Why do .mil guys shoulder so high?

[PALADIN-hgwt]

xxxxx

[Cameron]

It yields a great check weld while keeping the neck in a natural position. The 5.556/.223 doesn't recoil enough to need my butt in the shoulder.

Cameron

[DocGKR]

Bring the weapon up to your cheek, not the cheek down to the weapon...

Try shooting with body armor, helmet, etc... with a collapsible stock--it simply works better to shoot the M4 type carbine with it in the position you describe.

[rhino]

Ditto. Putting just enough of the "toe" of the stock against your body/shoulder allows you to keep your head as upright as possible.

[Oscar 319]

I don't know if anyone uses these anymore, these were made with that principle in mind....

http://www.duostock.com/DUOSTOCK.COM.data/Components/duostock_in_iraq.jpg

[panzerr]

The Army didn't teach me to shoot that way...I developed the habit on my own (and so would any 11B worth his salt)

[rob_s]

Transitioning from the AR to the AK this is one of my biggest complaints. If I hold the AK as high as I'd like with iron sights I get almost no toe at all, and the stouter recoil of the bigger bullet really starts to leave a mark after 3 days. Putting an Aimpoint Micro on the AK helped to some degree as now the sight plane is a little higher.

Same idea, for me, with the lower 1/3 cowitness mounts for Aimpoints and why I think the theory that the Eotech "comes with a mount" is nonsense; the Eotech sits far too low with it's stock "mount".

[Redhat]

The Army didn't teach me to shoot that way...I developed the habit on my own (and so would any 11B worth his salt)

that's surprising! Every .mil class I've ever been in taught to place the toe high in the shoulder pocket. Of course, with all your gear on you don't have much of a shoulder pocket so you must adapt.

[Jay Cunningham]

I was originally rained to shoulder my AR with the tip of the buttstock in the shoulder as described.

After training extensively with LAV (who preaches a more aggressive stance) my buttstock find a firmer purchase on my shoulder.

http://i143.photobucket.com/albums/r147/VickersTactical/VT_AdvCarbPist_Dec06_22.jpg

http://www.gandrtactical.com/images/archive/Training_Pics/M4C%20Carbine5.jpg

http://www.gandrtactical.com/images/archive/Training_Pics/M4C%20Carbine4.jpg

[Redhat]

I think it probably originated from the target shooting/marksmanship community who basically determined what went into the "official" training program.

[Heavy Metal]

Are those bottom two pictures Ken Hackathorn's place?

[telecustom]

I think stock placement is dependant on the situation. If it s snap shot, then the high shoulder is the way to go. But when you need to have a more solid position and better placement of the butt of your weapon. Just my $.02

[SIMPLYDYNAMIC]

I think it probably originated from the target shooting/marksmanship community who basically determined what went into the "official" training program.

From what I have heard and from an educated guess, I would say that has a lot to do with it.

We always want to find the position that provides a rigid abutment for the weapon to recoil against. That IMO is obviously more like Thekatar says above...
however; it is of course situational dependant. You may have to shoot over something like a high wall on your tiptoes where the higher toe/stock position comes into play. I notice when I am in the marksmanship off hand with a sniper rifle (which I have found myself in overseas) I had a high toe stock placement.

[Robb Jensen]

I too believe it's based it the yellow glasses shooters. ;)

[SIMPLYDYNAMIC]

I saw a pair of those in your shooting bag!:eek:

[Robb Jensen]

I saw a pair of those in your shooting bag!:eek:

[Austin Powers] That not my bag man! [/Austin Powers]

[CarlosDJackal]

This is how it was explained to me: it's because of the design of the M-16 family of rifles. In most other rifles, the buttstock has a downward "sweep" designed into them. Without such a bend, it requires the shooter to either bring their heads down or "toe the rifle" in order to achieve proper sight alignment.

Of course, this could all be a bunch of baloney that I gobbled up hook, line, and sinker. :confused:

[WillC]

Bring the weapon up to your cheek, not the cheek down to the weapon...

Try shooting with body armor, helmet, etc... with a collapsible stock--it simply works better to shoot the M4 type carbine with it in the position you describe.

+1, especially with a high noise headset.

[Low Drag]

Get a timer, try it both ways and different ranges and see what works best for you.

Do what works for you, after you put in the time of course.

[CarlosDJackal]

Just move along, nothing to see here...

[MX5]

Are those bottom two pictures Ken Hackathorn's place?

Those are at GTA in NE OH.

[panzerr]

The Army didn't teach me to shoot that way...I developed the habit on my own (and so would any 11B worth his salt)

I resend this statement. It was borne out of laziness and ignorance.

[sinister]

Bringing the comb of the stock to your cheek and keeping your head upright helps you keep your equilibrium when you are in patrolling mode or the standing/slow fire position for longer periods (especially with MICH and goggles). The fluid in your inner ear (which is helping you keep your balance) tells your brain how your head and body are oriented.

The average melon weighs 8 pounds without helmet.

An aggressive/firm cheek-to-comb position with buttstock in the shoulder uses the weight of your grape and MICH/goggles to help keep the rifle from rising up and right (if right-handed) in doubles, hammers, and strings.

[Spade]

A buddy & myself were watching some training videos & noticed that they shoulder deep in the pocket. My buddy commented that he did not do that & I replied neither did I. At the time we could not come up with a reason why. Shooting with gear on makes seems reasonable.

[Failure2Stop]

What works well at 200 yards in the standing position for 40 minutes and 20 bullets is different than what works well when on the move at a distance of 3 yards and a time limit of "right ****ing now".

The marksmanship training cycle for people we pretend to be forging into warriors is partly at fault. Basing initial exposure to the standing position on long-range target shooting, and the obvious need to adopt target shooting methodology to be successful in the evaluation, is not helping our guys win gunfights at the distances at which a standing position is a viable answer, and not with the gear and armor that they have to wear while doing it. Since most mass-issue training is based on numbers turn-around and check the box approach to training it is watered down and delivered by guys that aren't qualified to teach another living person how to tie their boot-laces, let alone win a gunfight through skill and guile. Since the evaluations are excessively watered-down and time limits can be exceeded, the student does not need to learn how to actually run the gun in a manner that would be the most efficient/effective.

Another reason is the ACOG. This primarily applies to non-shooting times when the optic is being used to gain SA, locate or positively identify a threat. It is easier and more stable to raise the gun high in the shoulder, RPG style, to look through the ACOG. It has been commonly seen and identified on the major news networks. I absolutely hate it and will not permit any person under my authority to convey such a passive attitude or to point their weapon at anything they do not believe to be a threat. If they think it might be a threat, no problem. It is lazy, careless, and dangerous.

So the answer to your question is this: poor training and/or laziness.

[SeriousStudent]

.....

I absolutely hate it and will not permit any person under my authority to convey such a passive attitude or to point their weapon at anything they do not believe to be a threat. If they think it might be a threat, no problem. It is lazy, careless, and dangerous.

......

Do you recommend they carry a small pair of binoculars or a monocular for target assessment?

I am not picking a fight or spreading hate and discontent, just curious. I was always told back in the Dark Ages, when I was a grunt, to never carry anything that might make me look like an officer. Just in case the bad guys were low on ammo.

Thanks much! :)

[Ak44]

Hm...Maybe that's why my LT gave me his radio and told me to point where the patrol was going...:D

[SeriousStudent]

Yes, back when I was a Lance Cooley, my company Gunny told me to "never look or act like an officer"......

The echo had not even died from my smart-ass reply, before I was doing push-ups.

Staff NCO's. No freaking sense of humor. :(

[Ak44]

Bootcamp in 2004, the shooting coaches told us high in the shoulder. Then at Security Guard school and CQB school, they told us forget all the crap we learned in bootcamp and started doing all that high speed low drag stuff :cool:.

[Failure2Stop]

Do you recommend they carry a small pair of binoculars or a monocular for target assessment?

I am not picking a fight or spreading hate and discontent, just curious. I was always told back in the Dark Ages, when I was a grunt, to never carry anything that might make me look like an officer. Just in case the bad guys were low on ammo.

Thanks much! :)

Ha. I knew that someone was going to ask me to clarify this. I intentionally didn't get into it because I didn't want to hijack a zombie thread away from the shooting aspect, though I raised the non-shooting aspect because I think that it is a significant part of the perception.

What I mean by the "don't point it at anything you don't think might be a threat" is this:
If you see something that might be a threat, but you aren't sure, go ahead and use the sighting system for ID, but at least be in a position that if you do need to shoot at it, you will be able to place effective fire on it. If it is far enough away to need 4X magnification to ID it, a standing position is probably not a wise choice anyway. If it might be a threat, act accordingly. Worst case- you bring everybody out of cover and back to whatever you were doing before or ventilate the threat with effective fire and whoever else wants to play gets more of the same.

There will of course be circumstances where the gun is pointed at something you don't want to shoot, and as long as you follow the remaining safety rules, no great harm will result. It's the same draw-back as only having weapon-mounted lights, except that you can bounce the light and make ID without confining the muzzle to such a tight area on the space requiring assisted vision.

I do not want people to become cavalier about pointing their weapons at things without respect for what they are designed to do. I value the lives of my men above all else, so if they believe that something may be a threat to their lives or the lives of others, they are absolutely free to use their aiming device to confirm or halt the need for immediate action. In the same breath, I would not have them tarnish their reputation or lose professionalism with a disregard to pointing their weapons at friendly forces. There is a time to observe and there is a time to aim. There will be times that those areas overlap, but instilling a sense of when they do not is very important.
There are simple, inexpensive options to enhance observation for those times.
Guys that will buy their own $200 "fighting knife" but whine about buying a $50 set of binos are not exemplifying professionalism or a realistic perception of their needs. But that's ok, I am also adept at behavior modification.

[SeriousStudent]

F2S,

Thanks very much for the explanation. As always, I appreciate your time and educational skills, particularly with a window-licker such as myself. The point about fratricide risk is an excellent one as well.

Stay safe!

[BLACK LION]

Got damnit January needs to arrive sooner ;)

Profound post once again FTS.

I read in one of my "swat sniper" books(authors name escapes me)
that as part of trianing and unbeknownst to his neighbors, would "hold the scope" on them to gain an affinity for how the idiosyncracies of 2 legged animals transmits thru a rifle scope. Of course, keeping the safety rules in the utmost regard.
I am a proponent of small compact variable binoculars and I currently use the Barska 9-27x25 version...
I would also like to get my paws on a Brunton zoom monocular which is a 10-30x21.

I have no problems holding the scope on an undetermined threat if the situation warrants it and using binocs or monocs arent feasible or available.

[ramennoodles]

F2S,

Thanks very much for the explanation. As always, I appreciate your time and educational skills, particularly with a window-licker such as myself. The point about fratricide risk is an excellent one as well.

Stay safe!

haha, you said window licker. I haven't heard that in a while. All I know is when bad people appear, I put the red dot or front sight post on target and then there's a bunch of loud noises. I don't think about where the butt stock is.

[ROGOPGEAR]

I too had my stance and how I shouldered my AR pretty much figured out, and thought boohiss on those boneheads until my brother visited and I tried on "some" of his gear.

As you can see I embraced the ghey way but here are a few noobish offerings of some of my observations.

1. The plate carrier with chest rig over top kinda got in the way of my original "perfect shoulder technique" (it stuck out a few more inches) and to get any purchase or support I had too shoulder it high and on the outside of my shoulder.
2. Although it is a fixed stock, I did try it with my collapsible stock, and when I shouldered it "correctly" it felt like I was holding the AR way out in front of me even with the stock collapsed all the way (and it just didn't feel right sitting on all that gear instead of shoulder)
3. Bringing the head down to the weapon instead of the weapon up to the head is great and all, but now imagine that with a helmet that ways a ton and with some NVGs on it too, you might be singing a different tune after a while. (said a little funky but you know what I am saying)
4. Turning sideways in my stance alleviated a few problems, instead of squaring up to the target.
5. I did some shooting and moving too, and wearing this small amount of gear (he had some plates but not all, and I still had no where near the amount of gear he would normally be carrying) had a huge effect on my normal mobility and maneuvers.

So, all I am saying is that many things change when you put 50+ pounds of gear on and strap things all over your body, kinda messes up your perfect technique and finesse equilibrium that you had established while running around in a t-shirt with a few mag pouches hanging off your belt. You can't shoulder your weapon like you would normally, moving your head around feels like trying to move a watermelon, doing all this wonderful jump on your side and shoot under the car and pop back up stuff kinda goes out the window, you lose your balance and trip over things, and often can't even see your feet because of all the gear hanging off your body.

This is only to give perspective to some of the "incorrect" techniques embraced by our actual warriors. Those of you on here who have actually been in harms way in like manner, thank you, and rock on, this message was not meant for you.

PS forgot to add the 100+ degree heat, this probably kills a lot of once good intentions.

Me in the first two with my brothers gear, some real operators in the last with "horrible" technique.
http://i415.photobucket.com/albums/pp238/ravenwulfe101/DSCN3665.jpg?t=1256273868
http://i415.photobucket.com/albums/pp238/ravenwulfe101/DSCN3666.jpg?t=1256273910
http://i415.photobucket.com/albums/pp238/ravenwulfe101/IMG-4.jpg?t=1256273938

[Failure2Stop]

I too had my stance and how I shouldered my AR pretty much figured out, and thought boohiss on those boneheads until my brother visited and I tried on "some" of his gear.


A few things, regarding this post-

1- That gear setup is all kinds of jacked up.
2- I train people every day in armor. The problems you notice are due to the fact that you don't live in armor like we do. This is one of the reasons that we spend a lot of time wearing it and shooting in it. I have yet to have a shooter that could not get into a good position.
3- There are lots of people that are inefficient with their weapons, and sometimes they make it onto the covers of books.

[castillo]

Just because you are in the military does not mean you know jack about guns or shooting tactics. Most of the untruths I've heard in terms of ballistics, tactics, weapons maintainance, etc. I heard in the Army, especially in TRADOC environments.

[VooDoo6Actual]

imo,

Keeping your weapon high on my shoulder allowing your head to be more upright and does a better job of keeping your eyes and head orientated on and at the threat(s).

Approx. 93% of what humans process through their OODA loops are from the visual/eyes.

Your eyes need to be on recognized threat(s) eliminating them and scanning for more even though we conciously know to cover 360 safely w/o sweeping friendlies we can still accurately shoot at one target per sight picture per se.

Whether your shooting from cover, concealment, exposed, crouched, improvised shooting postions etc your BHG/OODA needs to be able to get as much of threat matrix picture as possible imo.

HTH....

[Failure2Stop]

Keeping your weapon high on my shoulder allowing your head to be more upright and does a better job of keeping your eyes and head orientated on and at the threat(s).

Uh, explain to me again why my weapon is on your shoulder. :D



Your eyes need to be on recognized threat(s) eliminating them and scanning for more even though we conciously know to cover 360 safely w/o sweeping friendlies we can still accurately shoot at one target per sight picture per se.

Whether your shooting from cover, concealment, exposed, crouched, improvised shooting postions etc your BHG/OODA needs to be able to get as much of threat matrix picture as possible imo.


I look for and evaluate threats with the gun low and out of my line of sight, or raise my head off of the gun. It doesn't matter how the head is held, if there is a big object in the line of sight, there will be less to see.

Having an aggressive stance/position while shooting does not have to detract from observation ability while observing.

[BLACK LION]

I caught that one but left it up to more "seasoned professionals" to tag it and bag it... :)

Good eye!

[ROGOPGEAR]

A few things, regarding this post-

1- That gear setup is all kinds of jacked up. (pray tell what is so jacked up so I can tell my brother so he can increase his survivability/efficiency so we can have him come back home, since he is in Iraq right now)
2- I train people every day in armor. The problems you notice are due to the fact that you don't live in armor like we do. This is one of the reasons that we spend a lot of time wearing it and shooting in it. I have yet to have a shooter that could not get into a good position. (true I do not live in armor, not a pro and will not even try to claim to be, and therefore my noobish observations are completely illegitimate, right?)
3- There are lots of people that are inefficient with their weapons, and sometimes they make it onto the covers of books. hmm, and inefficiency with a weapon can be judged by one picture? point proven.

thanx.

[panzerr]

Just because you are in the military does not mean you know jack about guns or shooting tactics. Most of the untruths I've heard in terms of ballistics, tactics, weapons maintainance, etc. I heard in the Army, especially in TRADOC environments.

I couldn't agree more.

The Army does a horse shit job of teaching infantrymen how to employ their primary weapon system. It is up to the individual to go outside the 'Army box of knowledge' (which is designed for the lowest common denominator) to learn how to effectively employ their weapon systems.

[Failure2Stop]

(pray tell what is so jacked up so I can tell my brother so he can increase his survivability/efficiency so we can have him come back home, since he is in Iraq right now)


Take a look at the gear.
A chest rig overtop of a vest is inefficient. If you need to get your shit on RIGHT NOW, you will be behind the power curve. It takes longer to put everything on, longer to take off (including cut off, should the wearer need to get holes plugged or squirters clamped), is thicker, incurrs more shifting/movement that either alone, and makes shouldering the gun more difficult.
The big pouch on the front will make you a higher profile when prone and blocks vision downward. It will also make enclosure clearing rough as it will force the wearer further away from the next forward guy in the stack, which will make the wearer slower into the room, leaving the other entry guys more vulnerable, and thus more likely to get shot-up, which would make the wearer more likely to get shot-up. Get rid of it.
The knife by the left shoulder- one of the worst places for access, unless you want to cut your own neck, in which case it is perfect. Recommend placement so that the draw puts the hand in a position to use the item instead of easily being trapped/blocked.
The big pouches on the side are going to rub the elbows/arms, which will get really annoying, and whatever that little pouch on your right side is could easily be tucked somewhere less obtrusive.
All those big pouches sticking out everywhere are not necessary. A small pack that fits the stuff is generally a much easier/more comfortable/fightable answer.


(true I do not live in armor, not a pro and will not even try to claim to be, and therefore my noobish observations are completely illegitimate, right?)

I didn't say that. I explained why it felt so alien and weird to you, which is due to lack of experience and knowledge.

Me telling you you suck at shooting while wearing armor should insult you about as much as being told that you are a shitty Space Shuttle Co-Pilot. The only difference is that most people have never touched the space shuttle and therefore are not damaging their ego when they admit that they don't know anything about it. Guns and armor, on the other hand, due to their availability and male machismo, incurr some illogical assumption of proficiency due to proximity. It's ok to be bad at something you have never done before.

The observations of general feel and comfort are absolutely applicable. It isn't too tough to identify things like: heavy, cumbersome, restrictive, etc. However, if you have never been instructed on how to use a rifle with the armor and are just making it up as you go along, sorry, but no, your observations are not as valuable/instructive as those that have and do.


hmm, and inefficiency with a weapon can be judged by one picture? point proven.


Yes, I can. Bear in mind that I said "inefficient", not "ineffective".
Like I said before, and anyone that has read more than two of my posts will know, I do this shit for a living. I have the ability to rapidly identify and correct issues to get the best performance with the most efficiency as possible from a shooter.

And what point was proven? If you are trying to imply that I don't know what I am talking about and that I would have to see more pictures to see a fault, I am sorry, but that would be incorrect. All more pictures would show would be more problems. Look at the pic of the guys on the Mike Pannone cover.
The guy closest to the camera is leaning against the cover, which is inefficient as it will take him longer to get lower behind the wall, and makes him vulnerable to splash and spall off the face of the wall, as well as greater secondary frag through the wall.
He could probably be in a kneeling supported position, which would be much more efficient and accurate than a standing.
The guy further away is holding the VFG with a broom-stick hold, which is less efficient.
Both of the guys have their sotcks a little hig, but they are both well lower than the picture you posted of yourself.



thanx.
You're welcome :)

[BLACK LION]

The guy further away is holding the VFG with a broom-stick hold, which is less efficient.


AKA, "choking the chicken"... ;)

[ROGOPGEAR]

Take a look at the gear.
A chest rig overtop of a vest is inefficient. If you need to get your shit on RIGHT NOW, you will be behind the power curve. It takes longer to put everything on, longer to take off (including cut off, should the wearer need to get holes plugged or squirters clamped), is thicker, incurrs more shifting/movement that either alone, and makes shouldering the gun more difficult.
The big pouch on the front will make you a higher profile when prone and blocks vision downward. It will also make enclosure clearing rough as it will force the wearer further away from the next forward guy in the stack, which will make the wearer slower into the room, leaving the other entry guys more vulnerable, and thus more likely to get shot-up, which would make the wearer more likely to get shot-up. Get rid of it.
The knife by the left shoulder- one of the worst places for access, unless you want to cut your own neck, in which case it is perfect. Recommend placement so that the draw puts the hand in a position to use the item instead of easily being trapped/blocked.
The big pouches on the side are going to rub the elbows/arms, which will get really annoying, and whatever that little pouch on your right side is could easily be tucked somewhere less obtrusive.
All those big pouches sticking out everywhere are not necessary. A small pack that fits the stuff is generally a much easier/more comfortable/fightable answer.



I didn't say that. I explained why it felt so alien and weird to you, which is due to lack of experience and knowledge.

Me telling you you suck at shooting while wearing armor should insult you about as much as being told that you are a shitty Space Shuttle Co-Pilot. The only difference is that most people have never touched the space shuttle and therefore are not damaging their ego when they admit that they don't know anything about it. Guns and armor, on the other hand, due to their availability and male machismo, incurr some illogical assumption of proficiency due to proximity. It's ok to be bad at something you have never done before.

The observations of general feel and comfort are absolutely applicable. It isn't too tough to identify things like: heavy, cumbersome, restrictive, etc. However, if you have never been instructed on how to use a rifle with the armor and are just making it up as you go along, sorry, but no, your observations are not as valuable/instructive as those that have and do.



Yes, I can. Bear in mind that I said "inefficient", not "ineffective".
Like I said before, and anyone that has read more than two of my posts will know, I do this shit for a living. I have the ability to rapidly identify and correct issues to get the best performance with the most efficiency as possible from a shooter.

And what point was proven? If you are trying to imply that I don't know what I am talking about and that I would have to see more pictures to see a fault, I am sorry, but that would be incorrect. All more pictures would show would be more problems. Look at the pic of the guys on the Mike Pannone cover.
The guy closest to the camera is leaning against the cover, which is inefficient as it will take him longer to get lower behind the wall, and makes him vulnerable to splash and spall off the face of the wall, as well as greater secondary frag through the wall.
He could probably be in a kneeling supported position, which would be much more efficient and accurate than a standing.
The guy further away is holding the VFG with a broom-stick hold, which is less efficient.
Both of the guys have their sotcks a little hig, but they are both well lower than the picture you posted of yourself.


You're welcome :)

In all seriousness, thank you for your second post, it was much more constructive than the first. On the little packs, my brother is a medic for his infantry unit, and those packs contain a plethora of medical gear that is absolutely essential to doing his job. He chose to put them there so they would be in his workspace and instantly accessible, and more efficient. Sorry, that probably would have helped to know. On the chest rig over the armor, that is probably more of a selfish reason for the both of us, I provided the money and we bought identical rigs together and he ended up integrating it into his kit (so it is probably not the most efficient, as you pointed out).

My original point was to lessen the blasting of our military by those who have never had the eye opening experience of "being in their shoes." Just from that momentary experience, I realized that much of what I had learned previously would have to be modified/adapted to those new parameters, which were quite cumbersome. I guess it opened my eyes to a different world.

I understand that that in no way applies to you, just from the little posted on your public profile, and the vast content of your many posts, so I guess my intended point was completely lost in your extensive training, it was just to pass on a revelatory experience to other noobs such as myself for the collective betterment. And for the lessening of the bashing.

Thank you again for your assistance. I will be reading more of your posts.

[Failure2Stop]

On the little packs, my brother is a medic for his infantry unit, and those packs contain a plethora of medical gear that is absolutely essential to doing his job. He chose to put them there so they would be in his workspace and instantly accessible, and more efficient. Sorry, that probably would have helped to know.

Funny, just as I hit the "send" button I thought, "Wouldn't it be funny if he was a medic?"
In that case the large pouches make absolute sense. I don't have much to teach medics since they have a distinct seperate role from mine, other than glaring issues.
All my best to your brother.