Designated Marksman discussion thread

[kaltesherz]

Kalte maybe you mentioned t an I missed it but were you in afganistan or Iraq?

I was in Afghanistan 2008-2009, that might be an important detail to leave out...

I forgot to mention that later on in the tour our Brigade was issued freshly refirbed M14's with the newer type EBR stock (adjustable cheek wield and length), Leupold M3A's, 7 brand new spanking mags, harris bi-pod, and a bunch of M118LR. When they showed up in country every platoon was told to pick one guy to send to Bagram to be issued the "package" and then spend 3 days in a relaxed SDM class of just shooting at various ranges from 100-800m (no target detection or range estimation). Since my section had previously sent me to SDM training stateside and I had already been on a Bagram vacation to MRAP school they sent another good shooter in the other section. When he came back to us he would switch from M4 to M14 depending on the mission, and it was usually left up to him to decide what he was going to hump.

As an SDM you're still a grunt, and there were a few times when I had to clear rooms, guard prisoners, and other tasks where the size and optic were far from desirable. While I was lucky to get 3 weeks of school taught by excellent instructors, the ideal SDM weapon needs to have a simple enough operation and optic that any squared-away trigger puller can be taught how to properly utilize it with minimal training. The ACOG isn't perfect, but it's extremely easy and fast to use for both ranging and hitting targets, and is MUCH more durable than a variable mil-dot optic. I've seen two Leupolds quickly ruined by poor handling that wouldn't have even caused a loss of zero on an ACOG.

A good SDM rifle isn't supposed to be sexy, it's supposed to be make an infantryman with minimal training effective to 600m. It's not about what would be the best rifle that YOU would shoot well in a perfect environment. It's not a range toy. It's going to be beaten to shit in the armory in garrison, let alone in theatre.

The LMT .308 would be a familiar operating system / maintenance with accuracy potential and durability. Throw a TA-11H / bipod on it and it's good to go.

[Todd.K]

Lack of support for the M-14 was one problem. Cheekweld was another big one. The M1 was a great rifle in it's day, but had been surpassed. Same with the M-14, it's not personal or hating.

This discussion has many aspects but many are not obvious without knowing how the Infantry works. Don't overlook the fact that a good gunner can get hits out there with a 240 or 249 and Elcan as well.

Terrain dictates, sometimes a higher power scope is worth the downsides and other times an M16 gets in the way compared to the M4. There is room for variation but equipment can't give you more than the training time allows. It hurts regular training and team work if you have the SDM going to a month or more of school.

[C-grunt]

Like I posted earlier I was issued the 3rd ID/SDM-R/AMU rifle for my 05 tour in Iraq. I had a 4x ACOG with the red chevron and ballistic drop reticle. Not sure of the model number. I was also issued a full box of M262 on top of what was given to me as a basic load.

I was able to effectively engage targets out to about 600 meters with relative ease. In combat my longest shot was just about (map measured) 400 meters +-5. We did shoot out to about 800 meters once or twice but that was a bit harder, but doable.

I like the idea of keeping it a 5.56 wepon and an AR family gun as well. Like others have stated I was still a grunt and did plenty of room clearing and basic foot patrol with the rifle. I didnt find the weapon to be much heavier than everyone elses M16A4s. Only a few had M4s.

Being in a Mech unit I was never worried about not having enough penetration through cover at distance. It wouldnt have really mattered anyways as the insurgents in our AO rarely would go toe to toe with us. In fact they only did twice. Every other time we killed some it was by luck that we were able to find them after an IED attack or maybe a quick ambush and run.

I found the M262 to work well at range, but then again we never had a problem with M855 either. They wouldnt necessarily drop DRT from a COM hit but they werent fighting either.

As far as optics I really liked my ACOG. The reason is the durability. It never lost zero during the deployment even after several IED blasts, tumbles over walls or down a hill or being thrown around in a humvee. I was also a truck gunner so it spent a bit of time in the back seat of a humvee getting banged around.

As far as training goes I really didnt get any. Myself and the other guy in my platoon were chosen because we were the "gun guys". My battalion decided to send NCOs to the week long class so they could come back and train us. Well long range shooting is exactly a skill learned through books so that didnt help us at all. My unit, while damn good at fighting, had a lot of stupid bullshit and politics when it came to how they treated E-6s and below. But thats a whole nother story.

[Ash Hess]

Todd, I agree with all. It is defiantly a balancing act. The hardest part is having the SDM on tap for all the things he needs to do. He is still part of the squad after all.

[boltgun71]

I’ve been reading this thread with great interest and there many goods points.

For a little background I have served as a SDM in OIF 2003-2004, a Sniper in OEF 2006-2007, been through the AMU’s SDM Course in 2008, the US Army Sniper School in 2003, and several other military and civilian shooting courses. I have been employed as a SDM and Sniper myself and been in charge of coordinating, planning, and running training for SDM’s and Snipers; both informally at the CO level all the way up to formally for BN/BDE’s.

As for the ideal SDM rifle it’s a matter of personal preference and experience that can be argued amongst experts all day long. For the SDM role, where a standard grunt at squad level is expected to be proficient to engage targets between 300-600m, beyond the normal soldiers effective range, we already have rifles up to the task at hand. A standard M16A4 or M4 equipped with an ACOG is already capable enough in this role and we have plenty of them in the military already. What we don’t have in great supply though are soldiers skilled enough to use them to engage targets out to 600m. There is no secret to shooting at long range and extending the effective range of soldiers, you just have to master the basics/fundamentals of shooting. The problem is the Army as a whole sucks at this. It’s about quantity at the range, not quality. As long as everyone qualifies, that’s all that matters to big Army. Check the block and your good to go. Most soldiers aren’t given the time to properly learn, let alone master the basics to become skilled shooters. Training schedules, money, or lack of true subject matter experts, always seem to get in the way. We can issue SDM’s a 0.5 MOA rifle but if there not given to skilled shooters than it doesn’t matter. You can’t buy or issue skill. Quality equipment helps to master the fundamentals with less of a learning curve but it’s not necessary.

Lack of good standard gets in the way as well. When I went through the AMU’s SDM course in October 2008 it was essentially a 5 day familiarization course. We were given Armalite NM AR-15’s with ACOG’s, Black Hills 77gr ammo, and a Harris bipod which we fired all week long. Some time was spent shooting iron sights and using a sling for support also on the first 2 days. It was a good fun course with lots of trigger time but the problem was, at the end of the training there was no qualification or standard you had to achieve and everyone got a certificate. No matter how well or poorly you shot at the end of the week you were an AMU certified SDM.

The Armalite rifles the AMU had were nice and I did enjoy shooting them, they are also available to units for purchase to use as SDM rifles. Essentially they were just flattop NM AR-15’s with fluted 20” barrels, NM triggers, a free-float rail system, and a 4x ACOG as the primary sight.

I have personally used and trained others to use the M16A4 and M4 out to 600m and beyond and they are certainly adequate for that task. If you want to improve upon them I would recommend a free-float rail system and an improved trigger and that’s about it. Take the money you save from creating and issuing a new weapon system and spend it on training and ammo so the soldiers can become proficient with their weapons.

The MK12 and M110 are great rifles also, more than accurate enough, already in current service with support systems for them, but they are not needed. Both were designed as sniper rifles, and rightfully so are best used for that purpose. Outfitting soldiers as SDM’s with these rifles, without the proper training to fully utilize them would just be a waste of money.

I carried a M21 myself as a SDM in Iraq (I also had a M4 with ACOG depending on the mission). It was an old Winchester M14 in match configuration, with a McMillan stock, Leupold M3A, and Harris bipod. I loved it, but I don’t think it is the best choice for across the board issue to soldiers. There was a lack of support for it (at least in ‘03-04), heck I only had 3 magazines for it, and it’s an unfamiliar system for most soldiers to learn. I was already familiar with the M14/M1A prior to working for Uncle Sam so I didn’t have any issues but I have run across several other soldiers, particularly in theatre, that were issued a M14 or EBR, and had little to no training on how the system works, particularly disassembly and assembly. Keep the SDM rifle an AR variant of sorts and that won’t be an issue.

As for the 7.62 versus 5.56 debate, I will leave that to others to argue, as there are too many variables. I prefer 7.62mm myself but have seen multiple targets engaged with both. I have seen one shot from each drop targets instantly, yet I have also seen a man take three 7.62 rounds to the chest, barrel rolled with each shot, yet still get up and run away over a mountain from me. Some just have more of a will to live than others. Both calibers are legitimate lethal rounds. Just pick one, learn to shoot it accurately, and don’t stop shooting until the threat is eliminated.

[Moose-Knuckle]

I think the Brits have it right, the LMT .308 with the right optic and training would be an ideal SDM weapon. It's accurate, reliable, and not too bulky. It is heavy, but you can't have everything, esp in 7.62x51. Plus an ACOG properly calibrated and zeroed can get hits on target fast without having to get all the training on mil-dots and worrying about DOPE, remember SDM's aren't snipers and aren't supposed to be snipers, we're grunts with a little talent and training, that's all.

The first time I saw the L129A1 I thought the same thing. I look forward to hearing the AAR's from the Brits.

[ALCOAR]

AAR's so far have been very good with some very long range confirmed engagements using the 16" SST barrel and the 6x acog's.

[JSantoro]

That is what I kept in the trunk for the most part. Too long, too heavy, too slow with the big scope, poor scope mounts, no spare parts, no mags, no way to get a cheekweld with the original stock designed for irons. The new stocks might be better for a cheekweld but they add weight.

Being all metal, those stocks also beat the living hell out of the shoulder of the shooter. They have no give in them, which is great for optics, but are a literal pain compared to a good synthetic or synth-bedded stock. Doesn't help, either, that some *note sarcasm follows endnote* genius decided to put the SSDS on things. That's a great sniper scope, but it's WAY too busy for a DM capability; they don't need it, they don't get the training time on it, and it's a waste of money to buy them for that role.

Somebody mentioned the Mk12 being "fully fielded," earlier. The term is being misapplied in a way that suggests that that's the go-to or common weapon. It's not, either from a sheer numbers standpoint, and because those that ARE out there are going down from lack of supply support similar to that of the M39 and other M14 variants.

"Fully fielded" actually means that every unit entity that was designated to receive some portion of the total population for a weapon or system has taken possession of it. The Mk12 program decided that X number of them would be fielded, and so X were fielded. It's not a common platform.

An aside: everybody has gotten the brief on the range specified in the blurb about the mission of the DM, but it also specifies, "high-volume precision fire out to 600m..." Things like that are the sort of thing that need to be kept in mind, because it little details like that that got the Camp Perry bolt-gun purists to shut up, otherwise that's what would be still in use.

Put a different (i.e., 1-6x or 1-8x) optic than the SSDS (or whatever the Army equivalent is) on the M110. I have yet to see anything that can keep up with that baby in either a sniper or DM role.

[wild_wild_wes]

AAR's so far have been very good with some very long range confirmed engagements using the 16" SST barrel and the 6x acog's.

As I understand, as Mk12s get sent back for re-barreling, certain SEALs have specified a 16" barrel instead of the standard 18"; I have seen a pic of one of these in one of our recent fun discussion threads on this forum.

[ALCOAR]

You gotta a habit of brewing up very good topics for discussion that generate good debate...IIrc your Barrel Paradigm thread discusses that subject.

I have all but abandoned the idea of running anything but a dedicated sniper rifle in a .260 rem in a barrel length over 16".

I was foolish for so many yrs. preferring the mind pondering extra 2" on a SPR over a Recce in gained velocity and what that then would translate to in real world extended range and accuracy...ultimately I came to the conclusion that not only do the extra 2" not help, they play a substantial detrimental effect to the light sniper, or sniper m4 as an overall weapon and hinder its ability to be a "light" sniper.