View Full Version : Full auto in close quarters (defensive) discussion
technician
03-22-12, 11:03
This is a branch off the "BG(s)+Armor+Home Invasion (http://m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=95912)" thread where the topic of FA in CQB was brought up. From some of the responses I realized I might have some misconceptions on the topic.
Member sboza mentioned he was taught NOT to use full auto in a CQB situation:
Wasn't talking about mag dumps. I was always taught not to go full auto for cqb. I'm not trying to be stubborn, if there are some here who kick in doors with the selector on fa and have good reasons for doing so, I would consider changing my view on the topic. I do see some potential benefit for very highly, highly trained guys but I'm not sure I'm buying it in general (and definitely not for the OP).
Does anyone have any opposing or concurring viewpoints from their own training or experience? I'm hoping for input that would relate to defensive situations (home/property/buildings/vehicles), I have no fantasy of assaulting a target.
Please refrain from posting comments regarding NFA and legality. It would be in the NFA section if that was in question.
Failure2Stop
03-22-12, 12:01
Talking about well trained users:
The biggest issue with FA in compressed space/time is getting the selector from "safe" to "auto".
SWATcop556
03-22-12, 23:55
For me I don't see any real need for FA in a LE setting. I have both a M16 FA lower for my work rifle and I'm also issued a MP5 that is FA. Only time I shoot them on FA is to qualify since it's required. I feel just as confident with semi auto fire and my shot placement is much more precise.
I'm not saying that FA doesn't have it's place but for MY intended uses and purpose FA falls into the "man this shit is fun" category, not the practical category.
For me it comes down to the same idea the F2S mentioned, time. I'm a lefty so for most M-4 style rifles I will have to use my trigger finger to hit the fire selector. In the Marine Corps I was taught that full auto is a last resort "holy crap I shot him 5 times and he's still coming" approach where you switch to FA and dump the rest of the mag into the guy to get him to stop. For me this means taking my finger off the trigger and not engaging the target in that split second it takes to switch to FA. Why do that when I could just keep shooting? I especially don't want to do that if the guy is moving towards me.
I also think the need in LE applications is extremely limited and only in very rare or specific situations can I see its benefits and this would mostly be in relation to well practiced, team sized tactics under a true extreme situation. However, I am under the better to have and not need, than to need and not have. No downsides practically speaking to have the option. I will say that I much prefer full auto over burst fire selection. As mentioned the dialing up to auto is not so quick and since we manipulate the safety our default is semi auto. Also a very good shooter might be able to shoot at a pace that almost looks like full auto rate of fire while maintaining accuracy. I will also add that a highly trained shooter on full auto can select the number of rounds that they wish to fire on demand.
Failure2Stop
03-23-12, 09:51
In the Marine Corps I was taught that full auto is a last resort "holy crap I shot him 5 times and he's still coming" approach where you switch to FA and dump the rest of the mag into the guy to get him to stop.
Who ever taught you that is either an idiot or so far out of his lane that he can't even see the road.
If you are shooting at a threat, and your shots are not achieveing the intended result, start shooting it in the face. If something is not working, why would I continue to do it when a perfectly good answer is just an aim-point away?
The sole application of FA on a carbine/rifle is for achieving fire superiority/suppression in an engagement, and should only be used briefly.
Talking about well trained users:
The biggest issue with FA in compressed space/time is getting the selector from "safe" to "auto".
For me I don't see any real need for FA in a LE setting...I'm not saying that FA doesn't have it's place but for MY intended uses and purpose FA falls into the "man this shit is fun" category, not the practical category.
I also think the need in LE applications is extremely limited and only in very rare or specific situations can I see its benefits and this would mostly be in relation to well practiced, team sized tactics under a true extreme situation. However, I am under the better to have and not need, than to need and not have. No downsides practically speaking to have the option. I will say that I much prefer full auto over burst fire selection. As mentioned the dialing up to auto is not so quick and since we manipulate the safety our default is semi auto. Also a very good shooter might be able to shoot at a pace that almost looks like full auto rate of fire while maintaining accuracy. I will also add that a highly trained shooter on full auto can select the number of rounds that they wish to fire on demand.
What those guys said. Useful for a more limited user group, which must be trained and disciplined.
FA over burst. With a FA, you can fire what you want. With a burst, you get what you get and it's not always what you dialed over to.
When I went to basic it seemed as if "full auto" was cool and in fact many FM's talked about full auto fire when clearing buildings and assaulting objectives.
These are the same FM's that depicted soldiers clearing houses and throwing frags inside rooms. Obviously that shit is way outdated. On the other hand time and place are probably key here.
Even with multiple attackers I would still prefer to use semi. One would be surprised at how many rounds you can accurately put down range on multiple attackers with a little practice.
I'll stand by what I said in the other thread.
I don't view full-auto in close quarters as going full retard but it is easy to argue there being better ways (much more precise and controlled semi-auto fire).
Going out to say 100 yards and using it to engage an individual target that isn't broad side of barn is another story.
lethal dose
03-23-12, 20:42
Not sure if my last post went through. May have been deleted. If that's the case, I apologize to anyone who may have read and was offended. Although I spoke only of how I feel, the post was not a positive contribution. Good advice has been given. I agree with swatcop.
Failure2Stop
03-23-12, 20:56
Not sure if my last post went through. May have been deleted. If that's the case, I apologize to anyone who may have read and was offended. Although I spoke only of how I feel, the post was not a positive contribution. Good advice has been given. I agree with swatcop.
Doesn't seem to have gone through.
Feel free to resend if you want.
Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk
Who ever taught you that is either an idiot or so far out of his lane that he can't even see the road.
If you are shooting at a threat, and your shots are not achieveing the intended result, start shooting it in the face. If something is not working, why would I continue to do it when a perfectly good answer is just an aim-point away?
The sole application of FA on a carbine/rifle is for achieving fire superiority/suppression in an engagement, and should only be used briefly.
3/7 mid OIF 2, started teaching the usage of burst in close fighting in Al Qiam.
They found it more effective and as their gunner stated in their post deployment AAR
"Head shots sound great on the rifle range not as easy for a target running at full speed with an engagement window of 1 to 3 seconds. Also, not easy when fighting a religious zealot, adrenalin and whatever else pumped up, inside a house or building and you have to put five to ten rounds into him to kill him. "
lethal dose
03-24-12, 05:44
I agree to an extent, but I'm going to go ahead and call this a fallacy.
3/7 mid OIF 2, started teaching the usage of burst in close fighting in Al Qiam.
They found it more effective and as their gunner stated in their post deployment AAR
"Head shots sound great on the rifle range not as easy for a target running at full speed with an engagement window of 1 to 3 seconds. Also, not easy when fighting a religious zealot, adrenalin and whatever else pumped up, inside a house or building and you have to put five to ten rounds into him to kill him. "
John_Burns
03-24-12, 21:16
While I am not at all an expert on FA fire I have had a conversation about FA with a friend of mine who trains SMUs on a regular basis. He is mentioned by name in Kyle Lambs book and on Larry Vickers website as one of the guy who helped them learn to shoot proficiently.
He is really closed lipped about the training but he did say that prior the SSF trigger 3 out of 4 guys in the really HSLD units would opt for a high quality Semi Auto trigger vs a mil type burst or full auto. It seems having a reasonable and repeatable trigger action in semi was more important to these guys than being able to dump the mag with just 1 pull of the trigger.
As other have said the use of full auto for these guys was pretty much limited to “fire superiority” not for actually hitting things and stopping threats. Semi worked much better for real work.
Of course the above is just anecdotal plus second hand and this is the internet.:D
Disciplined fire > Volume of fire every time. Not to say that some people can't be effective shooting FA, but I'm not one of them, and I would say that I'm probably in the same category as 95% of the shooting world on this one.
FWIW no one uses FA unless it is an M249 or M240 and then it is short sequential bursts (ex: 3-5-3) or a qualified Z pattern (ex 7-10-7)
:D
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.