Are there different requiremets or standards for today's snipers?

[blasternank]

Are there different requiremets or standards for today's snipers? I've come across guys the last few years that have gone through and are considered snipers in the military. I knew these guys before they went in and they hardly knew which side of the gun to shoot from. Plus, afterward I am not impressed with their knowledge on much about guns or ammo. And shooting with them made me more concerned as to the word "military sniper".

I know they actually did some type of sniper school as their parents were all proud which is great! I was just wondering if they have different degrees or something or if they have put in guys in there smaller groups that might be able to shoot a little better than the rest for an aid or advantage. I could see that. Anyway, I am in no way bashing snipers or the military I am just curious if there are some newer programs.

Thanks.

[btroj]

I think the military has different "levels" of "snipers". For a while the army was going to having a squd designated marksman.not a sniper by any real measure, just a guy with better sighting equipment and more rifle marksmanship training.
I think that the "real" sniper schools are very competitive to get into and have a high failure rate. It is not a fun/glamorous/easy job. It is far more waiting and watching from a concealed location, which may not be comfortable, than it is shooting. Sniper school is about concealment and observation as much as it is shooting. What good is it to be capable of making the shot if you can't identify the target or get killed before getting off the shot.
TV and movies have us thinking snipers are all about shooting ALOT and small groups. It is far, far deeper than that. It is a skill set that few will ever have and an ability to handle the stress of being alone in enemy territory. People who get thru sner school are amongst the true elite of the armed forces and their numbers are small.

No, I have no military experience and I know no snipers. I do however understand what matters and it is much more than being a good shot.

[TCLouis]

A military sniper may NOT have great interests in guns. Like some police officers it is just a tool.

As far a guns/ammo knowledge, interest, all they need to know is their weapon system , ammo as supplied and the data for the combo.
Snipers are/can be used for missions where nary a shot is fired, only the skills of stealth and survival are called upon.

I am not so sure that lack of firearms/shooting experience might not be an advantage when teaching a guy to shoot and take data from his spotter.

Oh I did forget one part of military snipers . . .

"Those that claim they were snipers"

Just an opinion of course and we know about opinions!

[RollerCam]

I am not so sure that lack of firearms/shooting experience might not be an advantage when teaching a guy to shoot and take data from his spotter.



It would kinda' nullify the value of our DCM program, wouldn't it?

[Got-R-Did]

Excellent posts by both Btroj, and TCLouis. As a former All Skills Firearms Instructor for my Dept. I can certainly attest to the "tool" aspect of many shooters wearing a badge. While there may be an extraordinary amount of talent/skill possessed by some of my students, they simply had no interest beyond the professional association with firearms. One particularly talented Preemptive Tactical Marksman I had the pleasure to work with could recall all the parameters of his rifle/scope/ammunition and place bullets on target at unknown distances with surgical precision, but simply did not have a connection to firearms in any other context.
I often wonder how far he could have gone as a Competitor for our State Association High Power Rifle Team. He could really read conditions and wind, and his range estimation was typically within 10 yds out to well past 350 yds. Once he was promoted out of his Field Operations Unit, he put that skill set in the filing cabinet and hasn't shot a rifle since.
Got-R-Did.

[44fanatic]

btroj was right on the mark...

A sniper is highly skilled and goes through several months of school, a school that has a very high washout rate. Over the past few years, the Army has introduced a "Squad Designated Marksman". This individual is supposed to have shown an extreme proficiency with his assigned weapon, usually an M4 or M16, and then they are sent for additional training. I believe the assigned weapon of the SDM is an M4/M16 with a scope. They are a great asset to the squad and can place accurate fire on targets that would normally recieve grazing fire from the squad.

[pdawg_shooter]

Oh how times have changed. Back when, every man had to qualify as a rifleman first. Didnt mater if you were going to be a baker or in the band. Aimed fire at an individual target, not spray and pray, is what we learned. Yes, I am that old.

[82nd airborne]

Oh how times have changed. Back when, every man had to qualify as a rifleman first. Didnt mater if you were going to be a baker or in the band. Aimed fire at an individual target, not spray and pray, is what we learned. Yes, I am that old.

That hasnt changed at all.

[82nd airborne]

By the way, Ive asked alot of people that claimed to be "snipers" and Ill say oh, what is the BC of the 175g matchking out of a 24" bbl M24? Most just stutter. Then I ask what the last target at the army's sniper school is, again most stutter. Point is, for some reason, alot of service members claim to have been snipers. I never will understand that.

[Geraldo]

btroj was right on the mark...

A sniper is highly skilled and goes through several months of school, a school that has a very high washout rate.

Try several WEEKS, not months. The USMC Scout Sniper Basic Course is down to just over eight weeks, the Army school is less, and SOTIC is six weeks. A large part of the curriculum is not related to shooting, but to camo, recon, etc. There is a high failure rate, and not all of it is due to poor shooting.

The bottom line is that not everybody who shoots for a living likes to shoot for fun.

[Geraldo]

By the way, Ive asked alot of people that claimed to be "snipers" and Ill say oh, what is the BC of the 175g matchking out of a 24" bbl M24? Most just stutter. Then I ask what the last target at the army's sniper school is, again most stutter. Point is, for some reason, alot of service members claim to have been snipers. I never will understand that.

With all those snipers, it makes you wonder who was left to ship ammo, drive heavy equipment, and maintain the helos, just to name a few. And with all that precision fire, our wars should have been a lot shorter.

[cajun shooter]

As a former sniper that was trained both in the military and by the FBI let me say a few things. The post about claims to being a sniper is one that a lot say but have never done. I don't know of your ability to fire a rifle but I gather from your post that you are saying that you out shot a sniper. The training required is very intense and does have a high failure rate. Some men have the needed shooting ability but fail very badly in other facets of training. Today's POLICE TEAMS are two men just as the military is. AT one time it was one man and his rifle. Real sniper school requires many hours of just getting in position to take the shot. You then have one man on the gun and the other on the spotting scope. His job is two fold in that he sets up the shot with the required numbers of range, wind, elevation and to provide cover fire if needed. He is called the spotter and both men are crossed trained so that they may swap off so that one man does not fatigued out from being on the rifle for too long of a period. They do look for men who are intense deer stand hunters as they already have that waiting for hours to shoot in them. All certified snipers are capable of shots over several hundred yards and beyond but the average sniper shot taken by the LEO is only 75 yards. That has to do with the terrain that is available in most big cities that have such men trained for that job. Some news reports will say that the man was taken out by a police sniper when the guy was probably the firearms instructor with out formal training. Read the story about the SEAL team snipers that took out the guys on a boat in rolling seas that were holding hostages. Try that shot and see how you fare. If they have any guy who applies that walks around 24-7 talking and bragging about guns and how great he is he is the first to wash out. Knowning about guns is a long way from pulling the trigger to take a human life.

[Finster101]

I have known two guys who were snipers. Neither talked about it much.

[82nd airborne]

As a former sniper that was trained both in the military and by the FBI let me say a few things. The post about claims to being a sniper is one that a lot say but have never done. I don't know of your ability to fire a rifle but I gather from your post that you are saying that you out shot a sniper. The training required is very intense and does have a high failure rate. Some men have the needed shooting ability but fail very badly in other facets of training. Today's POLICE TEAMS are two men just as the military is. AT one time it was one man and his rifle. Real sniper school requires many hours of just getting in position to take the shot. You then have one man on the gun and the other on the spotting scope. His job is two fold in that he sets up the shot with the required numbers of range, wind, elevation and to provide cover fire if needed. He is called the spotter and both men are crossed trained so that they may swap off so that one man does not fatigued out from being on the rifle for too long of a period. They do look for men who are intense deer stand hunters as they already have that waiting for hours to shoot in them. All certified snipers are capable of shots over several hundred yards and beyond but the average sniper shot taken by the LEO is only 75 yards. That has to do with the terrain that is available in most big cities that have such men trained for that job. Some news reports will say that the man was taken out by a police sniper when the guy was probably the firearms instructor with out formal training. Read the story about the SEAL team snipers that took out the guys on a boat in rolling seas that were holding hostages. Try that shot and see how you fare. If they have any guy who applies that walks around 24-7 talking and bragging about guns and how great he is he is the first to wash out. Knowning about guns is a long way from pulling the trigger to take a human life.

Im not saying "I outshot a sniper" Im saying I completed all four of the schools the army has to offer, spent a year and a half in the desert with an m24, and spent plenty of time in hospitals afterwards recovering from failing to get into position, and am still getting surgeries.

ETA: Just realized there was a similar post, if it wasnt in reference to mine, my bad!

[Doc Highwall]

At one time is was more about being a good shot and people who hunted made up the majority of snipers. It was not until after Vietnam that formal sniper schools were set up and a MOS / Military Occupational Specialty was issued to soldiers who had completed the course. Now days you still have to be a good shot but that is only a small portion of the training with field craft including orienteering, observation and concealment as more important with the sociological mind set of being able to handle what you have done to protect your fellow soldiers and live with it.

[C1PNR]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think there are still "Designated Marksmen" in some formations, Squad, Platoon, or Company.

The last thing I remember seeing was that they were supplied with some sort of "worked over" M-14. It's not so much that they are trained "snipers" just maybe better shooters and with that rifle had a little better capability for longer shots, etc.

I have no idea how accurate or true to life it is, but I sure did enjoy reading "Hogs in the Shadows" recently.

[felix]

I would never qualify. I am even too scared to travel through East St. Louis, and will drive around that cesspool no matter where I am going. It is about the same nowadays on the eastern side of the main city before you cross the river to the East city. I would like to say if you are the person who can walk through that area without being accosted in the least, you'd fit right in as a hired gun. ... felix

[82nd airborne]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think there are still "Designated Marksmen" in some formations, Squad, Platoon, or Company.

The last thing I remember seeing was that they were supplied with some sort of "worked over" M-14. It's not so much that they are trained "snipers" just maybe better shooters and with that rifle had a little better capability for longer shots, etc.

I have no idea how accurate or true to life it is, but I sure did enjoy reading "Hogs in the Shadows" recently.

The army's sdm's go through a three week course for the most part, that focuses on the shooting aspects of the game, as apposed to the navigation, concealment, technology, and all the other fields of dedicated sniping. In urban warfare, SDM's are every bit as effective, if not more so, than snipers.

[Doc Highwall]

Yes there are still "Designated Marksmen" but the sniper team has training to operate independently where a larger force would be easier to detect. A lot of times it works as a undetectable FO that gathers information on the enemy and nothing else. The danger is there 24/7 with no let up of keeping your senses at max attention with a lot of what ifs going through your mind.

[1Shirt]

Interesting thread. Lots of perspectives, and I agree with the factor of tools. After all is said and done, a rifle is but a machine that allows a rifleman to launch a projectile. The quality of the rifle, the optics, the load, the distance,and the sniper team mentality seperates the sniper from the rifleman.
1Shirt!:coffeecom

[mooman76]

On the show top shot this season there is a guy claiming to be a Air Force sniper. I am not going to go and say there is no such thing but I have never heard of it. Many careers in the military has cross training into related fields that are needed so they might go to the sniper school to get additional related training such as Para rescue that has to recover a downed pilot. So attending that school, they might call themself a sniper and the school would probably be a shorter version of the sniper school. The AF has never taken shooting as seriously as I think they should but it's because they have a different mission than the other armed forces.

[leadman]

My nephew just completed army sniper training and is being deployed to the desert again. Have not spoke with him in awhile as he goes home to Michigan when on leave. I'm in Az.
He is going thru many different types of training like paratrooper, etc.

[blasternank]

Thanks for the responses. There must be some type of cross training as I've seen some of these guys shoot and it's nothing to write home about. :)

[merlin101]

What i find amazing is that one place I worked one other guy and myself were the only vet's out of aprox12 people. When he an I left that left none, we were replaced by two other guys that BOTH are snipers! YEAH right! I talked to them and they just talked up a storm till they found out I served then they got real quiet. HMMMNN kinda makes ya wonder.
BTW I was never in combat and was in field artillery, remember

FIELD ARTILLERYMEN DO IT WITH A BIGGER BANG!!!:bigsmyl2:

[montana_charlie]

I am not so sure that lack of firearms/shooting experience might not be an advantage when teaching a guy to shoot and take data from his spotter.
It would kinda' nullify the value of our DCM program, wouldn't it?
'Civilian Marksmanship can be thought of as having some shooting ability in those people who might be needed in a 'call out the militia' scenario ... where training time doesn't exist.

When it comes to teaching a recruit to shoot and manage a military weapon, it is much easier if the recruit starts out saying , "I don't know nuthin'." than it is when he proclaims "I already know it all."

The latter type usually have to be un-taught a lot of stuff before they can start to learn what they need to know.

CM

[Dragoon 45]

Retired Army Infantry, 11Z5P. Retired just prior to New Years 2005 after my second deployment to Afghanistan and being asked to volunteer to go to Iraq after being home just three weeks. Went through the rilfe range part of sniper school once, but was never a qualified sniper, I was part of the permanent Range Detail and talked myself into that part of the school. Most guys I have met who claimed to be snipers were frauds plain and simple. Just like all the Non-vets who claim to be vets with lots of medals for heroism, I have never understood why they did that. Every verifiable sniper I have ever met, was very close mouthed about their training and/or accomplishments, never met a true sniper who bragged about what they did or even talked that much about it.

The US Army has had a love-hate relationship with sniper training. Sniper Schools were set up during WW I, WW II, Korea, and Vietnam, but it was only after Vietnam that a permanent sniper school was set up. The various interwar periods saw the sniper programs disbanded due to lack of funds and lack of interest by Army Brass. The USMC on the other hand kept some type of sniper program alive from the End of WW II on that I can verify with some sources saying the Marines had a sniper program post WW I on.

In regards to the Squad Designated Marksman, they can be issued an M-14 with optics, an M-14 EBR with optics, an M-21, an accurized HB M-16 with optics, an AR-10 variation, or whatever else is available. Even saw some carrying SVD's in Afghanistan. AFAIK the weapon for the SDM has not been standardized yet as the Army hasn't made a decision on what it should be and even if the weapon has been selected, production has not started yet. So pretty much anything available is being used right now. From personnal experience in Afghanistan, the SDM program is very useful and meets a need, but is a bandaid for a larger problem. I believe that the majority of the Squad's members should be armed with 7.62mm rifles not the M-4's that are useless past 150 yards.

[pdawg_shooter]

Seems like the M14 just wont go away. Great rifle!

[*Paladin*]

On the show top shot this season there is a guy claiming to be a Air Force sniper. I am not going to go and say there is no such thing but I have never heard of it. Many careers in the military has cross training into related fields that are needed so they might go to the sniper school to get additional related training such as Para rescue that has to recover a downed pilot. So attending that school, they might call themself a sniper and the school would probably be a shorter version of the sniper school. The AF has never taken shooting as seriously as I think they should but it's because they have a different mission than the other armed forces.

Yes, there are absolutely snipers in the Air Force. I am Security Forces in the AF. We are the Defender's of the Force. We are the AF's infantry and MP's. We have snipers (Close-Precision Engagement Teams and ADM (Advanced Designated Marksmen), and they are trained by the US Army. We use M107's and M24's for our sniping role.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Air_Force_Security_Forces

[cajun shooter]

Dragoon 45, You are dead on about the ending of our sniper programs after each war. What I never understood was the reasoning behind those decisions. Any one that has been in the military knows of all the waste that goes on. I saw whole hams and chickens being thrown away after mess was over and coming from a very poor family was in complete shock. This was in 1965. I asked a cook why they did that and he said that they deliver my food based on a company strength of men. If I have 25 or more soldiers who don't show up for mess then I have to get rid of it for the next load or I will run out of storage room. I still can vision that food when I see all the hungry people we have on the streets. My point is that is just one small part of waste of funds and it would not take that much compared to other cost to maintain a sniper program with the men deployed to different infantry, airborne, light mechanized units. The Green Berets had the same fate after Viet Nam. There was a General which my old mind will not recall that hated the units. I can only guess that he was jealous of the ability that they had. He went out of his way to have the entire training program dis mantled. It took a lot of man hours to regain the training that was lost because of this stupid move. The M 14 was the weapon that we trained with in basic. The 16 was a new system at that time and was only issued in AIT. For the type of war that we were in at that time the 16 was a good choice even though the Seal teams kept some 14's. I can't imagine what our troops are doing in such open terrain as we find ourselves in today. Thank You for Your Service and Welcome Home. Later David

[161]

I carried the office scoped rifle for 10 years. I attended "Sniper Spotter Training", taught by the Iowa Law Enforcement Academy and FBI. I never liked being called a sniper, I didn't think I earned the right to be put in the same class as military guys who put themselves in harms way. The training I went through consisted of field-craft. I enjoy that the most. Ballistics, observation, intelligence reporting, range estimation range cards reading the wind, position shooting and more but it's been 15 or more years ago. I watched a video once with Carlos Hathcock.(SP?). As you know he was a competitive shooting for the USMC before being deployed in Vietnam. When asked if he reloaded he said 'I'm a launch platform don't reload don't work on guns just send rnds. down range". Hathcock even referred to LE snipers a surgical marksmen.
Warren

[c3d4b2]

From conversations with individuals in the military armament selection I have the impression that someone else in the military organization selected the rifle and ammo for the snipers to use. With this in mind, I am not surprised that a sniper would know little about ballistic coefficients or different rifles. I would think snipers would be knowledgeable on how to make corrections to deliver the bullet on target.

[deltaenterprizes]

I knew a guy that was trained as a sniper in the Marine Corps when Carlos Hathcock was there.He was a hell of a shot and my scores increased when I shot the military high power rifle match and he was my spotter. He is a good old boy from West Virginia, never told stories and I never asked, this thread made me think of him. Lack of work in the 80s made him move back home from the New Orleans area. I think I will look up his number and give him a call.

[82nd airborne]

From conversations with individuals in the military armament selection I have the impression that someone else in the military organization selected the rifle and ammo for the snipers to use. With this in mind, I am not surprised that a sniper would know little about ballistic coefficients or different rifles. I would think snipers would be knowledgeable on how to make corrections to deliver the bullet on target.

The BC is important as you need it to determine the bullets flight path for different wind, altitude, temerature, humidity, and a host of other conditions. Its not so much a necessity for urban battlefields where alot of the shooting is 200-500 yards, but in mountainous regions it is a necessary part of the equation.

[Simonpie]

I've never met a sniper, but I've met a few Israelis. Seems every one was a special forces paratrooper.
Then again, Israel has a draft and a short service time, so there could be a lot of them around.

[jcwit]

It would kinda' nullify the value of our DCM program, wouldn't it?


We no longer have a DCM Program.

We do have a CMP aka Cilivian Marksman Program. But it is not federally funded and is self supporting.

[cajun shooter]

Every person born in Israel has to serve in the military be they man or woman. They also kept a weapon at home. The neutral Swiss have a similar law but the training is not as intense. They had a lady write into a newspaper and ask why the Israelis have no problems at their airports. The answer is that they only have one. I feel that todays military is very shorthanded because of the draft being stopped. When I became 18 in 1965 every male was made to sign up for it and by written law you were obligated to six years of service. That service was broken down to two years of active, two years of reserve duty and two years of stand by. I did not wait for the draft as all my kin on both sides served and I enlisted. The poor soliders today who did the correct thing in serving their country are being mistreated big time by having to serve 2,3, even 4 tours of duty while the rest stand by and enjoy all the USA offers with out paying any dues. I have two sons and when they became of age I took them down to the local offices and put one in the Marines and one in the Army. We are able to do what we want today because of all those who went before us. This country has lost that and it is a shameful thing to see. I don't think that a man should be able to run and be President of this great country with out knowing to what and where he is sending our troops in harms way. I'm off the box.

[blasternank]

Every male is required to sign up for the "Selective Service" or draft when he is 18. The military from what they claim is a better military as a result of having it a volunteer military where people voluntarily join and are there because they want to be there. That's just what I've read.

I do believe that we should have something for people so they understand the military and hopefully will pay attention to what is going on in the world. I can't stand seeing these people yelling about they have rights and have no idea what goes into receiving those rights. Plus service teaches patriotism and being an informed and involved citizen for the rest of their lives.

[Rangefinder]

For those not in "the know", it's always been my experience that they believe a sniper to be the "magical shooter" that shoots a target from a mile away and little more. Hollywood doesn't help much. I've met quite a few with amazing stories (insert eye-roll here).

Are snipers an elite class? In my opinion, not so much--being a sniper is just being in a different class from standard infantry. Everyone has a role to fill. More often than not, a sniper's role doesn't even involve taking a shot. Observation and Recon are primary. Sniper training involves a great deal of things NOT involved with shooting---camouflage,, stalking, concealment, observation and recognition skills, independent thinking, etc... I don't care if someone can put a round through an apple at 1500 meters. If they can't hide their presence in a snow storm at night or tell the difference between a tank and a water truck, they aren't worth squat in the field.

On a side note, in my experience someone with NO rifle skills prior to training often makes a better shooter than someone that has prior experience. They will learn what they're taught and adhere to it without having a lot of bad habits to correct or overcome.

[44fanatic]

On a side note, in my experience someone with NO rifle skills prior to training often makes a better shooter than someone that has prior experience. They will learn what they're taught and adhere to it without having a lot of bad habits to correct or overcome.

Concur on this last comment. At basic training, my Drill Sergeant stated that he hated the guys with a hunting background...to many bad habits (non military form) to break. Saw it in myself when we ramped up for Afghanistan in 2008. They Army, or at least here at Fort Campbell, had started sending NCO's for training as Unit Small Arms Master Gunners. Over a 3 month period (not 3 months continious) they were trained on new to the Army shooting form, techniques, weapons maintenance, etc. My buddy went to the training, and suffered the pain of running all the ranges later. Taught me to break some old habits like releasing the trigger as soon as you shoot and holding the trigger after the shot. Once released, bringing the trigger back to the breaking point and holding it there until the next shot. My groups and qualification scores improved greatly after that...1st time in a 21 year career that I ever fired expert.

He said allot of the sources of training input were from LE, military marksman/sniper schools, competitive shooters and self defense classes.

[Dragoon 45]

Concur on this last comment. At basic training, my Drill Sergeant stated that he hated the guys with a hunting background...to many bad habits (non military form) to break. Saw it in myself when we ramped up for Afghanistan in 2008. They Army, or at least here at Fort Campbell, had started sending NCO's for training as Unit Small Arms Master Gunners. Over a 3 month period (not 3 months continious) they were trained on new to the Army shooting form, techniques, weapons maintenance, etc. My buddy went to the training, and suffered the pain of running all the ranges later. Taught me to break some old habits like releasing the trigger as soon as you shoot and holding the trigger after the shot. Once released, bringing the trigger back to the breaking point and holding it there until the next shot. My groups and qualification scores improved greatly after that...1st time in a 21 year career that I ever fired expert.

He said allot of the sources of training input were from LE, military marksman/sniper schools, competitive shooters and self defense classes.

I can't speak to anything past my retirement, but up till 2005 Army Marksmanship Training was non-existent for line infantry. They went to the range twice a year to qualify on pop-up targets that were engaged in a specific order. If they were lucky they went through a one day CQB (close quarters battle) trainup before deployment, that actually taught very little. Very little training was done on KD ranges were marksmanship is actually learned. After learning marksmanship in the USMC in the early 70's, I was appalled with the very poor training the Army provided to most infantry. In 20 plus years in the Army, I was never in a unit that had over 5% qualified as Expert and normally every unit I was in had at least 15% that could not qualify with anything but a 5.56mm pencil. The units always reported that all infantrymen had qualified with their assigned weapon but in a lot of cases they qualified with the aforementioned 5.56mm Pencil.

Unfortunately, from what I have been hearing, the USMC is slipping in the Marksmanship training area also. They are still better at it than the Army, but don't put near the emphasis on it they did 20-30 years ago.

I guess DADT repeal training and figuring out how to deploy women in the infantry are much more important than marksmanship training in today's military. I count my lucky stars I retired when I did.

[82nd airborne]

I can't speak to anything past my retirement, but up till 2005 Army Marksmanship Training was non-existent for line infantry. They went to the range twice a year to qualify on pop-up targets that were engaged in a specific order. If they were lucky they went through a one day CQB (close quarters battle) trainup before deployment, that actually taught very little. Very little training was done on KD ranges were marksmanship is actually learned. After learning marksmanship in the USMC in the early 70's, I was appalled with the very poor training the Army provided to most infantry. In 20 plus years in the Army, I was never in a unit that had over 5% qualified as Expert and normally every unit I was in had at least 15% that could not qualify with anything but a 5.56mm pencil. The units always reported that all infantrymen had qualified with their assigned weapon but in a lot of cases they qualified with the aforementioned 5.56mm Pencil.

Unfortunately, from what I have been hearing, the USMC is slipping in the Marksmanship training area also. They are still better at it than the Army, but don't put near the emphasis on it they did 20-30 years ago.

I guess DADT repeal training and figuring out how to deploy women in the infantry are much more important than marksmanship training in today's military. I count my lucky stars I retired when I did.

I think most line dogs train on an almost daily basis. CQB training is almost constant. I can remember going into the field for a month at a time for constant training, minus about 4 hours a night for sleep. We shot at least 2-3 times a week.
Even in your company AO, when nothing is going on, Your not a good leader if you dont pull weapons out of the cage and make your men train. I remember almost no idle time, because if there was, we would organize low level training right there on the spot. We would practice room clearing by raiding our neiboring units buildings.

[82nd airborne]

Also, in our particular unit, if you could not qualify expert, you were eitherr removed, or given an HQ job. It is still the same in many infantry units.

[Dragoon 45]

I think most line dogs train on an almost daily basis. CQB training is almost constant. I can remember going into the field for a month at a time for constant training, minus about 4 hours a night for sleep. We shot at least 2-3 times a week.
Even in your company AO, when nothing is going on, Your not a good leader if you dont pull weapons out of the cage and make your men train. I remember almost no idle time, because if there was, we would organize low level training right there on the spot. We would practice room clearing by raiding our neiboring units buildings.

There was a lot of training with weapons, but training ammo was in very short supply. Running battle drills, using MILES, patrolling, etc. used up a lot of training time but contributed very little to marksmanship. I was the 1SG in my last unit an Infantry HHC. My mortar plt could put rounds down range, but could not hit the broad side of a barn with their individual weapons. Our Scout Plt was again very good tactically, but their marksmanship sucked. My CS platoons were even worse regarding markmanship. All of these problems I attributed to a lack of training ammo and the poor state of marksmanship training in the Army. If somehow we managed to find some training ammo, we rarely got enough to fire every member of the company. For the pistol shooters we went 18 months without qualifying them due to lack of ammo. Our battalion forecast the ammo requirements every year, they ordered the ammo 120 days out for scheduled ranges, but always at the last minute the ASP would let us know they did not have the required ammo on hand.

In some ways, the new sights that the Army has issued (i.e. red dot, CQB, etc) makes up for some of the lack of training. But I have my doubts that most infantrymen could hit a target past 50 meters if they were forced to rely on iron sights.

I am told that marksmanship training has become much better in the last 4-5 years, but do not have any personnal experience to back that statement up.
The reports of infantry units shooting themselves dry in engagements in Afghanistan with attendent problems of weapons overheating and jamming suggest that there is still a lot of training needed in fire discipline and marksmanship.

I am not saying all infantryman can't shoot. There is always that 10% or so who will hit a target with their first round every time. The other 90% are the ones who worry me.

[TCLouis]

Like most any thread with one-upmanship, I will tell of a story I heard from Fred's second cousin once removed about working on the ranges.

This was set back in the early days of Iraq/Afghanistan (so it must be true).

As the story goes a unit came through the ranges getting pre-trained/qualified with individual weapons before being called up/trained up to be deployed . . .

They went out with a PCard and bought all the 9mm ammo they could from the stores (mostly WalMart) in three counties as they could not draw 9mm to qualify.

Course it is just a story and it happened a while back.

[Dragoon 45]

Like most any thread with one-upmanship, I will tell of a story I heard from Fred's second cousin once removed about working on the ranges.

This was set back in the early days of Iraq/Afghanistan (so it must be true).

As the story goes a unit came through the ranges getting pre-trained/qualified with individual weapons before being called up/trained up to be deployed . . .

They went out with a PCard and bought all the 9mm ammo they could from the stores (mostly WalMart) in three counties as they could not draw 9mm to qualify.

Course it is just a story and it happened a while back.

Not trying to one up anyone but, I have actually seen Reserve Units do that. Especially back in the early 90's when they still had 1911's and couldn't get .45 ammo. The army bought a lot of .45 ammo from Israel for some reason back in the late 80's, but during the change over to 9mm they didn't keep enough of a reserve stock. You could get 9mm all day long but couldn't get a box of .45 though the system. I have also seen units buy commercial 5.56mm so that soldiers could actually fire the 80 rds needed for a range qual, the ASP only issued 40 rds per soldier and totally ignored the other requirements of ammo for Night and NBC Quals. The Senior NCO's and Officers all chipped in to buy the ammo. This was during the Clinton years, when ammo budgets were slashed along with other training funds. It sucked then almost as much as it did under Carter.

But you can still get .30-06 and .30 carbine Ammo through the system to this day. Units order it all the time for rifle teams and other functions. I went to a retiree event last summer were they were letting us shoot a bunch of different rifles and MG's and the host unit brought out ammo cans full of Lake City .30-06, and M-1 Carbine ammo for us to shoot. We probably shot 3000 rds of .30-06 out of 1903's, M-1's, and an old BAR, along with 1500 or so carbine rounds out of a couple of M-2's in one afternoon. Had a blast. Then we also had a couple of SAW's, an M-240B, an M-24, a Ma Duece, and some foreign rifles also.