Sharpshooters Cadre

Discussion in 'Army Reserve' started by WFR_BOY, Aug 24, 2005.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Has anyone else been told this course has been binned altogether?

    My Pl Sgt put me forward for it and was aparently told by our PSI that the TA no longer has any form of sharpshooter/sniper course.


  2. There was a note round from DInf to the effect that the TA are not going to provided snipers and therefore the scaling for L96 etc will be removed. As a consequence the training of TA soldiers as sharpshooters and snipers will cease.

    This follows almost two years after the paper from DInf that .22 shooting has "no place in the training of the battle shot". Which is odd because I've spent the first ten years of my life down the .22 range of a drill night coaching new shots and ironing out problems. A lot cheaper and simpler than the alternatives and more importantly instantly accessible.

    And to think the RTMC is surprised to find that soldiers are poor shots.
  3. Thanks for the info, cost cutting me thinks!

    as for .22 shooting, when i was a kid i joined the ATC and spent many a happy hour on the no-8 rifle.

    then i joined the TA and got marksman on every APWT ive done to date, wonder why that is?


  4. Cutaway

    Cutaway LE Reviewer

    You're just lucky.

    By a spooky coincidence, the more one practices the luckier one gets !
  5. Arg. Wish I'd seen that paper, what utter shite. The person who wrote it obviously has no TA training experience.

    As a young Pl Comd, I was blessed with being at a Platoon TAC with its own range. We were hardly out of the damn thing. With a bit of imagination (and a suitable risk assessment - wait, this was the 1980s) you could do no end of "interesting" stuff in the range. Found myself practising my artwork and generating ATk targetry for the 84mm MAW sub-calibre, doing IWS shoots in the dark, all sorts of stuff. Kept the guys' eyes and hands in, gave recruits something to get excited and tell their mates about, allowed some JNCOs / SNCOs to actually use their range qualifications.

    Coincidentally, the sub-unit in our Bn with the active 0.22 range in the Coy TAC (not ours, curses) were consistently the winners at the Bn SAAM.

    If anyone at HQ Inf actually believes that "all TA Infantry will be within 30 minutes travel of a SAT / DCCT", then they've never tried to get to one, discover that the custodian is late / knocking off early, the sights are iron, two lanes are broken, and you've still got to get back to the TAC in time for dismissal. Whereas virtually every TAC has (or could have) a 0.22 range on-site.

    If they found the cash to build SA80K, then surely they can fund H&K to develop a 0.22LR conversion kit for the SA80A2 system. Holding back dedicated A1 is a second-best solution.
  6. thats a load of arse more rounds down range more chance to solve problems.
    even some cheap civi guns would at least get someones principles of marksmanship scored away
  7. Nearly all .22 ranges were shut because of that old favourite: health and safety. The MoD was scared that soldiers would get lead pollution from being inside the range, and couldnt be arrsed to find the funding to fit proper (filtering) ventilation. As a result of being scared of lead poisoning, soldiers (Reg and TA) face a drop in skill level and thus risk some fatal lead poisoning in operations.

    Bearing in mind the massive numbers of TA now being used in warmer climes, the cancelling of the sniper course is sheer folly. Snipers are damn hard to find (not a pun!) as most infantry soldiers, even with the required training, will still fail the course. I did a TA sniper concentration at Warminster years ago and it was bl**dy hard (yes, I did fail first attempt. Could never withdraw on a stalk :( ). Snipers also pass on their skills to the rest of their Bn, thus raising skill levels across the board. Also gives a commander a good place to hide his real weirdos (as the perverts normally take up all the space in the Milan Pl) :)

    Call me a bitter cynic, but once again all these changes are nothing to do with operational requirements, but a case of allowing that fat jock pr*ck Gordon Brown and B-liar to spend our taxes on single parent disabled lesbian outreach workers in Islington.
  8. I spent four years at a TA centre in London, with a .22 range. We used to parade in the range but never ever fired a single shot in it. When I asked why, I was told the story about the lead poison. Total crap ... Two cadet units shared out TA centre, ACF and ATC, and they were both using the range week in and week out. I know because every time we paraded, I checked the range log, which showed that the cadets had put hundreds of rounds down - but I was told to stop being a smart arse. The result was we fired on a 'real range', once or twice a year, and the standard of SAA and shooting was bloody atrocious.
  9. iits true Ta milan platoons were a holding area for deviants
    anyone want a novel way to defrost a chicken :(
  10. An interesting assessment by the DInf.

    Somewhere I still have document (circa 1977) entitled 'Shoot to Kill' which contains a comprehensive section on the use of a .22 *air rifle* as an effective marksmanship training aide. As I recall this section was written by an infantry Lt Col and described at some length those air rifles commercially available and possible target scenarios.

    Of course this was written at a time when Northern Ireland was the formative operational experience of many of our senior infantrymen. No doubt the legal and political constraints of the day that demanded our soldiers produce aimed shots at snap targets were near the top of the training requirements list for writers of this document.

    Many a happy Tuesday evening was spent by Pte. Mercia at an indoor range firing a .22 SLR conversion at the black and white images of attacking Russians projected on a film screen. The film would stop after each shot and show whether or not you had achieved a hit.

    Anyway, a 5.56mm at .223 is almost a .22 anyway :)
  11. .22 shooting is the cornerstone of cheap, accessible SAA training.

    H&K and RSAF Enfield did make a sub calibre 10 shot L85 and L98 semi auto conversion for those rifles. They are like rocking horse shit now, as so few were made, but I saw one for sale recently in Gun Mart. There was also supposed to be a low power 5.56 training round issued for use in indoor or gallery ranges, but it never materialised either.

    I dont think the barrel in those rifles was entirely suitable for .22LR though. A.223 barrel with a 1 in 9 or 1 in 12 twist is not going to give MOA accuracy when a .22LR is pushed through it. The usual barrel tighter, with a 1 in 16 twist. But the fitted standard barrel was accurate enough for cinema range training/snap shooting

    As for the lead poisoning argument. That is utter C ock! The shooting anti's went to great expense to find a link between lead poisoning and indoor and outdoor ranges. But unfortunately, all the scientific studies showed that regular civvy shooters (and the sample tested included muzzle loading enthusiasts and home reloaders)had no more or less lead in their blood stream than the same sample of non-shooters.

    Also the damage to the environment was neglible. There was no scientific evidence of lead leaching into the water table from outdoor or indoor ranges, and that, in fact, the lead, because it contains antinomy, for hardness, and does not rust is very stable, and does not break down at all. After a few months, lead oxides form on the surface of the bullets which effectively seals the lead in the ground. Also contamination was confined to only the first 4-6 inches of topsoil in outdoor ranges.

    But the 'Antis' will never let it go.