TwoSocksJackson
Clanker

I am indeed well aware that the personal weapon with which I was issued between 1973 and and 1986 was single shot only![]()
You were issued with a Martini–Henry in 73?!
You lucky devil you
I am indeed well aware that the personal weapon with which I was issued between 1973 and and 1986 was single shot only![]()
Thank you for your reduced service.No, as said elsewhere, I am a bin man who just knows some people in the pub who have served.
I've seen it labelled as 'overlearned response' (20(+) years ago now, could be labelled differently by modern psychology)People will do in combat what they've done in training. It's the whole point of training![]()
You are clearly The One.You were issued with a Martini–Henry in 73?!
You lucky devil you![]()
Very true , from what I hear current Squaddies get little range time , I dont get why not , as a civvy I shoot nearly every week up to 200m off hand and long range prone etc , if I take a couple of weeks out it shows and takes a session or two to get back to where I was before.1. You can't learn to shoot any weapon well, if you only shoot a handful of times in a year.
a. Let alone learn to be a decent battle shot - that calls for ancillary skills, not least of which is locating a thoroughly uncooperative enemy.2. Terminal effect of 7.62 is arguably excessive for a modern infantry rifle. Recoil certainly is, for an assault rifle at any rate - and yes, I am indeed well aware that the personal weapon with which I was issued between 1973 and and 1986 was single shot only
3. Which is excellent news: although many would argue (many based on recent sandy experience) that the terminal effects of 5.56 are insufficient at the extremity of its nominal effective range of SA80, which is disappointing.
4. Caveats in Para 1 and 1a apply equally to all infantry small arms users. Can't locate your enemy - then you're simply missing him with a higher degree of (in)accuracy to no good effect.
@Bubbles_Barker - Thank you for seeking my input![]()
That's just crazy talk!!!!Which could all be based on common components.
Just adding my bit...I find cocking the AR type platform really awkward...
It is possible to fit a l/h side cocking handle on an AR15 , the Sabre Defence ones that Guy Savage mentioned earlier built used one that looked like it came off an L1A1 , there's no reason this couldn't be fitted on semi/full auto`s ,maybe the Septics dont want any stinking British /Belgian designs on their rifles .With the added bonus that because you cock it by pulling the handle back over the butt stock you cannot have a built up butt to give a good cheek weld. To compensate for this when firing you tend to raise the butt up so that the toe only is sort of resting where the whole butt should be.
With the added bonus that because you cock it by pulling the handle back over the butt stock you cannot have a built up butt to give a good cheek weld. To compensate for this when firing you tend to raise the butt up so that the toe only is sort of resting where the whole butt should be.
They don't need to get remotely close to the limit of any weapon's inherent accuracy.is there any point issuing rifles with longer range capability if most users cant shoot their current rifle to its limits?
It is possible to fit a l/h side cocking handle on an AR15 , the Sabre Defence ones that Guy Savage mentioned earlier built used one that looked like it came off an L1A1 , there's no reason this couldn't be fitted on semi/full auto`s ,maybe the Septics dont want any stinking British /Belgian designs on their rifles .
With the added bonus that because you cock it by pulling the handle back over the butt stock you cannot have a built up butt to give a good cheek weld. To compensate for this when firing you tend to raise the butt up so that the toe only is sort of resting where the whole butt should be.
I dont get why not
California Highway Patrol, the Newhall Shootout (5-6 April 1970). they lost 4 officers in a shootout. It took years for CHP to admit that officers were found with brass in their pockets but they finally did. I worked with a former CHP who was on during the time frame of the shooting. He said that the CHP Range Master hated a messy range so you fired, unloaded and put the brass in your pocket before loading from a dump pouch.People will do in combat what they've done in training. It's the whole point of training
"train as you fight", "training scars" and all that. There's an old saw about US police officers catching their ejected revolver brass and putting it in their pocket in a firefight. Whether that actually ever happend or not, I dunno, can't find anything definitive in a couple of minutes. But the global point is true that what you train, you'll do live.
And to bring it back to my civvy cnut shooting world, you see it simple things with people training movements by the numbers, choppily with pauses, and then do exactly the same thing on the timer.
See numerous posts referring to studies done on marksmanship.Yet the USMC is moving back to shooting single shots at targets at range, witness the wholesale adoption of the M27 rifle by the whole Corp....
So what needs to change?A variety of factors, mostly the amount of policy and paperwork involved making it unnecessarily difficult to book range time and ammo.
Having done a Herrick (15) I'd vehemently agree with the second point. Some of the contacts we had with probably no more than 40 -40 people firing saw Ammo Replen demands by the CSM for 20k rounds. Yet no one actually reported identifying the enemy firing point.See numerous posts referring to studies done on marksmanship.
Perception, even from many infantry types with lots of sand on their boots: lots of rounds down is best.
Reality from studies: target identification and aimed shots.