is the mfal replacing rifleman training

[fivefivesix]

the more and more i see all the users of the mfal in the millitary i started wondering, is it taking the place of proper training for the infantryman?
it seems like a great tool for urban combat but if a soldier is trained with the multi function aiming laser, and not taught proper sight alignment wouldnt it be breeding bad habits?
im just curious and would like to hear feedback from the end users

[R Moran]

What do you consider "proper training for the Infantryman"?

What bad habits?...killing more bad guys?

The laser is just another sight, it does nothing magical, and the proper fundamentals of marksmanship must still be applied.

As PR would say, people need to get over the romance of iron sights, and get on with shooting people in the face.

Bob

[JSantoro]

In regard to MFAL devices, here's the alternative....

"You need to properly align your sights, then point them at your target while maintaining that alignment."

How? I can't even see them because it's darker than the inside of a freakin' boot right now!

"I don't care, align your sights."

And.....SCENE.

The idea that MFALs are inherently subtractive instead of additive under limited-visibility conditions is, to be frank, harebrained.

Is getting trained in the use and employment of an MFAL device somehow "improper?" Compared to what?

Following this logic, infantry should only be using pointed sticks with which to fight, lest they lose the ability to fight with pointed sticks. Forget the fact that there's better ways of doing business that provide a real, palpable, verifiable advantage over our adversaries...

Perhaps we need to address the current state of pointed-stick skillset degredation before we start talking about MFALs?

[fivefivesix]

all i asked is it seems like the more they are used the more dependant people get to needing them.
it was an honest question that i dont know that much about thats why i asked. i said its a great idea for urban but i didnt understand its use fully. i feel like when i ask a question, ones that are in the know more than me try to make me feel like i did somthing wrong by asking.

[R Moran]

Jim, very well put.

Here's something, just yesterday I was shooting in full SCBA, I challenge anyone, to get any kind of proper stock weld with that crap. Then properly apply the fundamentals of marksmanship.

556,
Let me ask you this, and I'm not being a dick, I just want to see where you are coming from.
Are you now, or have you ever been an Infantryman? If so with who and when?
Do you work in a job that issues, uses or could benefit from an MFAL?
What do you consider proper training for an Infantryman, and why?
What evidence, or what leads you to believe that Soldiers and Marines are not trained in the proper fundamentals of marksmanship, or the use of iron sights?
What do you mean by being dependent on an MFAL, and what leads you to believe this?
Why do you consider them good for urban use? and by contrast not good for field use?

You may have all the infantry experience in the world, and we can have a discussion about it.

But, these types of anti-technology posts pop all the time on various forums. Most of the time, they are posted by people who have a deep seated, but unrealistic romance with Parkerized steel, walnut, and .30 bullets. They are often detached from the realities of the modern battlefield and adversaries.
Myself and I suspect Jim, often deal with these type at work. Unfortunately for the operator, they are often making the decisions, and are not the one who will have to live with the consequences of them.

Having a laser, red dot, vertical foregrip, 2pt sling, etc etc do not negate the need to apply the fundamentals of marksmanship. THE single most important one, is trigger manipulations. The use of modern aperture iron sights, is quite easy, once you've mastered trigger manipulation, you are home free.

Bob

[fivefivesix]

r moran,
im not in the service but i fully support our troops. i come from a famly of marines and 101st ab.
if this came of as an anti technology post i apologize, im trying to understand more about them and would like to try one. i read an vauge article on them and have been curious. i dont carry a gun for a living, and all my experience comes in the form of pistol training. i have a hard time typing my thoughts out and usually expect people to know what im trying to say. by the way i dont own an sks or ak or rpk etc. the only .30 im gonna buy is a lever gun. for the longest time i thought they were used to laze targets for airstrikes.
im really just trying to get more info on them and asking for realworld feedback.
usually with technology comes people forgetting basics and i was wondering if they were just isuing them to soldiers who c ant use irons. no disrespect at all, just really intriuged and curious.
as in proper training do the drill instructers actually let the troops shoot and teach how to use irons before isuing such equipment?
beleive me anything that can be used to bring our soldiers home alive and take out as many bad guys as possible is great.
the scopes we have now are awesome, like the acog with the hash marks for the bullet drop compensator.
all in all i was trying to come up with a good way to ask the question how they are used and does the armed forces still train guys to shoot.
i hope i didnt sound like a dick as i forget you guys deal with a lot of jackasses that think there rambo and post crap like this all the time.

[R Moran]

For the average CCW holder, they are not going to offer much, and you'll need NODs to get the most/best value/use from them.

I don't know what Drill Instructors teach, I had a Drill Sergeant

But, what does it matter, if they learn irons? We've had this discussion before, and I do not believe there is any need to learn iron sights first. You need to learn to manipulate the trigger first, and whatever facilitates that, is a good thing.
So, of course they still learn to shoot. Your question sounds like someone asking if the troops still learn to shoot, because they are now issued M4's and not M1's or M14's. They just now learn to shoot with something different.

The Soldier, will be issued what his MOS requires of him, and what his unit has.

A multifunction aiming laser, has an IR illuminator, IR aiming laser, and a visible aiming laser. They each have a use.
The IR stuff, obviously at night. A laser with a helmet mounted NOD, is about the best way to go, to engage adversaries during periods of limited visibility. In fact, I know, one guy, whose unit wont even go out, if there's to much illume at night, that's how capable they are at night fighting.

The visible laser, also has it place. When shooting from unconventional positions, or with a pro-mask, or SCBA they become a big help.

I bet our adversaries, when given a new weapon or capability, do not sit around fretting over some loss of "skill". They just see it as a way to kill more Americans.
He wont care if you know how to use your irons, when your plowing rounds into him, in 0% illume, and he has no idea where its coming from.

People need to get over this detrimental attachment and romance with the past. I'm all for history and tradition. I'm also all for learning from the past, one of the things we often learn, is there is a better way to do things then what we did in the past.

Bob

[Grumpy MSG]

r moran,
im not in the service but i fully support our troops. i come from a famly of marines and 101st ab.
if this came of as an anti technology post i apologize, im trying to understand more about them and would like to try one. i read an vauge article on them and have been curious. i dont carry a gun for a living, and all my experience comes in the form of pistol training. i have a hard time typing my thoughts out and usually expect people to know what im trying to say. by the way i dont own an sks or ak or rpk etc. the only .30 im gonna buy is a lever gun. for the longest time i thought they were used to laze targets for airstrikes.
im really just trying to get more info on them and asking for realworld feedback.
usually with technology comes people forgetting basics and i was wondering if they were just isuing them to soldiers who c ant use irons. no disrespect at all, just really intriuged and curious.
as in proper training do the drill instructers actually let the troops shoot and teach how to use irons before isuing such equipment?
beleive me anything that can be used to bring our soldiers home alive and take out as many bad guys as possible is great.
the scopes we have now are awesome, like the acog with the hash marks for the bullet drop compensator.
all in all i was trying to come up with a good way to ask the question how they are used and does the armed forces still train guys to shoot

fivefivesix the way your initial post read, could sound offensive to some folks, so a confrontational reply wouldn't be unexpected. sorry to say this but you hung a "KICK ME" sign on your back and somebody did. Technology has always been changing for our weapons and always will. As for training with that technology, if anything it lags behind the technology, not getting in front of it. I mean a unit waits until it signs for a piece of equipment before worrying about training Soldiers to use it. Training time is a precious commodity and why train for a system you don't have yet.

As for the Multi Function Aiming Laser, they are not really used all the time, it is just units have a tendency to require Soldiers to "dummy cord" expensive items to prevent their loss, so a lot of units have their Soldiers install them on the weapons and dummy cord them in place. Just because they are there doesn't mean they are turned on. In many cases, the only time the AN/PAQ AN/PEQ is used is during night missions. Some units do not even train on their use. The same type of questions were asked when the Army began issuing the Aimpoint M68 CCO (Close Combat Optic) and the ACOG RCO (Rifle Combat Optic). Some units (especially Reserve Component) never even see their optics until they are in the pre-mobilization/ deployment training.

[fivefivesix]

im not fretting over a loss of skill i was just wondering if they get dependent on them etc, there sidearms dont have a laser.
as far as the attachment and romance over irons i have no clue what your talking about, i myself prefer red dots and yes i use a cheap one at that as im not in harms way and i dont get to go shoot at terroists.

[fivefivesix]

are they used to direct fire to a specific spot?
ive seen them used thru night vision so im starting to understand.
what you guys need to understand is i have no clue about how gear affects being able to aim, and i never even thought about its use at night but it makes sense.
as far as technology i like to know how it works, does it work well, drawbacks etc.
i cant afford new tchnology and i just started using a red dot after i bought a good rifle. im very intrigued by the stuff i see on the millitary channel etc.