When I was in the Army, we thought and talked in millimeters/meters, especially when working with foreign armies like the Aussies or the Dutch so MILS was easier. When I got out, everything around us in America is referred to in inches and yards. Sports, local ranges, hanging photos, etc is all in Imperial. Eventually I let go of the MILs and converted to MOA, and it's easier to me not having to do the extra math to translate the world around me (from my understanding) into something else. That's why I prefer MOA optics now.
Although it is a common misconception a milradian is not part of the metric system. The term includes the "mil" prefix (1000 mrad = 1 radian) so it is a logical assumption. It is simply an angular measurement, like degrees or minutes of angle. What varies between terms is the number of them that are in a complete circle: 360 degrees, 21,600 MOA and 6,283 mrads.
@DaishoTactical Great explanation. We used MILs for other things like estimating the size of certain objects like vehicles and stuff. I also recall us mixing in degrees instead of MILs for certain things like Support by Fire when working off of phase lines. Maybe it was easier for us dumb grunts to not jack it up by using a compass. I like the math when doing wind calcs with MOA, as well. I appreciate your explanations on your videos and have shown several of your CQB videos (Deliberate vs. Dynamic) to my shift. Keep up the great work.
You need linear/vertical movement for application. Angles is what gets you there. If asked how big an object is, you don't say 2.56 degrees. You say, "10 inches.' I am aware the scope uses angles. That's not what I'm talking about.
When I was in the Army, we thought and talked in millimeters/meters, especially when working with foreign armies like the Aussies or the Dutch so MILS was easier. When I got out, everything around us in America is referred to in inches and yards. Sports, local ranges, hanging photos, etc is all in Imperial. Eventually I let go of the MILs and converted to MOA, and it's easier to me not having to do the extra math to translate the world around me (from my understanding) into something else. That's why I prefer MOA optics now.
Although it is a common misconception a milradian is not part of the metric system. The term includes the "mil" prefix (1000 mrad = 1 radian) so it is a logical assumption. It is simply an angular measurement, like degrees or minutes of angle. What varies between terms is the number of them that are in a complete circle: 360 degrees, 21,600 MOA and 6,283 mrads.
@DaishoTactical Great explanation. We used MILs for other things like estimating the size of certain objects like vehicles and stuff. I also recall us mixing in degrees instead of MILs for certain things like Support by Fire when working off of phase lines. Maybe it was easier for us dumb grunts to not jack it up by using a compass. I like the math when doing wind calcs with MOA, as well. I appreciate your explanations on your videos and have shown several of your CQB videos (Deliberate vs. Dynamic) to my shift. Keep up the great work.
Still have a Leupold Mk4 with a TMR reticle
Most people don't know who to fully use MILS because they don't understand it. MOA is so much easier to use because we use inches in america.
Wait till u use a scope with MOA dials and a mil reticle….
Bullshit. MOA and mils are angular measurements. Not linear.
If you're converting either to a linear measurement you're already losing 😂
You need linear/vertical movement for application. Angles is what gets you there. If asked how big an object is, you don't say 2.56 degrees. You say, "10 inches.' I am aware the scope uses angles. That's not what I'm talking about.
Neither MOA or mil is more precise, really. They make 1 MOA adjustable scopes and they make 0.05 mil scopes too. It’s an irrelevant point.
It's more accurate
I think "more precise" is the correct term.