find it. Going up a road where there's a checkpoint somewhere being run by someone. Bullet holes started appearing in the windscreen with the car full of people, what's the army phrase, effective fire.
Lots of pzzt pzzzzt noises.

Bravo73
15th Aug 2008, 21:22
'Ere ya go, Foss:

YouTube - Heart stopping footage of journalist car under fire Georgia (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DNEDtzytGas)

:eek:

Loose rivets
15th Aug 2008, 22:11
Just as an aside, I hear that it now takes 23,000 rounds per kill V the 18,000 that it was taking a couple of years ago. The civi cost of these rounds right now is about a quid a shot.


Sniping is getting very skilled. I'm not certain, but I think a 3/4 inch group at one mile. 1 1/4 at a mile and a half. I can get the latest figures tomorrow.

Still air, a huge scope and all the time in the world to aim, but still...impressive, or horrifying, depending on your viewpoint.

What also stunned me was the almost perfect efficiency of the silencers. The bolt was the only sound I could hear.

max_cont
16th Aug 2008, 10:15
Folks FWIW, you cannot silence a supersonic round. The equipment we use in civvie street today is far superior to what we had “in the day” It is the equal of anything the military now use…mainly because it is the same equipment or in the optics case, better.

If you truly hear nothing when a round is fired then that is whisper ammunition. This is a heavy for caliber bullet at subsonic velocity used for short range work only. However the surprisingly loud noise the bullet impact can make when hitting flesh can alert anyone nearby to the fact that something’s up. This limits its application.

Moderators will reduce the muzzle report on a large caliber weapon firing full power loads, but not silence it. It helps in avoiding detection from the target area and reduces the flash to almost invisible. It also reduces recoil.

The sonic crack of a bullet is very difficult if not impossible for someone to get a direction from where the shot comes from. With a moderator the “thump” that we used to use for shot direction finding by ear is absent to the target since the muzzle report is so reduced, you can’t hear it much beyond 1-200 meters. As a consequence we never really worried about the crack. However the cracks from different caliber bullets do sound different. This could alert the enemy to the presence of a sniper team working the area if you were not using a standard caliber.

GrumpyOldFart
16th Aug 2008, 16:56
From the subtitles on the full version of that tape:


Iyi misiniz cocuklar




Does that mean what it looks like? 'E's missin' 'is family jewels?

:uhoh: