Heresy: An Introduction to Combat Riflecraft

mountainguerrilla ^ | 4/29/13 | John Mosby

[zeugma]

TFP

[archy]

One method I routinely use in classes to demonstrate the robustness of modern optics is generally good for an “OH S***!” reaction from witnesses. I grab one of my rifles that mounts an EoTech (generally perceived as the least robust of the big three), and drop it, onto the ground, optic first, from head high. I then run the gun through the class. I’ve dropped it onto asphalt, gravel, pavement, grass, and into the mud, with no ill effect. While I don’t recommend this course of action to anyone, least of all with an optic you plan on using to potentially save your life, it does demonstrate that modern combat optics are at least robust as irons (I should probably admit however, that I have a Burris MTAC 1.5-6X variable scope on one of my other M4s, and I don’t have the stones to try it with that one. I d***ed sure wouldn’t try it with a Nightforce or Schmidt and Bender scope either, unless one of those companies wants to send me a scope to test…..? Bueller? Bueller? Bueller? I’m sure they would withstand it, but I really can’t afford to be wrong either, and it certainly falls under unusual abuse).

One of the reasons my M16A1 wears a Brit SUIT Tri-Lux scope. And the Soviet 1P29 is about as good and likely even more robust.

[Doomonyou]

Later

[archy]

I recall that a post-WWII study showed that some ridiculously small percentage of US soldiers actually aimed directly at an enemy - they may have fired their weapon, but couldn’t bring themselves to take a life.

It was by S.L.A. Marshall, from a day when hard-kicking Garands and bulleye targets were the order of the day. After a generation raised on John Wayne war flicks and cowboy movies, and the Army's change to pop-up silhouette targets, it was much less a matter. And in Korea it was cold. It wasn't just shooting; getting frozen troops to do anything energetically was a good trick.

[Billthedrill]

For heresy it isn't actually very heretical. I do note with some fondness the reference to a "cheek-weld", an ancient (you know who you are) technique designed to place the eye at the proper angle for iron sight alignment. It is also marvelous for promoting consistency of presentation, which is pretty much the same thing in application. I love it, I use it, I feel weird shooting any other way.

BUT

Skeletal stocks and optical sights mounted higher than the iron sight plane often don't allow that nice, tight cheek-weld, nor do the two-eyes-open, heads-up techniques more typical to urban combat. The fact is that a competent rifleman needs to open his repertoire up to employ all the available gear. Even an old git like me loves his red-dot when he gets used to it.

While I've done it myself - lately - I'd still minimize using the magazine as a rest. Don't grind your mags in the dirt if you don't have to. Just my $0.02.

[Geoffrey]

I have the typical high power prone - but my son in the army has a prone so low and flat...

I would too, if I was being shot at and not just plinking away at paper targets.

[Billthedrill]

Amen. I talk smack because the little paper fellers downrange aren’t trying to kill me. I think.

[DuncanWaring]

As I recall the story, American soldiers trained on bullseye targets for The Great War, and on silhouette targets for WWII.

[Future Snake Eater]

Could be, I got the story second-hand. I know the author was recently railing against first-person shooter games for similar reasons.

[19th LA Inf]

I don’t suppose that anyone would consider the M1 carbine a “combat rifle”, but that’s what we trained with in the Signal Corps in early 1951. I was amazed to find that I was allowed to shoot left-handed. We had paper bullseye targets, and also popup silhouettes manned by guys in pits at fairly close range, probably 30 or 40 yards. I was sure I was getting hits on the popups one day, but they wouldn’t fall down. I might not do this today, but that day on the range I started aiming at the crossties forming the rim of the pits. A few splinters down into the pits seemed to improve my “accuracy” a lot. BTW, I qualified Expert on the paper bulls.

[doorgunner69]

The question is, can you put a human in your crosshairs as easily as that buck, and not lose your nerve.

That is certainly an area that veterans have an edge in over civilians.

No wonder Obunga and his head Dyke list veterans as likely domestic terrorists that need to be watched.

[Tainan]

Just shoot what you can see.If you can’t see anything, but you know the guy is there, shoot there anyway, and keep him more interested in not getting shot than he is in shooting you, and let your Ranger buddy maneuver around and smoke him.

.......word.

[Voice of Reason1]

Ping for reference.