Oh man, I've been putting of posting on this. It's all been said but here are some brief thoughts, please keep in mind that I’m military and the ELCAN is a military optic…..supposedly.
1. Suggesting that the operator adjusts protective equipment to accommodate a bulky optic is absurd. The C-79 is too large and heavy for what it does and it doesn't do that well. I’m not sure why people are so intent on defending this product, I have a feeling that it has more to do with nostalgia and anecdotal experiences as apposed to disciplined objective thinking. There seems to be a lot of “get over it” and “adapt and overcome” or equally retarded BS….this needs to change.
2. It doesn't matter that a BUIS is "available" for the ELCAN. If you had to use it there is no expedient way of removing the sight. Experienced soldiers will over tighten the screws that are prone to loosening. At least you can mount an ACOG with a release of some sort. And even if you managed to get it off the VAST majority of our soldiers have ZERO understanding of how irons work. In addition to that, the ELCAN takes up so much bloody space that you can barely fit most BUIS with certain eye relief settings. Yeah….I know there’s a cheesy plastic one that will fit sometimes, in my opinion it is poorly constructed and fragile.
3. Optics (like everything else) are TOOLS. The Canadian military (and our country as a whole) has a severe case of over simplifying equipment and its employment. There's no such thing as "the optic" or "the rifle" or "the vest". To use the cliché, these items are tools in a toolbox. No one piece can do everything nor should it. An anti-gun culture and the lack of domestic defence industry produces soldiers/leaders with very little working knowledge prone to compartmentalizing concepts and over simplifying weapons employment. Combined with a distracted leadership focused on cumbersome administration and non-military tasks creates a culture of the blind leading the blind. This severely limits our progress in truly professionalizing our ground forces. We should explore the armoury concept to weapons/optics/training. I’ve said it for years; issue a kit, not just a rifle/sight. Give our operators options and the training to match.
4. Ultimately none of it matters. The vast majority of our issues are HUMAN related and can be solved with training conducted by knowledgeable instructors, truly professional and interested students as well as big can of ammo. It’s a cultural problem and changing culture takes time.
Stay low, shoot straight
1. Suggesting that the operator adjusts protective equipment to accommodate a bulky optic is absurd. The C-79 is too large and heavy for what it does and it doesn't do that well. I’m not sure why people are so intent on defending this product, I have a feeling that it has more to do with nostalgia and anecdotal experiences as apposed to disciplined objective thinking. There seems to be a lot of “get over it” and “adapt and overcome” or equally retarded BS….this needs to change.
2. It doesn't matter that a BUIS is "available" for the ELCAN. If you had to use it there is no expedient way of removing the sight. Experienced soldiers will over tighten the screws that are prone to loosening. At least you can mount an ACOG with a release of some sort. And even if you managed to get it off the VAST majority of our soldiers have ZERO understanding of how irons work. In addition to that, the ELCAN takes up so much bloody space that you can barely fit most BUIS with certain eye relief settings. Yeah….I know there’s a cheesy plastic one that will fit sometimes, in my opinion it is poorly constructed and fragile.
3. Optics (like everything else) are TOOLS. The Canadian military (and our country as a whole) has a severe case of over simplifying equipment and its employment. There's no such thing as "the optic" or "the rifle" or "the vest". To use the cliché, these items are tools in a toolbox. No one piece can do everything nor should it. An anti-gun culture and the lack of domestic defence industry produces soldiers/leaders with very little working knowledge prone to compartmentalizing concepts and over simplifying weapons employment. Combined with a distracted leadership focused on cumbersome administration and non-military tasks creates a culture of the blind leading the blind. This severely limits our progress in truly professionalizing our ground forces. We should explore the armoury concept to weapons/optics/training. I’ve said it for years; issue a kit, not just a rifle/sight. Give our operators options and the training to match.
4. Ultimately none of it matters. The vast majority of our issues are HUMAN related and can be solved with training conducted by knowledgeable instructors, truly professional and interested students as well as big can of ammo. It’s a cultural problem and changing culture takes time.
Stay low, shoot straight
