If you love Free Republic
Donate once
Or donate monthly if you can
Click the Pic
Posted on 04/21/2011 10:42:43 AM PDT by Winged Hussar
Until recently the infantryman’s primary weapon was a radio connected to an artillery battery, a helicopter gunship or an A-10 Warthog. But in today’s asymmetric warfare, traditional American advantages, such as artillery and air power, have largely been negated. The majority of combat-related casualties are caused by explosives rather than small arms, but in direct combat, riflery matters as never before.
Americans rarely lose rifle fights. It occurs so seldom that it’s considered remarkable. But it can happen. Probably the most-publicized combat action in recent years was the prolonged shootout at Wanat, Afghanistan, in 2008. Seventy-two U.S. and Afghan soldiers were almost overrun by Taliban fighters. After the four-hour battle, 36 of the 48 G.I.s were either killed or wounded versus an unknown number of enemy casualties.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanrifleman.org ...
Our Army's marksmanship has in fact regressed to 19th century standards (when Helmuth von Moltke wrote of "the problem of the last 300 meters," the problem coming from von Dreyse needle guns and their foreign counterparts, all of which used black powder cartridges). The result of course is that Afghans with Lee-Enfield rifles have an advantage over U.S. troops with M-16s, M-4s, or whatever they issue nowadays.
We can't blame Barry for this one, though, as the doctrine change took place in 1958.
How often is >100, 300, 500, or 1000 yards even an option?
Return to the 308, reach out and touch someone.
I really think we need to go ahead and change over to 6.5 Grendel. There may be better cartridges which will fit the M16 base but any time you can get 6.5 Swedish Mauser ballistics from an M16 then go for it.
There is actually nothing basically wrong with the .223. It just needs to be used in a gun optimized for performance instead of ease of carry.
I didn’t qualify on my personal weapon the last few years I was in the service because, “The Enlisted Soldiers need the ammunition so they can score higher and receive more promotion points.” That pretty well sums up the US military - We don’t give a sh_t about combat, we give a sh_t about the bureaucracy.
There’s Fire *and* there’s Maneuver.
I DO NOT know the circumstances of this firefight, nor do I know if it is representative of many.
But.
Lee-Enfields with iron sights probably did not account for many aimed hits at 1000 yards.
IIRC this firebase was very poorly located tactically. IIRC.
I am not sure I agree that the losses were firearm and marksmanship related.
Sure we need firearms that can reach out and touch in AOO-appropriate ways, AND we need troops trained to hit what they aim at. I can only say that my son (USMC) qualifies at quite long distances with iron and ACOG sights. I do not recall how far. I’ll have to ask him. They also *DO* practice with what he referred to as a 7.62 SAW that would really reach out and touch. He felt that this weapon, when supported, would almost enable him to snipe.
LASTLY, I do know the USMC puts a real emphasis on marksmanship. Can’t speak for US Army. I know my “Johnny” *CAN* shoot ;-)
In afghanistan the distances are easily in those ranges on a regular basis
At least we were issued M-14s. Of course, the kids from the Big Apple and such still boloed alot because of the "kick", but it was a rifle I had confidence in.
We need to transition back to the 7.62 Nato and give our men and women a real weapon.
I do pretty well with my Mosin at 300 m with iron sights. I can keep a relatively tight group at 500 m with a scoped hunting rifle. Past that, I get into problems with overcompensation for wind and bullet drop. I’ve never been formally trained, and have always wanted to study ballistic theory; however, I pray that if the SHTF in this country, most of the firing I would be doing would be sporadic and at clearly marked targets wearing light blue helmets.
I’ve got a Saiga .223 carbine. I can hit anything with it out to 300 yds using just iron sights. I figure that will be good enough in my neck of the woods (suburbia) should the zombies start climbing over the fence.
The United States Marine Corps is the best shooting service on the planet. Period. The marksmanship training taught in specialized schools in other branches we receive in boot camp.
Semper Fi!
The United States Marine Corps is the best shooting service on the planet. Period. The marksmanship training taught in specialized schools in other branches we receive in boot camp.
Semper Fi!
http://www.appleseedinfo.org/search-states.html
Do it. Do it now. Military, up to and including special forces, have improved their marksmanship with Appleseed Project.
Go to the link, find the dates of events near you. Best experience you will have with a rifle. I am attending my second one Sat and Sun at Knob Creek, KY (next to Ft. Knox, S. of Louisville). And I have every intention of attending the other 4 planned for this year at the same location. And I will need them all, I'm afraid....
You will learn more about improving your marksmanship in two days there than 100 days by yourself at the range.
It's fun, inspiring and great for teenagers and women, also.
When I was in the infantry, we spent more time training to support the Bradley Fighting Vehicle than we did developing light infantry skills. The Army made all 11M soldiers (mechanized infantry) into 11B (light infantry) soldiers but they still train soldiers to fight with, from, and for the BFV. That means months of training time spent at gunnery qualification ranges, field training exercises, and the NTC out in Fort Irwin. Rifle marksmanship got maybe 2 weeks out of the year.
Furthermore, our rifles were old and we would regularly have to shoot the old M193 ball ammo out of the M16A2 which means the bullets were deforming in the barrel(hardly a recipe for developing accuracy). Even if we were shooting M855 ball ammo (the green tipped AP ammo designed for the M16A2), it isn't capable of consistently shooting 1" groups at 100 yards (1 MOA). It is capable of shooting 4 inch groups at 100 yards (4 MOA).
So, if you can only shoot 4 inch groups at 100 yards, guess what that means? It means you're only able to shoot a 16 inch group at 400 yards. That means, you are going to miss your enemy target at 400 yards under all but the most perfectly optimal of conditions (conditions which never occur in combat). Bottom line, the ammo sucks and rifle marksmanship training takes a back seat to too many other training needs in MANY infantry units.
The 1903 has a magazine cutoff too.
Strange that line sounds vaguely familiar. 8*)
The taliban regularly engage at 500 yards and our soldiers are at a disadvantage at that range.
We need .308s and Grendels
True, at the end of the range, the heavy bullet will always be more accurate and do more damage. Less wind drift!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.