<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: David Rolls and The Slope Doper</title>
	<atom:link href="https://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2011/09/david-rolls-and-the-slope-doper/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2011/09/david-rolls-and-the-slope-doper/</link>
	<description>from AccurateShooter.com</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 30 Apr 2026 14:59:33 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=4.1.26</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Emil Praslick</title>
		<link>https://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2011/09/david-rolls-and-the-slope-doper/comment-page-1/#comment-4670</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Emil Praslick]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 22 May 2010 21:44:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/?p=14589#comment-4670</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Agreed. It&#039;s just distracting.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Agreed. It&#8217;s just distracting.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Editor</title>
		<link>https://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2011/09/david-rolls-and-the-slope-doper/comment-page-1/#comment-4669</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Editor]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 22 May 2010 21:05:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/?p=14589#comment-4669</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Emil, Your point is very well taken. This article had appeared elsewhere first in its entirety, so I was reluctant to modify it. But I think the best thing it just to remove the Army vs. USMC-who-buys-what discussion. We know there are other products, such as the bolt-on angle-cosine indicator (ACI), and digital rangefinders with angle indicators that can serve similar functions as the Slope Doper. Some top-end scopes even have built-in angle correction.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Emil, Your point is very well taken. This article had appeared elsewhere first in its entirety, so I was reluctant to modify it. But I think the best thing it just to remove the Army vs. USMC-who-buys-what discussion. We know there are other products, such as the bolt-on angle-cosine indicator (ACI), and digital rangefinders with angle indicators that can serve similar functions as the Slope Doper. Some top-end scopes even have built-in angle correction.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Emil Praslick</title>
		<link>https://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2011/09/david-rolls-and-the-slope-doper/comment-page-1/#comment-4668</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Emil Praslick]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 22 May 2010 20:29:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/?p=14589#comment-4668</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I too, often find it amusing statements like 

&quot;I guess that explains why the Marines have the best tactical shooters among our military.&quot;

PR is a great thing, but both operationally (success by Army snipers in theater) and in competition (continued domination by Army shooters in Tactical and Bullseye-type shooting) the results would lead anyone to the exact opposite conclusion.

See what happened there? You took a review of a good product, injected some stupidity, and made a hash of it.

Has the author researched the Army&#039;s technique of deriving slope angle?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I too, often find it amusing statements like </p>
<p>&#8220;I guess that explains why the Marines have the best tactical shooters among our military.&#8221;</p>
<p>PR is a great thing, but both operationally (success by Army snipers in theater) and in competition (continued domination by Army shooters in Tactical and Bullseye-type shooting) the results would lead anyone to the exact opposite conclusion.</p>
<p>See what happened there? You took a review of a good product, injected some stupidity, and made a hash of it.</p>
<p>Has the author researched the Army&#8217;s technique of deriving slope angle?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Arch_</title>
		<link>https://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2011/09/david-rolls-and-the-slope-doper/comment-page-1/#comment-4655</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Arch_]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 22 May 2010 04:18:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/?p=14589#comment-4655</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#039;m not 100% certain Brian, but I think the point was that they were not spending the &lt; $20 that it costs to equip their men and women with the best tools for the job. I think the intent was the opposite of what you are suggesting.. Its always hard to tell with the written word.

Great idea too, simple, effective.. could even rough one up out of cardboard in a pinch if you are familiar with the angles/sine relationship from prior use.. good thinking there]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m not 100% certain Brian, but I think the point was that they were not spending the &lt; $20 that it costs to equip their men and women with the best tools for the job. I think the intent was the opposite of what you are suggesting.. Its always hard to tell with the written word.</p>
<p>Great idea too, simple, effective.. could even rough one up out of cardboard in a pinch if you are familiar with the angles/sine relationship from prior use.. good thinking there</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brad</title>
		<link>https://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2011/09/david-rolls-and-the-slope-doper/comment-page-1/#comment-4654</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Brad]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 22 May 2010 01:55:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/?p=14589#comment-4654</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Quite the contrary, he is simply suggesting that a less equipped team of shooters is at a disadvantage to a properly equipped team. You Army guys act like you have something to prove to the rest of the military when your history is just as impressive as any other branch. Don&#039;t be so touchy!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Quite the contrary, he is simply suggesting that a less equipped team of shooters is at a disadvantage to a properly equipped team. You Army guys act like you have something to prove to the rest of the military when your history is just as impressive as any other branch. Don&#8217;t be so touchy!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brian</title>
		<link>https://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2011/09/david-rolls-and-the-slope-doper/comment-page-1/#comment-4653</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Brian]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 May 2010 22:57:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/?p=14589#comment-4653</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[So because the Army bureaucracy wont buy this, the Soldiers that go out and kill the enemy are second stringers? Feel free to show up at AFSAM or All Army and inform the Soldiers.

Are you trying to help the company sell more of these?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So because the Army bureaucracy wont buy this, the Soldiers that go out and kill the enemy are second stringers? Feel free to show up at AFSAM or All Army and inform the Soldiers.</p>
<p>Are you trying to help the company sell more of these?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
