Page 4 of 12 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 227

Thread: Snipers Sniping & Countering them

  1. #61
    Council Member William F. Owen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    The State of Partachia, at the eastern end of the Mediterranean
    Posts
    3,947

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by William F. Owen View Post

    It takes no more time to teach someone to use a long range rifle with a good scope than it does to train them to use a guided weapon or SF GPMG.

    Modern sniping is far more about qualification than operational role.
    Quote Originally Posted by jcustis View Post
    Could you provide a little more detail as to why you believe those two statements?
    Happy to. When the UK ran the Platoon Manoeuvre Support Gun Controllers Course it was mandated as 20 days - 4 working weeks.

    I don't know about Javelin but I know the IDFs Spike MRs instructors course is 10 days. - 2 working weeks.

    In order to effectively employ a 8.6mm rifle all you have to know is how to use the weapon and the sight, plus the basics of application within platoon tactics. That can be taught in 10 working days, especially when assisted with modern PC training programs, to show how the mil-dot sighting system is used.

    Snipers have to not only learn but also qualify in a whole range of other skills.
    Infinity Journal "I don't care if this works in practice. I want to see it work in theory!"

    - The job of the British Army out here is to kill or capture Communist Terrorists in Malaya.
    - If we can double the ratio of kills per contact, we will soon put an end to the shooting in Malaya.
    Sir Gerald Templer, foreword to the "Conduct of Anti-Terrorist Operations in Malaya," 1958 Edition

  2. #62
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    11

    Default

    The Marine Corps' current rifleman, armed with a rifle combat optic, M16A4, and Gripod combination VFG/bipod closely approximates what a squad designated marksman needs to be capable of, if we ever had a need for one. No need to fancy Harris bipods or free-floating barrels. Enhanced training is the key for guys like that, but sustaining their training will always be the toughest part.
    ...I strongly believe that he needs a trained spotter. The spotter could be another equally capable DM, with his own weapon that is zero'd to his requirements.
    To my mind, and that of the British Army and IDF an "Marksman is merely member of a fire team equipped with a 5.56mm weapon with a 20-inch barrel, optic sight, and bipod. He should be able to consistently hit targets out to 6-800m.
    It seems that the current US experience is that a DM is as valued for observation skills as riflery skills, as in the example of Lance Cpl Wilson:

    http://www.military.com/features/0,1...ml?ESRC=dod.nl

    What's a good range requirement in an urbanized area? 800m...1,000m? We'd have to take a hard look at whether or not firing windows are posible out that far first, methinks.
    Snipers are making those kind of urban shots, but then again one of the USMC advanced sniper courses is urban sniping. I know of a major school that reports lots of requests for training in making shots at fleeting targets at 400-600m -- so this would be the critical consideration for DM training.

    To play the Devil's advocate, what are the advantages of a DM over an expert LMG gunner with a low-powered optic, the ability to squeeze off an accurate 3-5 round burst, and an assistant gunner acting as observer?

    Slightly different ways of going about it but both agreed that the DM should not be a member of a standard squad or fire team.
    As a historical footnote, one-per-squad was the plan in 1st Raiders. In each squad "Red Mike" had one "scout" who was supposed to be equipped with a scoped springfield in the original TO&E in the beginning of 1942. I've not found much on the Raider DM program, other than "Red Mike" dispatched Claude Harris back to set up the USMC West Coast sniping school in 1943. Lt Harris sent the top 5 graduates on to the Raider Training Center for 3 weeks of training (RTC was normally 8 weeks long). I don't know how many of the RTC-trained snipers went on to a Raider bn.

    In Afganistan, were a lot of patrols are carried out by company-sized units, the contact demands (often) long range precision fire, that even .50 MG's are not able to provide.
    The .338 Lapua is good out to roughly 1300 meters for an oxymoronic "average expert"-- this per a SOTIC plank holder -- just remember that snipers wish each other luck with "no wind, brother" for a reason! I know everyone wants to talk about amazing shots, but the attempts/successes formula has to be applied here.

    Modern sniping is far more about qualification than operational role.
    We might be wise to avoid thread drift into sniping!

    I believe I understand what you're saying -- the historical evolution of sniping in the UK has led to the identification of a cluster of basic skill sets (scout-sniper-observer) that are infused into a soldier who then applies those to circumstances. American sniping has been hugely influenced by the UK -- the real, practical, and mostly unknown historical evolution of modern sniping, avoiding the confusion caused by history's broken threads.

    I would like to say that the various current American military sniping programs do have slightly different qualifications depending upon perceived operational roles -- regular Army, USMC, and AF all currently run sniper programs here, and various commands within SOCOM run separate programs as well. In terms of comparison and contrast, for example, when the SEALs transitioned from dependence on the USMC basic course to their own (with SBS input), they created an 11-week course that included 2 weeks of photographic reconnaissance training. The Air Force school, on the other hand, gears itself largely to counter-terrorism/police SWAT-style operations and counter-sniper operations. In the American private sector I would describe the McMillan program as the most British, since they hired Mark Spicer to help run it!

  3. #63
    Council Member William F. Owen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    The State of Partachia, at the eastern end of the Mediterranean
    Posts
    3,947

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Schuld View Post
    I believe I understand what you're saying -- the historical evolution of sniping in the UK has led to the identification of a cluster of basic skill sets (scout-sniper-observer) that are infused into a soldier who then applies those to circumstances. American sniping has been hugely influenced by the UK -- the real, practical, and mostly unknown historical evolution of modern sniping, avoiding the confusion caused by history's broken threads.

    In the American private sector I would describe the McMillan program as the most British, since they hired Mark Spicer to help run it!
    I'm impressed! Yes you are right!

    I may want you on my side when I get into a huge bug fight with the Sniper Wing up at Brecon!

    Mark Spicer as in the Sniper Instructor who wrote the book? Really? Good for him.
    Infinity Journal "I don't care if this works in practice. I want to see it work in theory!"

    - The job of the British Army out here is to kill or capture Communist Terrorists in Malaya.
    - If we can double the ratio of kills per contact, we will soon put an end to the shooting in Malaya.
    Sir Gerald Templer, foreword to the "Conduct of Anti-Terrorist Operations in Malaya," 1958 Edition

  4. #64
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    499

    Default

    So, several folks have advocated four long range Riflemen per platoon as being about right. That's twelve for a company.

    Now, if you put all twelve Riflemen in one squad under an experienced squad leader for administration and training, and made that squad part of a company weapons platoon, and attached four Riflemen out to each rifle platoon for operations.....

    And if the company weapons platoon was led by a warrant officer weapons specialist who had once been an NCO, something similar to the Marine Gunners.....

    Just thoughts, just thoughts.
    Last edited by Rifleman; 12-24-2007 at 05:13 AM.
    "Pick up a rifle and you change instantly from a subject to a citizen." - Jeff Cooper

  5. #65
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    499

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jcustis View Post
    What if they are all fresh out of a DM course and the platoon commander and platoon sergeant aren't good marksmen, or are more concerned with fire and maneuver? Slapping a more powerful or variable scope on the rifle would not necessarily mean that they are training to a higher standard, but perhaps simply carrying more weight.
    I think my proposal would guard against that.

    A DM or two at the platoon level would be more appropriate in my mind. DMs are great for static security/defensive ops, but less so for dismounted offensive operations. However, even if he is not going to be out on the stalk, I strongly believe that he needs a trained spotter. The spotter could be another equally capable DM, with his own weapon that is zero'd to his requirements. Two teams of two DMs apiece and (4) rifles would permit continuous operations from a static position for somewhere around 12-24 hours.
    Again, four long range Riflemen per platoon, but only for operations. I think having them live with the rest of the Riflemen in a single squad in a company weapons platoon is the best option. That way they can be mentored by an experienced squad leader and, in an ideal world, a weapons platoon leader who is a warrant officer.
    Last edited by Rifleman; 12-24-2007 at 05:14 AM.
    "Pick up a rifle and you change instantly from a subject to a citizen." - Jeff Cooper

  6. #66
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    717

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rifleman View Post
    So, several folks have advocated four long range Riflemen per platoon as being about right. That's twelve for a company.

    Now, if you put all twelve Riflemen in one squad under an experienced squad leader for administration and training, and made that squad part of a company weapons platoon, and attached four Riflemen out to each rifle platoon for operations.....

    And if the company weapons platoon was led by a warrant officer weapons specialist who had once been an NCO, something similar to the Marine Gunners.....

    Just thoughts, just thoughts.
    While we're at it, how 'bout we call them Jaegars?

  7. #67
    Council Member jcustis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    SOCAL
    Posts
    2,152

    Default

    And if the company weapons platoon was led by a warrant officer weapons specialist who had once been an NCO, something similar to the Marine Gunners.....
    My, my, my. That would be a splendid idea given the inherent complexity of heavier weapons. The difficulty lies in that it isn't easy to grow Marine Gunners. At least in the Corps, there would have to be a significant T/O shift to bring about that manpower change, and I don't know if the computer models could find a way to do it without tearing a hole in the fabric of the infantry. The selection of Marine Gunners is a carefully managed process, from what I know. No room for slackers or grunts who have been "faking the funk," along the way. I imagine there is still a sufficient pool to screen from.

    One of the limiting factors is that this Wpns Plt commander would have to complete our Infantry Officer Course (unless a separate course was built up and out of the current Small Arms Weapons Instructor Cource [SAWIC]). Definitely an interesting idea, but the manpower tables are almost too much inertia.

    Back to the DM issue, I think retaining this squad or so at the Wpns Plt level indeed makes sense. Keep the weapon something of the 7.62x51mm variety. It keeps another caliber out of the logistics grinder, and in a pinch, straight ball ammunition can be employed. We certainly did so with our M-14s, although every now and then the special "white box" ammo would show up and it was considered a gem to have it due to its ballistic consistency.

    If we could go back a bit to what Schuld spoke of, what would we have DMs do? What sort of enabler do we want them to be? It is an important question b/c it means a lot to say that you want a basically-trained grunt to receive additional training on a heavier-caliber weapon and precision optic for the purpose of engagin targets beyond normal riflemen range, and means something considerable different to say you want him to be a keen observer, supporting arms controller, etc.

    In order to complete the in-house DM package that FAST Co was running back in the '91-'95 timeframe, I underwent something on the order of a week training in scouting skills (classroom), followed by another 10 days of actual patrolling exercises with a section of DMs, and eventually a 10 day shooting package that included unknown/known distance shooting and field stalks. Considering our employment envelope, I considered myself well-trained.

  8. #68
    Council Member slapout9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    4,818

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jcustis View Post
    Back to the DM issue, I think retaining this squad or so at the Wpns Plt level indeed makes sense. Keep the weapon something of the 7.62x51mm variety. It keeps another caliber out of the logistics grinder, and in a pinch, straight ball ammunition can be employed. We certainly did so with our M-14s, although every now and then the special "white box" ammo would show up and it was considered a gem to have it due to its ballistic consistency.

    If we could go back a bit to what Schuld spoke of, what would we have DMs do? What sort of enabler do we want them to be? It is an important question b/c it means a lot to say that you want a basically-trained grunt to receive additional training on a heavier-caliber weapon and precision optic for the purpose of engaging targets beyond normal riflemen range, and means something considerable different to say you want him to be a keen observer, supporting arms controller, etc.
    I think this is a better direction to go. If we could create better marksman of all rifleman you would always have a personnel pool to choose from..you-you-you are designated marksman for this mission afterwords you revert back to your original job.

  9. #69
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    499

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Norfolk View Post
    While we're at it, how 'bout we call them Jaegars?
    Noooo! Few of the son's of the son's of Ulster who killed Patrick Ferguson at Kings Mountain would have identified with that word. I liked your first idea better: Riflemen, since the men with M4s are really modern Carbineers.

    Now, what's the matter? Is my signature getting to you again? You know, I could always change it to this for you and Wilf:

    "If all else fails, I will retreat up the valley of Virginia, plant my flag on the Blue Ridge, rally around the Scotch-Irish of that region, and make my last stand for liberty amongst a people who will never submit to British tyranny whilst there is a man left to draw a trigger" - George Washington at Valley Forge

    Merry Christmas and no taxation without representation!
    "Pick up a rifle and you change instantly from a subject to a citizen." - Jeff Cooper

  10. #70
    Council Member William F. Owen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    The State of Partachia, at the eastern end of the Mediterranean
    Posts
    3,947

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rifleman View Post

    Now, what's the matter? Is my signature getting to you again? You know, I could always change it to this for you and Wilf:
    Hey buddy, don't touch nothing. My wife's grand parents both served time in British jails as terrorists. In fact, her grand parents organisation made several attempts on my grand fathers life!
    Infinity Journal "I don't care if this works in practice. I want to see it work in theory!"

    - The job of the British Army out here is to kill or capture Communist Terrorists in Malaya.
    - If we can double the ratio of kills per contact, we will soon put an end to the shooting in Malaya.
    Sir Gerald Templer, foreword to the "Conduct of Anti-Terrorist Operations in Malaya," 1958 Edition

  11. #71
    i pwnd ur ooda loop selil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Belly of the beast
    Posts
    2,112

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rifleman View Post
    Now, what's the matter? Is my signature getting to you again?
    It should be Scots Irish. You drink Scotch.
    Sam Liles
    Selil Blog
    Don't forget to duck Secret Squirrel
    The scholarship of teaching and learning results in equal hatred from latte leftists and cappuccino conservatives.
    All opinions are mine and may or may not reflect those of my employer depending on the chance it might affect funding, politics, or the setting of the sun. As such these are my opinions you can get your own.

  12. #72
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    499

    Default

    Yes, I've heard that and I understand that Scots or Scottish is the accepted term for people in Scotland. I'm certainly willing to acknowledge the Scots by whatever they want to be called.

    But on the North American frontier the Ulster immigrants and their descendants called themselves Scotch-Irish, or "Scotch-Arsh" as my Appalachian grandpa would have said. It's an established term in those circles that goes back a ways:

    http://www.scotchirish.net/What%20ab...he%20name.php4

    Besides, they started making liquor out of corn almost as soon as they landed so they certainly didn't need to reserve the term Scotch for whiskey.

    I reckon we've gone off course a ways, haven't we?
    Last edited by Rifleman; 12-25-2007 at 04:36 AM.
    "Pick up a rifle and you change instantly from a subject to a citizen." - Jeff Cooper

  13. #73
    i pwnd ur ooda loop selil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Belly of the beast
    Posts
    2,112

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rifleman View Post
    I reckon we've gone off course a ways, haven't we?
    Yes we have but it was welcome on this cold evening. And, if you had my last name you'd understand the issue.
    Sam Liles
    Selil Blog
    Don't forget to duck Secret Squirrel
    The scholarship of teaching and learning results in equal hatred from latte leftists and cappuccino conservatives.
    All opinions are mine and may or may not reflect those of my employer depending on the chance it might affect funding, politics, or the setting of the sun. As such these are my opinions you can get your own.

  14. #74
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    717

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rifleman View Post
    Noooo! Few of the son's of the son's of Ulster who killed Patrick Ferguson at Kings Mountain would have identified with that word. I liked your first idea better: Riflemen, since the men with M4s are really modern Carbineers.

    Now, what's the matter? Is my signature getting to you again? You know, I could always change it to this for you and Wilf:

    "If all else fails, I will retreat up the valley of Virginia, plant my flag on the Blue Ridge, rally around the Scotch-Irish of that region, and make my last stand for liberty amongst a people who will never submit to British tyranny whilst there is a man left to draw a trigger" - George Washington at Valley Forge

    Merry Christmas and no taxation without representation!
    Quite agreed on the "Rifleman" title for DMs - "Jaeger" (hehe) was a bit of a wind-up...and it worked! [Norfolk grins to self]

    Ahhh, now I know where your true loyalities lie Rifleman...and I have been known to haunt the forests, mountains, and Bourbon distilleries of Appalacha'...but not necessarily in that order - and Bardstown!
    I have Scots-Irish (Scotch-Arsh, just for you Rifleman) on my mother's American side - they came to the US rather late, in the 18th century.

    I have never had the pleasure of traversing the fair Valley of the Shenandoah, nor the Blue Ridge, but I will take Phil Sheridan at his word that it makes for a rich and quite pleasant foraging ground...

    And I do protest your implied assertion, Sir, that the denizens of Westminster are somehow less preferable to their upstart counterparts situated adjacent to Georgetown in handling matters of Public Taxation and Finance. I can discern no benefit to be had by having their lot so close at hand; indeed, had it not been for that Tax Revolt you fellows refer to as a "War of Independence", you might still possess the benefits of a lower tax rate, as what was levied in the Colonies was only a fraction of what was levied in the Mother Country...They after all, had Westminster resident amongst them, and had to pay for their immediate wants.

    You see, "Taxation Without Representation" was actually a ticket to a lower Tax Burden than what you have now - with the added benefit of having the leviers of said Burden resident Over There. Hah! Now what do you say of your little Revolution now, eh whot?

    But in all fairness, if it wasn't for my 1/8th Scots-Irish ancestry, I wouldn't be the Redneck Country Boy that I am today.

    I do have a question for Wilf re the .338 Lapua/8.6 mm: A fine cartridge to be sure, but would the benefits of such a powerful round be unnecessary for a true Rifleman, even in the Skirmishing and Marksman roles - would not something in the 6.5 to 7.62 mm range be quite sufficient? I am concerned because the .338 is not suited for rapid-fire if that were needed, or is there another reason besides range and AP performance for considering the .338 in the Rifleman role?
    Last edited by Norfolk; 12-26-2007 at 04:30 PM.

  15. #75
    Council Member William F. Owen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    The State of Partachia, at the eastern end of the Mediterranean
    Posts
    3,947

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Norfolk View Post

    I do have a question for Wilf re the .338 Lapua/8.6 mm: A fine cartridge to be sure, but would the benefits of such a powerful round be unnecessary for a true Rifleman, even in the Skirmishing and Marksman roles - would not something in the 6.5 to 7.62 mm range be quite sufficient? I am concerned because the .338 is not suited for rapid-fire if that were needed, or is there another reason besides range and AP performance for considering the .338 in the Rifleman role?
    All good questions.

    a.) 8.6mm has a very flat trajectory. Even I can hit 1 x 0.5m boards at 1,000m.

    b.) As concerns "skirmishing" the LRR operator has the same status as a GPMG gunner, except he can sling the thing on his back and carry a carbine. In an Owen Fire Team Group / Platoon, they would replace LMG gunners in the Recce teams.

    c.) Unlike a .50, it can be fired from one knee, which becomes an issue in places that have terrain like Cyprus or the Lebanon, or that have long grass.

    The reason I have studied the 8.6mm a fair bit is that it gives the platoon a measurable increase in performance for little added weight compared to other systems.
    Infinity Journal "I don't care if this works in practice. I want to see it work in theory!"

    - The job of the British Army out here is to kill or capture Communist Terrorists in Malaya.
    - If we can double the ratio of kills per contact, we will soon put an end to the shooting in Malaya.
    Sir Gerald Templer, foreword to the "Conduct of Anti-Terrorist Operations in Malaya," 1958 Edition

  16. #76
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    499

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Norfolk View Post
    You see, "Taxation Without Representation" was actually a ticket to a lower Tax Burden than what you have now - with the added benefit of having the leviers of said Burden resident Over There. Hah! Now what do you say of your little Revolution now, eh whot?
    Y'know, I think he's implying that if George III and Cornwallis hadn't been such wankers that I'd be proud to still be a subject instead of a citizen.

    But in all fairness, if it wasn't for my 1/8th Scots-Irish ancestry, I wouldn't be the Redneck Country Boy that I am today.
    There's hope for you!

    Back on topic. I'm interested in hearing what others think about having a single squad of long range Riflemen in a company weapons platoon and attaching them to rifle platoons for operations.

    Edson's squad sharpshooters in the 1st Raider Battalion didn't become standardized throughout the Marine Corps. There must be a reason for that.
    "Pick up a rifle and you change instantly from a subject to a citizen." - Jeff Cooper

  17. #77
    Council Member William F. Owen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    The State of Partachia, at the eastern end of the Mediterranean
    Posts
    3,947

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rifleman View Post
    @ Back on topic. I'm interested in hearing what others think about having a single squad of long range Riflemen in a company weapons platoon and attaching them to rifle platoons for operations.

    @ Edson's squad sharpshooters in the 1st Raider Battalion didn't become standardized throughout the Marine Corps. There must be a reason for that.
    @ I do see some merit in having different organisations for skills training and operations. The problem is that the unreflective always come out with the train as you fight gibberish - like that's even possible!

    @ and it may not have been a good reason. Armies, especially infantry, rarely ever do stuff for good reasons. Emotion and opinion are VERY powerful.
    Infinity Journal "I don't care if this works in practice. I want to see it work in theory!"

    - The job of the British Army out here is to kill or capture Communist Terrorists in Malaya.
    - If we can double the ratio of kills per contact, we will soon put an end to the shooting in Malaya.
    Sir Gerald Templer, foreword to the "Conduct of Anti-Terrorist Operations in Malaya," 1958 Edition

  18. #78
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    717

    Thumbs up

    QUOTE=Rifleman:

    There's hope for you!
    The Redneck International (REDINTERN) knows no borders!

    Back on topic. I'm interested in hearing what others think about having a single squad of long range Riflemen in a company weapons platoon and attaching them to rifle platoons for operations.

    Edson's squad sharpshooters in the 1st Raider Battalion didn't become standardized throughout the Marine Corps. There must be a reason for that.
    I suspect that the reason for Raider Squad Sharpshooters not becoming standard in the rest of the USMC may have been the preference to pool specialists at Company level, especially when so much of the regular USMC was involved in frontal-attacks during the Island-Hopping Campaigns. The constant close-combat conditions of Guadalcanal were not quite the same elsewhere I imagine - Iwo Jima, Tarawa, Okinawa, etc.

    I think that it is an interesting idea Rifleman, having a Squad of Sharpshooters at Coy level, and attaching them out as needed. Normally I woul say that it would make training and coordination better and easier, and it would be. Now, I'm not certain that would be necessary, or even desirable because the main role of said Sharpshooters as it occurrs to me is to support Platoons and especially Squads during the Firefight. My main concern here is that the Sharpshooters might become distracted from that if held at Company level and attached out from there. I think that I am of two minds on this.

    As I seem to understand it, while the Squads are dealing with the close-in enemy (within 200-400 m, or even less), the Sharpshooters are dealing with the enemy behind said close-in enemy (out to 600-800 m, or even more if using the .338 Lapua that Wilf recommends), and that is usually a Platoon fight, but in direct support of the Squads. At times, cover and visibility restrictions will require the Sharpshooters to be attached directly to the Squads. Beyond 800 m really is a Company fight most of the time (and in some cases, much less than that).

    But if a Squad of Sharpshooters were held at Coy level, they could form not only a potent Sharpshooting element, but also a very potent Skirmishing and Scouting element as well. In the hands of a skilled Coy Cmdr, they could really ruin an enemy's day (unless that enemy were Mech Infantry or Armour), and only using a fraction of the Coy's forces to do so. Just imagine, for a moment, what trouble a single skillful Sniper can raise for a Company or even a Battalion in some cases. Now just imagine what a dozen or so Sharpshooters (albeit obviously not of Sniper-calibre) could do, especially if their Rifles were capable of automatic fire as well as single-shot. Small teams of expert Markmen with good rifles (heavy barrel, optical sights, and bipod) and unsocial manners harassing an enemy Rifle Company or Battalion a few clicks in front of one's positions, or scouting ahead and to the flanks on the advance, could cause the enemy some consternation. And particularly if said Sharpshooters were able to distract the enemy's attention while our own Company moved to accord them an even warmer reception.

    This seems to me to be something a little along the lines of what Ken might thing of (I think that I may be beginning to understand how the Old Dinosaur's mind works, and that frightens me a little!). Great idea Rifleman.
    Last edited by Norfolk; 12-27-2007 at 05:38 PM.

  19. #79
    Council Member Tom Odom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    DeRidder LA
    Posts
    3,949

    Default

    The Redneck International (REDINTERN) knows no borders!
    That's why we have mobile homes!

    Seriously we did some work on this issue in the Company-level SOSO series of newsletters. CALL Newsletter 06-16 VOL 6 Tactical Marksmanship and Counter Sniper Ops. As it is FOUO you will have to look for it on the CALL gateway. Note also that we made use of a USMC X-File on desgnated Marksmen as well.

    Best

    Tom

  20. #80
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    FBGA
    Posts
    26

    Default

    Interesting post, so here's my two cents.

    As a PL in Iraq (TST PLT for 502nd IN CMD GRP), I already have DM. Usually, but not universally all line companies (no idea about heavy units) are MTOE at least 4-6 M14s. They usually distribute those over the Co. In most cases they are given to the best shots or preferable shooters who have gone through sniper classes. At Campbell SF units will regularly run advanced shooting classes.

    In Plt. you will then take those shooters and put them on patrol with that weapons system with either an scope 3x9x30 or an ACOG. Depending on your mission you can form Small Kill Teams to over watch ASRs or MSRs for IED emplacement or to catch insurgents at POO sites or as over watch elements.

    Your imagination is limit less to what you can use them for. As far as having them in a Sqd. in a PLT or attachment at Co is a bad idea. Control and supply/maintenance issues would suck. Everybody would want to play that's not my soldier game, except when they wanted them. Further, having 1 or 2 of them built in a platoon gives the PL flexibility to have them on a patrol in the streets, over watch, or be put in a hide site.

    I think its just best to have them integrated through out the company apart of platoons instead of forming some special section.

Similar Threads

  1. All matters Canadian / Canada
    By Jedburgh in forum Americas
    Replies: 133
    Last Post: 01-27-2019, 04:41 PM
  2. Are snipers and recon still valid in infantry battalions?
    By Kiwigrunt in forum Trigger Puller
    Replies: 231
    Last Post: 08-02-2016, 11:23 AM
  3. Replies: 29
    Last Post: 12-03-2014, 03:19 AM
  4. MAJ Ehrhart - Increasing Small Arms Lethality in Afgh.
    By SdunnyW506 in forum Trigger Puller
    Replies: 609
    Last Post: 04-22-2012, 02:10 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •