Automatic usage

cyclone

cyclone

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
379   0   0
Location
Toronto, Ontario
.

Mainly a question for present and former military, I suppose, and posted here as it seemed the best place for it....:yingyang:



Genuinely curious as to how much training and how much "experiential" use of automatic-fire occurred in your experience (note: not in a "receiving" sense!); in a recent In Range Q&A Ian & Karl seemed to imply that, for general American infantry, training & use of automatic-fire was minimal (but it didn't seem as though they were talking from personal experience)... :wave:



Anyhow, just curious.
 
Shooting an full auto is not different than shooting semi auto.

You are taught how to function the weapon and machine gun theory, ie how to use a beaten zone, rates of fire etc. Then you just use it. If you are a machine gunner as a position you might get a machine gun course where you learn indirect fire theory and techniques and some other advanced stuff, as well as get qualified on the bigger guns. But the majority do not get this, its just shoot it. This is for man portalbe guns, I didn't use the vech mounted guns.

Shawn
 
In the RCN we fire a lot of .50BMG so lots of auto there, there are manuals which describe burst lengths and other operating procedures. This is a directed weapon from a ship so there are some other factors as well.
We also have C6 and C9 machine guns, again operated on automatic..
The C8 Carbine is mostly used on semi auto however we do some training on automatic to practice controlling the rifle on automatic fire as well as for the fun factor. I can't see it being used on auto during operations from a naval perspective unless I wanted to unload a mag on a small boat or something.
 
It was used rarely as you still have to carry the ammo. It's used for specific purposes. Even as a big libertarian Auto as a civy just is not justifiable. I think the prohib guns should be restricted and restricted to a controlled status. 27 yrs in 5 tours, I wont say I never used it but it was few and far between.
 
cyclone said:
. Ian & Karl seemed to imply that, for general American infantry, training & use of automatic-fire was minimal ...
Click to expand...

Given that the general issue rifles and carbines for the US Army and Marines have no capability for full-auto fire, and haven't for over 30 years, I would say that is a safe conclusion.

The US experience with grunts in Vietnam did not paint a good picture of select fire for general use, so it was deleted from the M16A2, and remains deleted in the M16A4 and M4. Most US soliders will never even touch a shoulder rifle that has the capability to go automatic.
 
PPCLI-Jim said:
It was used rarely as you still have to carry the ammo. It's used for specific purposes. Even as a big libertarian Auto as a civy just is not justifiable. I think the prohib guns should be restricted and restricted to a controlled status. 27 yrs in 5 tours, I wont say I never used it but it was few and far between.
Click to expand...

Thank you for your service,
While I do fully agree with you that full auto has absolutely no practical use for a civilian shooter I think most here would like the freedom to try it and make the decision themselves as to if they "need" one.

It's not about need, it's about not being treated like criminals.
The government needs to stop looking at the tool and start looking at the person when bad things happen. Before you know it, our vehicles will all be fitted with sensors that pick up the speed limit for the road it's on and your speed will be governed to that speed so we can't break the law anymore.
Is that the world you fought for and risked your life for?
 
BattleRife said:
Given that the general issue rifles and carbines for the US Army and Marines have no capability for full-auto fire, and haven't for over 30 years, I would say that is a safe conclusion.

The US experience with grunts in Vietnam did not paint a good picture of select fire for general use, so it was deleted from the M16A2, and remains deleted in the M16A4 and M4. Most US soliders will never even touch a shoulder rifle that has the capability to go automatic.
Click to expand...

The M4A1 carbine has returned to full auto in lieu of the 3-round burst mode; likewise the Marines' M27 Infantry Automatic Rifle.

Burst fire as a function of the weapon is neither necessary or desirable:
1. The M16/M4 burst mechanism results in three different trigger pulls, which compromises shootability in semiauto.
2. Semiauto is the mode that should be used perhaps 99% of the time, anyway.
3. In the rare occasions that bursts of fire are required, it is prefereable that the shooter determine the length of the burst.

Generally, full auto is properly the scope of MGs/SAWs, as opposed to individual weapons.
 
It's worth giving TC 3-22.9 a read through if you can find a copy, the most current version of the USA's rifle and carbine training:

AUTOMATIC OR BURST FIRE

8-21. Automatic or burst fire is when the Soldier is required to provide suppressive fires with accuracy, and the need for precise fires, although desired, is not as important.

Automatic or burst fires drastically decrease the probability of hit due to the rapid succession of recoil impulses and the inability of the Soldier to maintain proper sight alignment and sight picture on the target.

8-22. Soldiers should be well-trained in all aspects of slow semiautomatic firing before attempting any automatic training.
 
BattleRife said:
Given that the general issue rifles and carbines for the US Army and Marines have no capability for full-auto fire, and haven't for over 30 years, I would say that is a safe conclusion.

The US experience with grunts in Vietnam did not paint a good picture of select fire for general use, so it was deleted from the M16A2, and remains deleted in the M16A4 and M4. Most US soliders will never even touch a shoulder rifle that has the capability to go automatic.
Click to expand...

The M4A1 is the standard infantry rifle of both the army and usmc now which is safe semi full FYI.

There are definite situations where full auto fire is pretty much a necessity. Counter Ambush, pretty much any form of the Aussie peel, any time you need to establish fire superiority others as well.
 
In my BMQ course we were instructed to never use the full-auto setting, as we're "supposed to be marksmen" and "actually hit what [we're] aiming at". Wouldn't even let us try some full auto fun at the range. However it could very well just be a BMQ thing, trying to save money on ammo costs or some nonsense. I'm not in a combat trade so I can't speak for how those guys actually train.
 
Im guessing you mean the c7 and c8 on automatic? A portion of pwt3 (personal weapons test) uses automatic fire. If I remember correctly it’s 2-3 3rd bursts from 25m and in. Full auto training on the c7 is minimal. It really depends on the unit, and who you worked for. If you had a sgt or two with the right courses and a good coc you could get training on it. It takes some practice to put a 30 rd mag on target and not get pushed off target.

There were lots of opportunities to fire the c9 and c6, if you wanted to. But again it depends on the unit.
 
bkelly4790 said:

The M4A1 is the standard infantry rifle of both the army and usmc now which is safe semi full FYI.
Click to expand...

I actually wasn't aware of that, I thought the M4A1 was still limited to special ops. But a quick search showed that they started issuing the M4A1 to regular units several years ago, and plan to convert their entire inventory, eventually. So lots of US soldiers do get to touch full auto carbines now.
 
A long time ago, far far away they trained to fire AK in short bursts. You set it to full auto, and use your trigger finger to shoot 2-4 rounds (ideally, 3). A single shot or more than 5 were penalized during qualifications (150-450 m, IIRC). A long burst (10 or more) could be used in very specific scenarios. Personal small arms were secondary / auxiliary to the firepower delivered by whatever is mounted on squad's APC, plus machine guns and grenade launchers (the latter shoot 40 mm in full auto).
 
In the CAF, the use of automatic fire with the rifle is very minimal. In the operational shooting programme, burst fire is only found in stage 3 practices, and as mentioned above, during the final serial of the PWT3 (@25m, two exposures, one burst at each, total of six rounds). During initial marksmanship training (conducted on BMQ), stage 2 is as far as it goes. Combat arms will progress further, theoretically firing all of the stage 3 practices and then firing the PWT3 (Personal Weapons Test 3). Once qualified to that level, as long as a memeber requalifies within 365 days, all that is required is to reshoot the test again. More often than not, this is what happens. Occasionally, time and ammo permitting, other shoots are conducted, but rarely those that focus on automatic fire.

After almost two decades of service as an infantry soldier, and a number of courses that focus on shooting (urban operations instructor, advanced small arms, field firing qual etc.), requalifying on my PWT3 each year is really the only automatic fire that I’m exposed to. Of course, there is the odd “fun” range where I, or another UOI, might run a range where we do some quick aim shooting and throw in some burst fire. There is a “stance check” drill where we illustrate proper balance and hold by having shooters fire a 30rnd burst in one pull, but aside from that, all semiauto firing.
 
cr5 said:
Thank you for your service,
While I do fully agree with you that full auto has absolutely no practical use for a civilian shooter I think most here would like the freedom to try it and make the decision themselves as to if they "need" one.

It's not about need, it's about not being treated like criminals.
The government needs to stop looking at the tool and start looking at the person when bad things happen. Before you know it, our vehicles will all be fitted with sensors that pick up the speed limit for the road it's on and your speed will be governed to that speed so we can't break the law anymore.
Is that the world you fought for and risked your life for?
Click to expand...

I agree 100% . Hence the modified res/prohib laws I mentioned. I don't see a need for it ,would like it though just to make sure my OPINION is clear. Definitely not a soccer mom needing to nerf pad everything. But realistically I definitely don't want them used by hunters,out on the open range. At the range yup, no problem
 
if/when you are in relativelyclose range (25-50yrds) and you KNOW 100% that everyone in the direction you are shooting IS a bad guy... full auto could serve a purpose (service rifle NOT actual machine gun, C9/C6/50cal)

or if entering a room/building/compound, again knowing 100% bad guys, then you could switch to auto, spray and force heads down while you dominate the room/area.


it's fun, but it's over in seconds and now you are empty and vulnerable.


having carried the C9 (auto 5.56mm light machine gun) I would take it into general battle again everyday of the week. but if clearing rooms/buildings, I'd prefer a well equipped C8 with a bunch of granades.
 
cr5 said:
Thank you for your service,
While I do fully agree with you that full auto has absolutely no practical use for a civilian shooter I think most here would like the freedom to try it and make the decision themselves as to if they "need" one.

It's not about need, it's about not being treated like criminals.
The government needs to stop looking at the tool and start looking at the person when bad things happen. Before you know it, our vehicles will all be fitted with sensors that pick up the speed limit for the road it's on and your speed will be governed to that speed so we can't break the law anymore.
Is that the world you fought for and risked your life for?
Click to expand...

I agree but it's just not gonna happen here. I got my kicks with autos at a range in Vegas. Fun but something I don't need to do again.
 
Even 5.56 is hard to control full auto. I have used a lot of SMGs that are controllable but they still require a lot of practice to use effectively at any significant range. I'd rather have standard cap mags back than F/A but that's just me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom