View Full Version : Is your average soldier trained in the use of full auto with the carbine?
vicious_cb
10-13-09, 01:22
I was just reading the article on about the Wanat battle was wondering if maybe some of these guys when cyclic with their carbine which caused the overheating. If maybe they were better trained on keeping their ROF their guns would not have overheated.
The average soldier has a 3 round burst option on his M4. Full auto M4's are not common. The average soldier probably never heard an intelligent discussion, such as one you might find on this site, about the use of full auto, or 3 round burst.
rifleman2000
10-13-09, 05:44
The average Soldier is not trained on full auto or 3 round burst on the M4. The Army focuses on aimed semi-auto rifle fire.
An Infantryman is trained on 6 to 9 round bursts on full auto weapons like the SAW, M240, and M2.
The average Soldier is not trained on full auto or 3 round burst on the M4. The Army focuses on aimed semi-auto rifle fire.
An Infantryman is trained on 6 to 9 round bursts on full auto weapons like the SAW, M240, and M2.
x2 when I was in the Army (11B1P) we were always told to first on semi, every so often we were expected to use 3 round burst, but spairngly depending on mission ( i never saw combat, this is just from combat simulations and war games ARTEP) but usually to conserve ammo and not overheat the barrels. Also we were always told to get better aimed shots and really to only use 3 round burst when doing suppresive/cover fire.
But things have changed a lot since I got out in 04.
In the Bee's all of our AR's are semi or full automatic. No burst. One of the things the Navy did get right. Our fire teams each have one designated automatic rifleman. We do not have SAW's. I've explained many a time that full auto for us equals waste of ammo and lots of misses. Once someone gets to blast off a bunch of full auto fire the curiosity is minimized. On the COP's the Marines always seemed surprised that our weapons were full auto. On the convoy teams when rounds were fired with the M-16's/M-4's they were always on semi. Full auto for belt fed, semi for rifles.
rifleman2000
10-13-09, 08:11
There are specific tactics that specialized teams use that require full auto (or a fast finger). React to close ambush, or when doing a small unit tactical withdrawal with a maneuver known as the "banana split" or "flick and flee".
in 10 years i have used burst on my rifle(other then training/range) 1 time, if i need burst/auto i will find a 249 to use.
There are specific tactics that specialized teams use that require full auto (or a fast finger). React to close ambush, or when doing a small unit tactical withdrawal with a maneuver known as the "banana split" or "flick and flee".
Or Ranger Peel, or Australian Peel.
But to answer the question, Most soldiers only get basic level of rifle training in Basic Training. Once they get to there unit, most soldiers will only do a basic qual twice a year with their M4. That means your average soldier with two to three years in the Army is sent to combat having fired less than 1000 (and perhaps less 500) rounds of 5.56mm in their entire life!
In most cases, your average 11B in light infantry units like the 101st and 82nd does have considerably more training in the use of their M4 but most would argue that there is still plenty of room for improvement. This also represents a very small portion of the Army. I have often called the 82nd 'the army within the Army.'
In Mech units, small arms training often takes a back seat to Gunnery. And, anyone operating a major system like a truck or artillery piece spends most of their time training on and maintaining those systems (or sleeping in the motor pool).
Bottom line, I am throwing the Leadership under the bus for failing to provide realistic and relevant training.
rifleman2000
10-13-09, 13:33
Bottom line, I am throwing the Leadership under the bus for failing to provide realistic and relevant training.
This is always a very real issue. Right now part of the problem is funds going to support "gaming" training and not live fire training.
The good news is that firearms training in the Army is being and has been upgraded thanks to experience overseas, the Asymetric Warfare Group, and new training aids like the LOMAH range system. Soldiers are now taught basic reflexive fire and there is more focus on safe weapon handling.
Of course, it is still never enough training.
The LOMAH system is very cool, I never shot on it but I have watched it in use (I work in the Army range program now as a dirty civilian). LOMAH ranges have down range sensors on each standard pop up target that detect the bullet's passage based on the sonic boom (triangulation). Each firing point has a computer screen, as well as the tower. A soldier can MISS his target completely, but if he is somewhat close the LOMAH will show exactly where his bullet was instantly. A Soldier can engage a 300m target and get instant feedback on their shot group.
Needless to say, LOMAH is not cheap.
rifleman2000
10-13-09, 14:06
Not focused at anyone in particular just a comment for all...
It really kinda cracks me up (on one hand, dissapoints on another) that a fair number of people buy into the mag dump break contact coolaid and apply it liberally in every situation. If all you ever train for is to do mag dumps or keeping a minimum of one or two guns going at all times you are not training realistically for the large majority of situations. Most definitely not for static defense or for gaining perimeter/area. The mag dump has very limited application in the real world where prolonged contacts happen.
During my first rotation to Iraq an IA patrol was a little less than 3k outside the wire (of the base we were on) when at least one of the vehicles was disabled by an IED setting off a complex ambush. The insurgents maintained semi-effective fire (effective for the goal they had of depleting the targets ammunition while preventing getting off the x) until the IA had no ammo left. At that point the insurgents moved in, killed and dismembered/decapitated all but one of the IA, who we believe was left to tell the story. That interaction took less than 30 minutes. I knew a couple of the guys, Kurds, on that patrol. Actual good dudes that would stand up and fight instead of sleeping on post or screwing off.
You want to learn to fight with a rifle? Practice making aimed shots while moving, communicating and using lots of different types of cover. I see schools teaching to never shoot over cover. This is obviously from someone who has never been in a gun fight standing behind a perimeter wall/burm/sand bag fighting position.
I have very limited use for F/A fire except in highly mobile break contact situations OR in crew served mounted weapons and unfortunately I think that a lot of people take the opinion of 'safe-semi-oh shit' and that the "oh shit" position will save the day even if they have never trained on how to employ it or discussed the downsides.
F/A will scare away the amateur insurgents hoards but it will do little to no good in a fight with motivated fighters.
DOC
Comments duly noted.
CarlosDJackal
10-13-09, 15:42
...Bottom line, I am throwing the Leadership under the bus for failing to provide realistic and relevant training.
This may be true at some levels. But it's hard to perform such training when the parent organization takes away your unit's ammo allotment year after year. The reality is all that is required is for Soldiers to shoot just enough to qualify once a year and nothing more.
Marksmanship does alway seem to take a back seat to SRPs, AG Inspections, Retirement Ceremonies, etc. :mad:
Not focused at anyone in particular just a comment for all...
It really kinda cracks me up (on one hand, dissapoints on another) that a fair number of people buy into the mag dump break contact coolaid and apply it liberally in every situation. If all you ever train for is to do mag dumps or keeping a minimum of one or two guns going at all times you are not training realistically for the large majority of situations. Most definitely not for static defense or for gaining perimeter/area. The mag dump has very limited application in the real world where prolonged contacts happen.
During my first rotation to Iraq an IA patrol was a little less than 3k outside the wire (of the base we were on) when at least one of the vehicles was disabled by an IED setting off a complex ambush. The insurgents maintained semi-effective fire (effective for the goal they had of depleting the targets ammunition while preventing getting off the x) until the IA had no ammo left. At that point the insurgents moved in, killed and dismembered/decapitated all but one of the IA, who we believe was left to tell the story. That interaction took less than 30 minutes. I knew a couple of the guys, Kurds, on that patrol. Actual good dudes that would stand up and fight instead of sleeping on post or screwing off.
You want to learn to fight with a rifle? Practice making aimed shots while moving, communicating and using lots of different types of cover. I see schools teaching to never shoot over cover. This is obviously from someone who has never been in a gun fight standing behind a perimeter wall/burm/sand bag fighting position.
I have very limited use for F/A fire except in highly mobile break contact situations OR in crew served mounted weapons and unfortunately I think that a lot of people take the opinion of 'safe-semi-oh shit' and that the "oh shit" position will save the day even if they have never trained on how to employ it or discussed the downsides.
F/A will scare away the amateur insurgents hoards but it will do little to no good in a fight with motivated fighters.
DOC
good post. not to get too far off topic, but i have had the same experience w/ IA and IP, the kurds are the only ones that give a damn, when the rest of their country wants them dead.
This may be true at some levels. But it's hard to perform such training when the parent organization takes away your unit's ammo allotment year after year. The reality is all that is required is for Soldiers to shoot just enough to qualify once a year and nothing more.
Marksmanship does alway seem to take a back seat to SRPs, AG Inspections, Retirement Ceremonies, etc. :mad:
Yep!
Again, Leadership, at all levels, up and down the chain of command. Good leadership fixes everything.
The good news is that there is ice cream in the KBR chow hall!
Only in a "banana /center peal". It essentially equates to me as a "panic switch". Semi-auto fire is more accurate and keep heads down just as well. Suppressive fire weapons are there to make sure the heads stay down.
I got to use the LOMAH system at Ft Knox it was really helpful with My battle Buddy that was shooting(could not focus on target).
we had a little screen right Next to us that showed us where the strike was and you could adjust as needed great training tool in my book ,Now the SIM range was a joke to me.it help some soldiers that have never shot a rifle.
get a air blow back recoil.but I have seen better graphics in play station games.
We used the 3rd Burst only when we did Live fire convoy training.all other times was a controlled single round fire,Most of the DS said to leave the accurate suppressing fire to the 249 and 240.and we were 19Kilo so we relly did most F/A training was done on the 50 cal ,a 240 Bravo above loaders hatch and the 240 charlie next to the Main gun
RogerinTPA
10-13-09, 19:42
Only in a "banana /center peal". It essentially equates to me as a "panic switch". Semi-auto fire is more accurate and keep heads down just as well. Suppressive fire weapons are there to make sure the heads stay down.
As mentioned, FA fire is used to spring ambushes and to break contact, with whatever "fire and maneuver" tactic (Center peel, reverse bounding over watch, etc...) your unit uses. Any other contact would be well addressed with accurate aimed semi fire. Anything else is a waste of ammo and lacks fire discipline.
I would add "accurate suppressive fire" to the comment above, especially with crew served weapons. You'd like to kill some BGs too, if possible, while keeping there heads down. Too many folks equate "suppressive fire" with shooting over their heads.
"accurate suppressive fire" very true .The spray and pray is a waste .Accurate fire is the king of the battle field:D
My m16 never saw "burst" unless we were ending a field op and needed to burn through blanks before going back to the company office. :D
rifleman2000
10-14-09, 07:41
As mentioned, FA fire is used to spring ambushes and to break contact, with whatever "fire and maneuver" tactic (Center peel, reverse bounding over watch, etc...) your unit uses. Any other contact would be well addressed with accurate aimed semi fire. Anything else is a waste of ammo and lacks fire discipline.
I would add "accurate suppressive fire" to the comment above, especially with crew served weapons. You'd like to kill some BGs too, if possible, while keeping there heads down. Too many folks equate "suppressive fire" with shooting over their heads.
Effective fire= you are killing them.
Suppressive fire= you are getting an A+ for effort, but they are staying down and behind cover!
rifleman2000
10-14-09, 07:48
The average soldier has a 3 round burst option on his M4. Full auto M4's are not common. The average soldier probably never heard an intelligent discussion, such as one you might find on this site, about the use of full auto, or 3 round burst.
Good weapon handling skills, marksmanship, and safety with weapons are critical skills for a Soldier. Of course, that goes without saying...
But most Soldiers are not as well versed on their individual weapons as an enthusiast/expert. They can employ them in situations they are trained for and they can maintain them.
The point is, if Soldiers had unlimited time they would certainly benefit from more weapons training, but there are a laundry list of critical skills, tactics, techniques, and procedures that a basic Infantryman needs to know in order to operate as a team, fight, and survive in combat.
And, I am sure you will agree that the Army wastes vasts amounts of time ****ing around with administrative nonsense or make-work projects?
Find me a Big Army soldier who has never slept in the motor pool, sat around waiting for a training meeting/bitchfest to end, or hid from some stupid detail.
The Army wastes A LOT of time that could be spent on other things.
rifleman2000
10-14-09, 10:08
And, I am sure you will agree that the Army wastes vasts amounts of time ****ing around with administrative nonsense or make-work projects?
Find me a Big Army soldier who has never slept in the motor pool, sat around waiting for a training meeting/bitchfest to end, or hid from some stupid detail.
The Army wastes A LOT of time that could be spent on other things.
No arguments here.
RogerinTPA
10-14-09, 15:00
Effective fire= you are killing them.
Suppressive fire= you are getting an A+ for effort, but they are staying down and behind cover!
This I know...but thanks.
was a requirement when I went through Infantry OSUT at Benning in 1979. We first qualified with the M16A1 in Basic Rifle Marksmanship (BRM) training and qualification, then the next week we took ARM (Automatic Rifle Marksmanship) using the old clothespin-type bipod. Soldiers earned the "AUTO RIFLE" qualification bar for the shooting badge.
I imagine ARM went away once the Army adopted the M16A2 with burst and the M249 assumed the Auto-Rifleman's role, circa mid-to-late 1980s.
The first time I shot the M16A2 in Immediate Action Drills I kept assuming I had stoppages and applied immediate/remedial action since prior to that I had always been issued M16A1s or Colt M723 Carbines (marked "M16A2 Carbine" but with full-auto components and marked "AUTO" and not "BURST").
rifleman2000
10-14-09, 18:58
This I know...but thanks.
You are welcome.
I think that in the just under 16 years I was in both the Active/Regular Army and the Army National Guard, I trained on burst fire from an M16 or M4 twice. Once in Basic which was more a familiarization fire, and once in Kuwait at the Doha range as practice to stop a vehicle.
The first M-16 the Army issued me in permanent party was a brand spankin new M16A1 which I got in 1988. I spent three years lugging it around in the field and taking it to the occasional range. We were never taught how to fire using full auto. The only time we used full auto was right after we left the arms room and to get rid of our blanks at the end of the field exercise. I was in a Patriot battalion and most soldiers wouldn't fire their weapons in the field if they could help. That is why our First Sergeant made everyone run a full mag through there weapons on full auto. His philosophy was now it is dirty so you have no excuse not to use your weapon in the field. I have covered many ranges over the last 22 years and the emphasis has always been on aimed semi fire. We are taught to squeeze the trigger faster if you want to increase the volume of fire.
I was in Desert Storm and I have a tour in Iraq. Two combat deployments plus multiple other deployments in between. Not once have I had to use my weapon outside the wire (I consider that a blessing of sorts). My last tour was as part of an advisory team. The insurgents would ambush and snipe at us. Not once did our Iraqis resort to full auto on their AKs (ammo is hard to come by). All of their fire was semi. The insurgents seemed to prefer semi also. The only weapons shooting F/A were the crew served on the gun trucks. My philosophy is that I can take 30 aimed shots to get a hit or ten burst per magazine. I prefer the 30 chances. The odds of achieving a higher hit to fired ratio seem higher to me.
It would be nice if we trained using burst and F/A but truth be told I would rather have advanced carbine classes instead. Most of my trigger time comes out of pocket and due to my assignment I haven't fire an official Army weapon since JAN 08 when I was still in Iraq. That is why I bought an AR so I could work on my basic and advanced skills. Just wish I could burn through 2000 rounds for practice like I did in Iraq :(. We had our own range and priority at the ammo supply point.
The senior leadership is looking at the marksmanship issue. I read an article earlier today in the Army Times that was discussing markmanship. LTG Hertling was discussing standardizing markmanship and qualification. His philosophy is to train the warfighters so that they have the advanced skills and train the support troops so that they have the necessary skill set to carry out their missions.
I have a friend who recently completed his training at Ft. Leonardwood here in Missouri. He told me that during basic he fired a grand total of 300 live rounds during his training. All were slow fire aimed shots...including his qualification. That is absolutely absurd.
rifleman2000
10-15-09, 10:20
I have a friend who recently completed his training at Ft. Leonardwood here in Missouri. He told me that during basic he fired a grand total of 300 live rounds during his training. All were slow fire aimed shots...including his qualification. That is absolutely absurd.
Basic training and IET has to squeeze in rifle marksmanship with a lot of other critical tasks. As I stated before, a Soldier has many other tasks as critical as marksmanship to learn.
Of course more shooting is better, but a commander and the schoolhouse has to balance it with everything else.
As for qualification, it is not really slow fire, depending on the range to the target you have from about 1 to 5 seconds to detect and engage each target with a single round.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.