View Full Version : The USMC and iron sights
My buddy's son just graduated PI on December 9th. Good kid, I've known him for several years. Got to talk to him today. After shaking his hand and telling him "You look good Jarhead!" the first question I asked him was "Did you guys train on iron sights?". His reply? "No, just the RCO" (ACOG). I was shocked. He said the M16A4's they had initially had irons on them but they never qualified or were taught to use them. This kid knows guns and he said he wished they had been taught to use them "officially", although he knows how to use them from pre-Marine life.
WTF is it these days? I know the Army had given up the ghost on irons but the vaunted USMC?
As an aside, I asked about the M27. He didn't know what I was talking about! They learned the SAW and 240 but apparently didn't even get introduced to the M27. He reports for MCT the day after Christmas so maybe there he will be exposed to it.
Also as an aside his cycle was the first since 1996 to be evacuated from PI (for Hurricane Matthew). They went to Albany, GA, for 10 days where the Marines have some sort of depot. He said they drilled and generally got f****d with as a penalty! This was early in his cycle so it didn't interrupt the important stuff that came later.
futurerider103
12-17-16, 19:25
I can't believe they would ditch the iron sights for the fact what happened if they're while they were in the field they'd be hosed
He said the RCO he was initially issued had a crack in it. I asked if it was in the lens or the light-gathering bar on top (which I've seen before). He said it was in the lens itself and was DX'd for another one. 'Cruit guns......
lawusmc0844
12-17-16, 19:52
As a Marine that got issued a Colt M16A2 in bootcamp and MCT I'm also disappointed they don't teach irons anymore. ACOGs are durable but Marines and especially recruits can break just about anything. I've had more than one RCO not hold zero because of those junk thumbscrew mounts that Trijicon includes with the optic. Armorers don't seem to check the mounting screws or have loctite in the armory (I know my old unit's armory didn't, I asked them lol)
Before KAC BUIS became standard I mounted a personally purchased Troy rear to my M4 before I went to Afghanistan the first time. At least my RCO had a GDI QD mount, those mounts are awesome, just too expensive.
I believe the M27 IAR is only issued to Infantry BNs, in my old Arty Btry, the 0811/14 launcher chiefs carried Para SAWs and M9s, no IAR for us.
Yeah I know, that's terrible. I was issued an A2 in boot, and fully understand the value of learning irons. I believe that boot camp should be irons, then RCO after. This would give recruits the experience and training to use both systems.
I was a marksmanship instructor when HQMC was floating that idea around of RCO only... I was vehemently against it, and voiced my opinion to a Marine high in the marksmanship chain, but to no avail.
LowSpeed_HighDrag
12-17-16, 20:13
I went to Boot Camp in 08. I was issued an A2 and learned on Irons in Boot Camp. Went to MCT and trained exclusively with the RCO. In the fleet, I had an RCO on my A4, but only shot with it on pre-deployment work ups. Annual qual was irons. It's a shame to see they have gone away from iron sight training, but on the flip side it's nice to see such focus on operating the RCO effectively.
I went to Boot Camp in 08. I was issued an A2 and learned on Irons in Boot Camp. Went to MCT and trained exclusively with the RCO. In the fleet, I had an RCO on my A4, but only shot with it on pre-deployment work ups. Annual qual was irons. It's a shame to see they have gone away from iron sight training, but on the flip side it's nice to see such focus on operating the RCO effectively.
Oh I'm tracking, believe me! I went through Army Infantry OSUT in 1983 and we had M16A1's.....there were no ACOG's or Aimpoints then! I guess I'm old school in that shit breaks and you need to be trained in the basic alternative.
I went through basic in 09. We had A2s and learned irons.
In Infantry school we got A4s with RCOs.
We never did any automatic rifles in basic BTW. Basic was just that, fundamentals.
In the fleet I got an M4 with an RCO and no back up irons.
There's probably no point of training with the standard carry handles anymore if they'll never see one in their carrers.
Well actually on second thought, they should at least learn them. Not all weapon systems run optics.
Beat Trash
12-17-16, 21:24
I went through Parris Island in 1983 with an M16A1.
My Son graduated from Echo company December 9th also. His platoon was the first to ever take final drill while off of the Island. He said Albany Georgia sucked.
It's correct that they no longer teach irons during boot camp, but teach the ACOG. They will teach them how to use iron sights at AIT, which is where my son is at currently.
Make no mistake, it's still the worlds most prestigious gun club, and they still train riflemen...
Eurodriver
12-17-16, 21:30
I attribute my ability to shoot well to two things.
Practice, and USMC instruction on the use of iron sights.
I'm curious what F2S thinks about this (although this is old news and he probably already opined)
556BlackRifle
12-17-16, 21:31
My son graduated in SD Aug 2015. He did some work with irons at MCT.
I'd think that a minimum of 100 meter iron training/qual would be important.
Looks like the question of the relevance of the FSB has been answered at the highest levels
Army still teaches irons unless that changed this year. My brother in law just graduated Basic in late 2014 and qualed with irons.
LowSpeed_HighDrag
12-17-16, 22:32
I attribute my ability to shoot well to two things.
Practice, and USMC instruction on the use of iron sights.
I'm curious what F2S thinks about this (although this is old news and he probably already opined)
Agreed. I'm very proud of having numerous Expert Awards, and could not have done it without a god-forsaken white barrel and a painful kneeling position.
I went through Parris Island in 1983 with an M16A1.
My Son graduated from Echo company December 9th also. His platoon was the first to ever take final drill while off of the Island. He said Albany Georgia sucked.
It's correct that they no longer teach irons during boot camp, but teach the ACOG. They will teach them how to use iron sights at AIT, which is where my son is at currently.
Make no mistake, it's still the worlds most prestigious gun club, and they still train riflemen...
Good to hear... Army boot/85, through the years I always appreciated the fact that all Marines were riflemen.
LowSpeed_HighDrag
12-18-16, 00:01
Good to hear... Army boot/85, through the years I always appreciated the fact that all Marines were riflemen.
As a Marine, I believe that is a myth. But, that's an argument for another thread.
After my first response I messaged my friend who is a squad leader currently in Afghanistan. He asked his cherries and they were still training irons at Sand Hill at Ft Benning. Though they trained them strictly as secondary sights.
Why you don't need to learn iron sights at Paris Island
1) It's recruit training. It's not combat warfighter operator tactical finishing school. The admin specialist, motor T mechanic, and tank crewman are 99% likely to never need to transition to irons. They probably will shoot their rifle at most once a year. The 03xx's will go off to their schools. They may learn irons at those schools, if not they'll learn it in the fleet. If they don't...
2) The RCO is robust enough to be relied upon. Whatever scenario destroys an RCO probably destroys the rifle as well. I've NEVER seen an RCO fail randomly. They all either failed when they were issued and immediately the problem was determined during the zeroing process or failed due to poor user maintenance and all failed because the user did not check or properly mount the optic to the rail mount. The abject fear we have of a scope going down on its own and having to rip off an RCO and through up my glorious iron sights is unfounded.
There is only so much time and money. Why will we waste time and money training Marines that less than a tenth of a percent will use when we can train them to use the optic that they will use?
They changed to only training RCOs because there is not enough time to always train a kid on RCOs before hitting a combat zone.
Young non infantry Marines were winding up in firefights without any training on the optic that sat on top of their rifles. There was an immense amount of debate on it and some true legends in our sniper community recommended the change.
It was a positive change and has been proven in far away lands.
The grunts are trained enough to learn irons and they do.
As a Marine, I believe that is a myth. But, that's an argument for another thread.
Yea, I get that, myth or not, I like the thought of it😀
For the record, I have no problem with the majority of training being on the RCO, as long as irons are addressed...warfare/times change.
Eurodriver
12-18-16, 06:37
They changed to only training RCOs because there is not enough time to always train a kid on RCOs before hitting a combat zone.
Young non infantry Marines were winding up in firefights without any training on the optic that sat on top of their rifles. There was an immense amount of debate on it and some true legends in our sniper community recommended the change.
It was a positive change and has been proven in far away lands.
The grunts are trained enough to learn irons and they do.
Well, with OEF/OIF all but over there is plenty of time to go back to the fundamentals.
I don't think there is some inherent demand for iron sight training based on nostalgia.
I just think a lot of people recognize that the USMC has always placed an emphasis on marksmanship at the highest level and proficiency in accurate rifle shooting is built on a foundation of Understanding iron sights.
Well, with OEF/OIF all but over there is plenty of time to go back to the fundamentals.
OEF/OIF has nothing to do with the focus of training. Also, operations continue all over the world regardless of OEF/OIF
I don't think there is some inherent demand for iron sight training based on nostalgia.
False. Nothing like this should be based on nostalgia. It should be based on creating hard, realistic training meant to create a more lethal Corps.
I just think a lot of people recognize that the USMC has always placed an emphasis on marksmanship at the highest level and proficiency in accurate rifle shooting is built on a foundation of Understanding iron sights.
The Marine Corps sucks at marksmanship. They just suck less than their competitors in other services. Proficiency in accurate rifle shooting is not built on a foundation of understanding iron sights. You now have a generation of Scout Snipers who have barely shot iron sights. Are they not proficient? The fundamentals apply just as much to optics as to iron sights. But that is another rabbit hole.
Mine in bold.
Rifleman_04
12-18-16, 07:20
Looks like the question of the relevance of the FSB has been answered at the highest levels
No. I'm not so sure the highest levels are even qualified to answer that question.
Rifleman_04
12-18-16, 07:27
They changed to only training RCOs because there is not enough time to always train a kid on RCOs before hitting a combat zone.
That's interesting if that's true. My first deployment to Iraq I was issued an acog right before we left. I had never used one before and we were given only one short little fam fire range session to figure it out.
That's interesting if that's true. My first deployment to Iraq I was issued an acog right before we left. I had never used one before and we were given only one short little fam fire range session to figure it out.
It's true
I went through Parris Island in 1983 with an M16A1.
My Son graduated from Echo company December 9th also. His platoon was the first to ever take final drill while off of the Island. He said Albany Georgia sucked.
It's correct that they no longer teach irons during boot camp, but teach the ACOG. They will teach them how to use iron sights at AIT, which is where my son is at currently.
Make no mistake, it's still the worlds most prestigious gun club, and they still train riflemen...
Yeah yeah..... ;)
My son graduated in SD Aug 2015. He did some work with irons at MCT.
And this kid might also get trained on irons when he goes to MCT. It's just that if you were gonna teach one thing in "basic" (boot) you'd think it would be the most "basic" sights-----irons. You would then assume that the next level of training, MCT (post-grad if you will), is where something like the ACOG would come into play.
They changed to only training RCOs because there is not enough time to always train a kid on RCOs before hitting a combat zone.
Young non infantry Marines were winding up in firefights without any training on the optic that sat on top of their rifles. There was an immense amount of debate on it and some true legends in our sniper community recommended the change.
It was a positive change and has been proven in far away lands.
The grunts are trained enough to learn irons and they do.
Thanks for that input. Was wondering why they did that.
Do ALL Marines have the RCO on their weapons downrange or just the infantry guys?
Thanks for that input. Was wondering why they did that.
Do ALL Marines have the RCO on their weapons downrange or just the infantry guys?
All Marines.
Well, with OEF/OIF all but over there is plenty of time to go back to the fundamentals.
I don't think there is some inherent demand for iron sight training based on nostalgia.
I just think a lot of people recognize that the USMC has always placed an emphasis on marksmanship at the highest level and proficiency in accurate rifle shooting is built on a foundation of Understanding iron sights.
Pretty much the point/question of me starting this thread.
I'll wager qualification scores have gone up with the RCO, especially since it's still a KD range Marines qualify on (right?).
Pretty much the point/question of me starting this thread.
I'll wager qualification scores have gone up with the RCO, especially since it's still a KD range Marines qualify on (right?).
The range distances stayed the same but scores didnt increase that much. I was in Quantico when they made the change.
All Marines.
Damn, Trijicon scored big with that contract!
Damn, Trijicon scored big with that contract!
Yep. I think the army infantry has them on the majority of theirs too. I am in Africa right now and all the soldiers here have Acogs.
Yep. I think the army infantry has them on the majority of theirs too. I am in Africa right now and all the soldiers here have Acogs.
Not to sidetrack my own thread but the Marines, like the Army, can get myopic at times. The last 15 years have been mostly open area shooting in the Sandbox, especially Afghanistan. Sure, there was urban/close-in fighting during OIF, but since combat ops were shut down there in 2011 A-stan has been the show. Eventually we will get involved on a two-way range somewhere with jungle/thick forest......watch the Aimpoints come out real quick like then. Yeah, you can use the ACOG as a CQB sight with both eyes open but it really shines at distance.
Eurodriver
12-18-16, 09:57
OEF/OIF has nothing to do with the focus of training. Also, operations continue all over the world regardless of OEF/OIF
- No shit. I was responding to a claim based on why RCOs are being issued at the recruit level - the claim was that we are rushing into combat so quickly new recruits did not have adequate training on RCOs (their theater optic). Now that OIF/OEF wound down we have time and can thus go back to taking our time with fundamentals. You can even read the conversation between several people about this above. How is your response about theater specificity in any way related to that?
I don't think there is some inherent demand for iron sight training based on nostalgia.
False. Nothing like this should be based on nostalgia. It should be based on creating hard, realistic training meant to create a more lethal Corps.
False? What is false? You literally agreed with me.
I just think a lot of people recognize that the USMC has always placed an emphasis on marksmanship at the highest level and proficiency in accurate rifle shooting is built on a foundation of Understanding iron sights.
The Marine Corps sucks at marksmanship. They just suck less than their competitors in other services. Proficiency in accurate rifle shooting is not built on a foundation of understanding iron sights. You now have a generation of Scout Snipers who have barely shot iron sights. Are they not proficient? The fundamentals apply just as much to optics as to iron sights. But that is another rabbit hole.
A "generation" of scout snipers who have barely shot iron sights? A generation? You say the Marine Corps sucks at marksmanship and then try to make a claim that Scout Snipers are proficient. Which is it?
Accurate long range shooting is almost solely dependent on good wind calls. One can learn trigger control, sight picture, all of the "mechanics" of shooting on optics for sure, but an RCO doesn't allow you to precisely hold for wind. You can't teach wind calls by throwing a bunch of 19 year olds on to the KD range and say "Just kinda hold a little more that way if the wind blows more".
I saw a significant shift on the range when my students went from irons to ACOGs. The 200 yard line is where many guys started shooting clean, but the 300 sitting and 500 prone suffered. Almost entirely reversed from just a few years earlier. Only one thing changed - irons. I'm not here to debate the merits of the ACOG vs Iron sights. The ACOG is the obvious winner, but without getting into learning how wind affect bullets you'll never be able to shoot well at long range. Bringing Scout Snipers into this equation is just retarded.
Mine in bold.
You sound like a douche. Probably legit Marine.
sevenhelmet
12-18-16, 09:59
Trivial question... are the USMC/USA issue RCOs adjusted in MOA or mils? I've always found it a little weird that my ACOG adjusts in MOA- I'm just an ignorant Navy guy, but I'd always thought mils were in more common use within the military.
Second question, do recruits get any pistol training at PI?
Eurodriver
12-18-16, 10:00
Trivial question... are the USMC/USA issue RCOs adjusted in MOA or MILs? I've always found it a little weird that my ACOG adjusts in MOA- I'm just an ignorant Navy guy, but I'd always thought meters/MILS were in more common use.
Second question, do recruits get any pistol training at PI?
1/3 MOA Adjustments on the TA31RCOM4/A4
No pistols at MCRD.
sevenhelmet
12-18-16, 10:01
1/3 MOA Adjustments on the TA31RCOM4/A4
No pistols at MCRD.
Thanks. Since most guys grew up thinking in yards, I guess that makes sense.
You sound like a douche. Probably legit Marine.
And who are you? People are allowed to have a different opinion than you. No need to get out the ad hominem attacks or sling mud at an entire service.
Please, let the audience know what your extraordinary credentials are that will let us know your insight into the training of Marines in 2016.
- No shit. I was responding to a claim based on why RCOs are being issued at the recruit level - the claim was that we are rushing into combat so quickly new recruits did not have adequate training on RCOs (their theater optic). Now that OIF/OEF wound down we have time and can thus go back to taking our time with fundamentals. You can even read the conversation between several people about this above. How is your response about theater specificity in any way related to that?
The claim is that the limited iron sight training was a response to OIF/OEF. The limited training has continued for a decade and a half into those conflicts. It's not related to OIF/OEF or anything else. It's related to a general low amount of funding and time for training regardless of any conflict.
False? What is false? You literally agreed with me.
Rephrased: "nothing related to training for combat should be based on nostalgia. It should be based on creating hard, realistic training meant to create a more lethal Corps. Placing unnecessary emphasis on iron sights doesn't do that.
I just think a lot of people recognize that the USMC has always placed an emphasis on marksmanship at the highest level and proficiency in accurate rifle shooting is built on a foundation of Understanding iron sights.
The Marine Corps sucks at marksmanship. They just suck less than their competitors in other services. Proficiency in accurate rifle shooting is not built on a foundation of understanding iron sights. You now have a generation of Scout Snipers who have barely shot iron sights. Are they not proficient? The fundamentals apply just as much to optics as to iron sights. But that is another rabbit hole
A "generation" of scout snipers who have barely shot iron sights? A generation? You say the Marine Corps sucks at marksmanship and then try to make a claim that Scout Snipers are proficient. Which is it?
[B]Yes, I can easily say the organization sucks at shooting and a small niche is good at it. Not really a quantum leap in thought. "America is full of obese people" and "American Olympians are great" aren't mutually disqualifying statements. Here's the point, there's all these guys (and yes a whole generation who learned to shoot on RCO's and not irons) shooting well at long range who didn't learn on irons. You don't need to learn irons to shoot well. Does it help? Sure. Learning to shoot a pistol helps as well but it isn't required to learn to shoot a rifle well.
Accurate long range shooting is almost solely dependent on good wind calls. One can learn trigger control, sight picture, all of the "mechanics" of shooting on optics for sure, but an RCO doesn't allow you to precisely hold for wind. You can't teach wind calls by throwing a bunch of 19 year olds on to the KD range and say "Just kinda hold a little more that way if the wind blows more".
You can hold for wind more precisely with an RCO than irons. When's the last time you looked through one? Serious question, because you probably haven't seen the RCO M7 if you think that
I saw a significant shift on the range when my students went from irons to ACOGs. The 200 yard line is where many guys started shooting clean, but the 300 sitting and 500 prone suffered. Almost entirely reversed from just a few years earlier. Only one thing changed - irons. I'm not here to debate the merits of the ACOG vs Iron sights. The ACOG is the obvious winner, but without getting into learning how wind affect bullets you'll never be able to shoot well at long range. Bringing Scout Snipers into this equation is just retarded.
.
F*ck it, I'm going to respond...
Eurodriver
12-18-16, 16:10
False.
Hammer27,
I looked up the RCO M7 and that is awesome! I have one of the horseshoe/dot ACOGs on my Colt M4 semi for several years now. I like it much better than the chevron. For CQB-type stuff it is quicker to pick up. I did not ask my buddy's son if it was the M7 or the "older" RCO with chevron, but if I had to wager for a 'cruit gun it was the chevron.
The ACOG with the ACSS reticle is pretty cool too. It has a horseshoe but instead of the big chevron it has a tiny one in the middle of the horseshoe. Quite honestly to my aging eyes it doesn't look much different than a dot.
http://www.primaryarms.com/trijicon-acog-4x32-scope-with-red-dual-illumination-acss-reticle-ta31-r-acss
Check it out. Not only does it have the shoulder measurements (18" instead of the usual 19") but it has a height-of-target scale off to the side. It is also calibrated in yards instead of meters.
Renegade04
12-18-16, 20:37
Personally, I have been shooting with irons since I was really young. My father (former Marine Corps Drill Instructor), put a gun in my hands when I was almost 6 years old. I went to Marine Corps Recruit Training (Parris Island, SC) in 1978 and was issued my first M16A1. I was already use to iron sights. Here I am, 56 years old, and I am still shooting with iron sights. Yes, I have several ARs with optics and many without and I always keep my skill with iron sights honed. Optics can fail and that is the reason for BUISs.
The RCO has also given every single Marine on a patrol a magnified optic. The advantages to that on a patrol cannot be overstated.
The A4 and M4 still have a front sight post and units have BUIS under the ACOG. I would much rather take a kid into a firefight that is the most proficient with an RCO. Headshots from a distance are cool.
And who are you? People are allowed to have a different opinion than you. No need to get out the ad hominem attacks or sling mud at an entire service.
Please, let the audience know what your extraordinary credentials are that will let us know your insight into the training of Marines in 2016.
Dude you've been here since 2010 and you dont know who Euro is or that phrase?
Quote Originally Posted by Eurodriver View Post
You sound like a douche. Probably legit Marine.
And who are you? People are allowed to have a different opinion than you. No need to get out the ad hominem attacks or sling mud at an entire service.
Please, let the audience know what your extraordinary credentials are that will let us know your insight into the training of Marines in 2016.
You guys disagree, but the 'douche' thing has been floating around here for several years, it's a good-natured jab. Sometimes us Marines are douches.
ets - didn't see c-grunt had already beat me to it.
Technology changes and curriculum changes. If every Marine down to the pogue USMCR units will be issued an ACOG or RCO then they should dump the training curriculum for iron sights. There are a finite number of training hours available; personally I'd rather see that time spent on relevant skills, not one that could only be applied in the most extreme of circumstances (if iron sights have been phased out Corps wide).
My cousin graduated from Benning Infantry OSUT around October; I'll ask him what they did for BRM.
That's interesting if that's true. My first deployment to Iraq I was issued an acog right before we left. I had never used one before and we were given only one short little fam fire range session to figure it out.
I was a corpsman. I did not have one 'back in the day,' then one day they became the range and I had one. It was, "here, Doc, put that on your M4 and zero it when we get in-country."
Pushbutton2
12-20-16, 21:06
I learned on iron sights in '89 in Hollyweird [emoji3].
Dumb question what's an RCO?
Removable Combat Optic??
RCO = Rifle Combat Optic.
Trijicon has 3 4x ACOGs designated as RCO; all have the chevron reticle as opposed to the crosshairs of the TA01 ACOG.
Pushbutton2
12-21-16, 05:39
RCO = Rifle Combat Optic.
Trijicon has 3 4x ACOGs designated as RCO; all have the chevron reticle as opposed to the crosshairs of the TA01 ACOG.
[emoji1303] Thank You!
My son got back from MCT a few days ago - pulled RA for a few weeks before combat engineer school starts. No irons anywhere at bootcamp or MCT. No backup irons on rifles at all. To me, it makes sense. Learn what you are going to be issued and use. I'm personally not a huge fan of the RCO/TA31, but for general use it has a lot of advantages over irons or a CCO/Aimpoint. Time and ammo allotments likely don't allow them to go through the whole cycle with two different sight systems.
noonesshowmonkey
12-22-16, 01:11
At what point was the military, the Marines or not, filled with shooters. If you want to find shooters, you have to find people that go above and beyond the minimum requirements. The current, modern standard is to be issued an M4/M27/A4 with an RCO. Train with what you use. Before, the issue weapon had iron sights only. So those were trained with. Now, there are RCOs issued with weapons, so they are trained with.
Any dedicated shooter will train with their irons, and in training beyond boot there will likely be extended training in things beyond the RCO, be it with irons or a red dot or whatever the weapon system is issued with.
The point is that the military produces shooters that can use issue gear to engage targets effectively out to the ranges expected during an engagement. Anything beyond that simple task is the subject of add-on training packages or individual interest.
As Jeff Gurwitch's articles about the current state of the art in SF A-teams shows, they have been stripping flip up BUIS off of rifles for years now. Modern rifle optics are that good.
This is not to say that BUIS aren't important, and that iron sights shooting isn't a skill that is worth training, but we also don't train our troops--the regular troops--to operate 1903 Springfields or anything close to them.
The Air Force still trains with irons along with the aimpoint.
Rifleman_04
12-22-16, 16:05
The Air Force still trains with irons along with the aimpoint.
Yeah...at 25 yards.
Eurodriver
12-22-16, 17:50
The Air Force still trains with irons along with the aimpoint.
Bringing up the Air Force in a USMC thread?
Lmao
I have zero military training so all can evaluate my comments with that in mind. I think all should learn how to establish a 100 zero with iron sights. This step would at least provide minimal familiarity with them.
I have zero military training so all can evaluate my comments with that in mind. I think all should learn how to establish a 100 zero with iron sights. This step would at least provide minimal familiarity with them.
All this makes me feel really old. I went to PI in 1966 & we had M14's. At Infantry training at Camp Geiger, we used M1's.
Bringing up the Air Force in a USMC thread?
Lmao
Well at least they still train with irons. And it may only be at 25 yrds, but at least the targets are small :D
Mrgunsngear
12-23-16, 13:33
At what point was the military, the Marines or not, filled with shooters. If you want to find shooters, you have to find people that go above and beyond the minimum requirements. The current, modern standard is to be issued an M4/M27/A4 with an RCO. Train with what you use. Before, the issue weapon had iron sights only. So those were trained with. Now, there are RCOs issued with weapons, so they are trained with.
Any dedicated shooter will train with their irons, and in training beyond boot there will likely be extended training in things beyond the RCO, be it with irons or a red dot or whatever the weapon system is issued with.
The point is that the military produces shooters that can use issue gear to engage targets effectively out to the ranges expected during an engagement. Anything beyond that simple task is the subject of add-on training packages or individual interest.
As Jeff Gurwitch's articles about the current state of the art in SF A-teams shows, they have been stripping flip up BUIS off of rifles for years now. Modern rifle optics are that good.
This is not to say that BUIS aren't important, and that iron sights shooting isn't a skill that is worth training, but we also don't train our troops--the regular troops--to operate 1903 Springfields or anything close to them.
Absolutely true. Lots of people who have never been in assume that people in the military know about guns and how to employ them. At the BASIC level, with 1 or 2 types of weapons, that's true. But, taking a good weekend carbine course will leave a civilian more proficient than most basic training/boot camp graduates.
Digital_Damage
12-23-16, 14:45
Just like the A2 front sight post, irons are just not needed anymore.
USMC has been actively phasing out the training on them for over a year now.
When you no longer find iron sighted firearms on the battle field, stop training with them altogether. If budget and time constraints can only facilitate learning one sight system, train with what is currently being used effectively in the field.
At some point personnel currently being deployed outside CONUS should be at least familiarized with iron sights and more importantly reading and compensating for wind and light.
Digital_Damage
12-23-16, 15:47
When you no longer find iron sighted firearms on the battle field, stop training with them altogether. If budget and time constraints can only facilitate learning one sight system, train with what is currently being used effectively in the field.
At some point personnel currently being deployed outside CONUS should be at least familiarized with iron sights and more importantly reading and compensating for wind and light.
That is exactly what they are doing.
Absolutely true. Lots of people who have never been in assume that people in the military know about guns and how to employ them. At the BASIC level, with 1 or 2 types of weapons, that's true. But, taking a good weekend carbine course will leave a civilian more proficient than most basic training/boot camp graduates.
Problem is that basic training cycles are all different from each other. During my OSUT, we hit the ranges almost immediately and we went through all the cycles of basic and advanced marksmanship training with different levels (whaaat?), reflexive fire and all that. We had time behind iron sights, optics and with PEQ15 (imagine that they let privates shoot at night - lol!).
It all goes back to your DS crew and how much heart they want to put in to it. We never had shortage of ammo either...
Now i hear from fresh Joes that they don't even shoot from .50 cal at some cycles...hands down.
Also, after basic, it is pretty much up to individual soldier to keep pushing for schools to work on his skills (which Army has plenty). If someone wants to just do his time and ETS - yes, he will leave with rather simple set of skills...but there are carrier paths or opportunities to get some good training...you know that.
As for training classes in private sector - well, you have to be careful here. I worked with plenty of people who went through some multiple "bad ass" private carbine classes and all they have learned was how to punch paper from 7 yards line...repeatedly. Some were really fast at it...and they didn't even knew how to zero their rifles or how to hit IPSC size target from 100 yds (i'm not making this up)...but they were really fast from 7 yards line...
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.