Are snipers and recon still valid in infantry battalions?

[Ken White]

For some of the same reasons that crew served weapons are usually kept seperate for training and garrison and attached out as needed. It seems to me that snipers and DMs would better trained under the supervision of a senior staff sergeant with sniper experience instead of a rifle squad leader who might not have any.

Totally agree with your logic but not the solution. First, a key distinction is just that 'crew served' -- keep the 'crew' together in both garrison and combat. Recall also that all the crew served weapons we have are best employed in multiples (yes, even the Javelin) so keeping the crew together for cohesion makes sense, training them altogether makes sense. Employing then together makes sense.

The designated marksman, to be most effective in combat should part of a crew involved in the fire and maneuver business. That crew is the squad so that's where he or she should be. The training issue in garrison is easily solved by scheduling the DM sustainment training so that they all get together under the senior Co (or Bn) DM / Sniper. In my view, you'd have two Sniper * tms at Co, a DM in every squad and the senior Sniper becomes the Co DM trainer. if there's also a Bn Sniper Tm or section, the leader becomes the Bn Master Shooter and oversees training.

Let me caveat all that by saying that's a here and now answer to your point. In a dream world, all the Squad Leaders (and thus the PSG) would have been DMs and would thus know how important the job was and would not neglect the training which they could conduct themselves. I'll add that 'dream' isn't at all hard to achieve -- all it would take is will power and an acknowledgment by the Army (and Congress) that not everyone who sticks around long enough and keeps his nose clean needs to be a Squad Leader...

It wouldn't have to be a .50 but wouldn't it be benificial for the company commander have some kind of heavy rifle available?

Yeah but I'd go with a .338 or similar on weight aspects.

Why, because you're just not a real sniper without a bolt rifle. Think about it. With a semi-auto you actually have to wait for gas to cycle the action before firing again, while a good man with a bolt rifle can.....

Yeah, yeah -- lot of tha going around...

Seriously though, I was just thinking that a semi-auto isn't as necessary once you're removed some distance from the firefight and perhaps operating in something closer to a true sniper role instead of a DM role, plus the M24 is still in the system and will be for some time, won't it?

Valid on all counts. My though is that to preclude identification by the other guys shooters and on logistic grounds, all the weapons in the Co that can possibly be similar should be, the more they all look and operate alike, the easier your training and the better to conphooze the evil enema. not a big thing, though...

But I'd be less concerned about what rifle is used and more concerned about grouping all snipers/DMs into a single squad for training and admin...Seems to me that concept sould also work well with snipers/DMs at rifle company level, that's all...As always, Sergeant Major, I look forward to your rebuttal!

here's my re -- the buttal was up above...

I hear you but I think that's a peace and not a warfighting approach -- it also neglects the fact that 'attachments' in combat do not work well, a guy cannot work for two masters and that the DM is an individual with an individual weapon as opposed to a crew with a crew served weapon. Combat cohesion is critical...

A lot of our poor structuring is a result of trying to make life easy in garrison and in peace time; unfortunately, while it works well there it often is a minor problem -- sometimes a major one -- in combat where there are so many bigger problems that the minor ones are overlooked. Not a good way to do it, IMO.