Thread: LSW...the Armys view...

Originally Posted by auscam

Originally Posted by Dossbag

Glad to see some of you agree with me, i was prepared for a 'fcuk off' for my encouragement of unorganised cabbies :D

Had something similar on the final exercise of my (infantry) IET; due to some stuff-up, we ended up with a double issue of front line. I was at one end of the pit with the MG and stacks of link, my No.2 was at the other with my rifle and a sandbag full of mags. We ignored each other for the duration of the shoot, concentrated on what we were doing and had a great time, cutting down gum trees and starting grass fires.

In 1980 while at Sennelager we spent a most of a day getting rid of 9,000 rounds of 9mm with Brownings and Sterlings.
It was the remains of the Battallions training 9mm for the year. We had to use it or return it.
When I left mid afternoon there was still a fairly massive pile of containers left, surrounded by Guardsmen busy filling their mags.
No training shortage then.
Good Days.

I have happy memories of grabbing all of the 7.62 and range time that was too much trouble for others...

In the days of SLR, I found that running ARA Match 3 Practice 2 was a good warm-up to put the APWT into perspective. Cancel that - adopt the standing position, and a quick race to put 10 rounds rapid towards the targets from 100m was a better one. Not fast enough, do it again. Still not fast enough. Right, now we've got the gunshyness out of the way, let's concentrate on shooting straight...

Huge fun is underrated in teaching value

(Advice to the aspiring subaltern - if you want to do any blank firing training, always schedule it shortly after an FTX, when the RQMS is sitting on sandbags full of returned ammunition and pyro, anticipating the nausea that is to follow... as if by magic, you appear as the solution to his problem. It's amazing the quality of training when everyone is carrying first-line-scales for every BHE)

Originally Posted by EX_STAB

Aside from that, learning to shoot in soft headgear and without webbing is a good idea. Once you know how you need to arrange yourself to shoot you can adapt your kit to your shooting style rather than vice versa.

Look back to the 70s and 80s - "Skill-at-arms Order" involved stripping everything off the webbing except the ammo pouches. Wearing lightweight trousers, and soft headdress. Add a Bisley of sunny days, ice-cream vans, and sh*tloads of 7.62; and I was a very happy teenager.

Except... shooting was perceived as being "unrealistic", and the pressure since has been to add helmets, full PLCE, body armour, the better to develop the battle shot.

I can see the merit of both ways...

Originally Posted by EX_STAB

Also, to DEVELOP shooting skills more challenging, basically smaller, targets are required. The current fig 11/12/14 etc may well be representative for the purposes of the IBSR etc but they don't help develop shooting skills because its too easy to hit them, particularly at short range.

True. What everyone forgets is that the APWT is a test of basic skills, suitable for recruits nearing the end of their training - a bare pass is certainly not what an experienced soldier should be happy with.

That's what the targetry and shoots in Pam 20 are for - unfortunately, if you run into the "wrong" range staff, changing 40-odd ETR targets from 11/12/12c at 300/200/100 to figures 12/12c/14 suddenly becomes too much like hard work... the shrinkage can also be a bit of a leap for the "developing firer".

Originally Posted by EX_STAB

When shooting for groups I have always found that I get tighter groups when shooting at a smaller aiming mark. This is where skill development really takes place.

If you can shoot to 75% of the rifle's capability when static in slow fire you are ready to move onto the more difficult stuff.

Grossman's "On Killing" has been mentioned in another thread - suffice it to say that there's good psychological reason why we train from day one by shooting at people-shaped targets.

I think the problem is that there are too many worthy training objectives, too many well-intended processes to ensure "quality", and too few hours in the day.

The lowest standard of training quality has been raised over the years - if you were unlucky, it was shouting, beasting, and not much coaching. Training planning could be inspirational, but it could also be dull and repetitive. As a subaltern it took me months before I persuaded the OC to run a shooting weekend where we tried to teach, rather than just push people through APWT attempts.

On the other hand, being an arrogant sod who always thought he knew best, I resented prescriptive programmes preventing me from tailoring my training according to the needs of the students...

Originally Posted by EX_STAB

Originally Posted by HectortheInspector

Originally Posted by EX_STAB

Originally Posted by HectortheInspector

I did a bit of shooting team stuff, once upon a time, but I always felt that one thing that was always assumed was that the shooter and target would be on the same level. When we moved on to shoots involving elevation firing up or down, the quality of shooting went to ratsh*t almost instantly. Most people could remember windage left and right, but adjusting for angle up and down was simply never taught.

This is something that has never really been addressed, which is strange, because we spend a lot of time in cities nowadays, and one thing they ain't is flat.

The range to apply is the horizontal range to the target.

Range, yes. Position and hold, no. I think in many cases it is lack of familiarity. Everyone was used to 'routine' ranges for APWT, gallery and moving target. Throw in a bit of elevation and angle, and everyone went to pieces.

I see what you mean, position and hold. I think this just needs to be practised on a suitable range. Thing is there are no suitable ranges to practice it on........

Wah deflectors on

Yes there are... there's the IBSR, and Field Firing ranges (he says, showing his age, LFTT it is then). No-one said that you were only ever allowed to use them for tactical skills... the Section in Defence ranges are perfect for this kind of stuff.

Originally Posted by HectortheInspector

I did a bit of shooting team stuff, once upon a time, but I always felt that one thing that was always assumed was that the shooter and target would be on the same level. When we moved on to shoots involving elevation firing up or down, the quality of shooting went to ratsh*t almost instantly. Most people could remember windage left and right, but adjusting for angle up and down was simply never taught.

This is something that has never really been addressed, which is strange, because we spend a lot of time in cities nowadays, and one thing they ain't is flat.

And the one thing that the SASC aint, is involved in operations day-to-day. The one thing they is involved in day-to-day is (you guessed it already) flat ranges.

Go figure, as they say stateside.

My conclusion? SASC are a signific ant barrier to operational effectiveness.

Originally Posted by Stonker

Originally Posted by HectortheInspector

I did a bit of shooting team stuff, once upon a time, but I always felt that one thing that was always assumed was that the shooter and target would be on the same level. When we moved on to shoots involving elevation firing up or down, the quality of shooting went to ratsh*t almost instantly. Most people could remember windage left and right, but adjusting for angle up and down was simply never taught.

This is something that has never really been addressed, which is strange, because we spend a lot of time in cities nowadays, and one thing they ain't is flat.

And the one thing that the SASC aint, is involved in operations day-to-day. The one thing they is involved in day-to-day is (you guessed it already) flat ranges.



Go figure, as they say stateside.

My conclusion? SASC are a signific ant barrier to operational effectiveness.

Got to agree here, my Bn was very heavily into shooting. Whenever possible we had range days, at one time each company had a range day every week. As the restrictions on ammo started to bite this was gradually reduced to at least once a month which was not sufficient. The SNCOs who used to run these ranges knew how to make shooting interesting and did so, it was only when the SASC turned up that things became more 'formal' and bl*ody boring. One of the most often used 'competitions' was the falling plates organised so that two sections shot against each other with time and ammo constraints, scores being kept. The level of competition and rivalry ensured that troops shot to their full potential, even when having just ran some considerable distance to shoot.

As for 'free for all' shoots, I have been involved in many in different parts of the world and I think that they can be the most fun shoots. They also engender total familiarity with your weapon system which is very important.

I suspect that SASC have come to see themselves these days as the paramilitary wing of the 'Ealth and Safety machine.

Not good.

one way that could help
would never happen due to the total mare that would be entailed.
encourage the lads to take up target shooting a battalion could probalby get a good deal on ammo and weapons

Originally Posted by brighton hippy

one way that could help
would never happen due to the total mare that would be entailed.
encourage the lads to take up target shooting a battalion could probalby get a good deal on ammo and weapons

That's not as ridiculous as it sounds. During the '60s the US Army adopted the 'Quick Kill' program, where soldiers were taught rapid, instinctive shooting using Daisy BB guns. After a bit of instruction most soldiers could hit objects the size of a coin thrown into the air. The better ones could hit an asprin.

Now instinctive shooting may not be the answer, but imagine if we had an SA80 replica airgun and each soldier was made to shoot many thousands of pellets at reduced size knock down metal targets, with some good coaching to correct any errors. Imagine what that could do for combat marksmanship!

I've seen video of Israeli snipers doing something similar with balloons.

Imagine what that would do for the G4 chain...

IIRC, the US infantry of the Viet Nam era took 40000 rounds for one kill, snipers used less than 2.

Originally Posted by auscam

I've seen video of Israeli snipers doing something similar with balloons.

No doubtng their marksmanship.

A little more attention to RoE is called for, however:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2...20/2521350.htm

Originally Posted by Bravo_Bravo

Imagine what that would do for the G4 chain...

IIRC, the US infantry of the Viet Nam era took 40000 rounds for one kill, snipers used less than 2.

Only 40000! That's a significant improvement - WW2 estimates put the figure closer to 1,000,000 rounds of SAA per kill, estimated across all allies on the European front 1944-45, IIRC.

Figures prove only that the primary role of small arms in 'conventional' combat is suppressive fire (artillery being the principal tool of slaughter)

Originally Posted by Gun_Nut

Originally Posted by brighton hippy

one way that could help
would never happen due to the total mare that would be entailed.
encourage the lads to take up target shooting a battalion could probalby get a good deal on ammo and weapons

That's not as ridiculous as it sounds. During the '60s the US Army adopted the 'Quick Kill' program, where soldiers were taught rapid, instinctive shooting using Daisy BB guns. After a bit of instruction most soldiers could hit objects the size of a coin thrown into the air. The better ones could hit an asprin.

Now instinctive shooting may not be the answer, but imagine if we had an SA80 replica airgun and each soldier was made to shoot many thousands of pellets at reduced size knock down metal targets, with some good coaching to correct any errors. Imagine what that could do for combat marksmanship!

£350 please!

Awaits incoming.

A proper .177, not some poofta airsoft toy!

sure something like that made for the same priceish.
although the grown ups would seriously ban them quickly if made no line would be safe
was talking more about real firearms a .22 target shooting could encourage marksmanship and less likely to lead to mayhem.

ask ugly about tregantle and an early airsoft SA80