CFSAC 2010 Course of Fire

greentips said:
I myself found it quite boring to be shooting the same match in the last 10 years, even the same match 4 or 5 times a years. Many like to shoot the same thing all the time so they can win. However, we all need to progress and it will be quite boring to do grouping and elementatry firing all year long for another 10 years. Perhaps the PRA should adopt a progress competiton plan that starts at the basic elementary firing that dominates the old M1-12 and advances to complete application firing (more akin to the CFSAC) as the season progresses from spring to autum.
Click to expand...

I think that you have a good point. Some form of progressive training or match qualification would make a lot of sense. I think that M1-12 still has a lot of value as an introduction to the SR discipline and as a training exercise. The new CFSAC matches can be quite intimidating for a new shooter (I saw one overwhelmed chap leave the range after match 1).

This past season I was fortunate enough to shoot the new CFSAC matches several times (including the ORA provincials), as well as NSCC matches 1-12 and 13-16 at Milcun. Also spent a week training on the new NSCC matches 17 (moving targets) and 18 (FIBUA). In my opinion the traditional matches fit nicely with the new matches. I can't see a reason for not shooting both.

Some food for thought.

In IPSC and IDPA matches, the stage designs are typically unique to that match. Generally speaking the shooter doesn't know the course of fire until a few minutes before the match begins. Part of the challenge of each stage is planning how one is going to shoot it.

Could this same approach be applied to SR? Obviously it would require designing the stages ahead of time. It could also make running the match more of a challenge (nightmare?) in terms of target management in the butts and coordinating shooters at the firing point.

It would also require the shooters to "think on their feet". Instead of using the same approach as the last time they shot the match, the competitor would need to develop new strategies required for the course of fire. This would keep the competition fresh and challenging (not that the existing matches aren't challenging enough).
 
Hungry said:
The DCRA has some serious decisions to make if they want to remain relevant to the CF!! :cool:

Cheers,
Barney
Click to expand...

Correct me if I’m wrong, but aren’t these matches essentially a training exercise to help the good guys (our CF) improve their skills? As I recall the DCRA's original mandate was to improve the marksmanship skills of our citizen's, this resulting in our soldiers being better marksman. Isn't that why us civilians have the privilege of shooting on military ranges?
 
I consider myself a SR newbie and I'm sure some would argue with me on that. I've shot BCRA SR once - top lee enfield shot. Shot CFSAC for the first time in 2009. Came 4th in Canada with a lee enfield and won the tyro trophy.

Anyways, my point is this.
I entered both of those SR matches using the skills I learned when I was between 10 and 15 years old. The CF has taught be maybe 5% of the skills I use when I'm shooting. The remainder was self instructed or mentored to me through my father when I was a youth. Here I am, a SR newbie, winning matches? Who the heck is this guy?

I'm nobody.

All of these competitions / concentrations will not make you a better shooter unless it is something you want. I mean really want. Going out of your way to shoot, taking vacation time, educating yourself, living and breathing it for short periods of time.

I'm not a professional marksman. I'm just a chap that is proficient with a lee enfield but more importantly I'm a shooter, regardless of the discipline, I love it all. Handgun, shotgun, .22LR silhouettes, SR, or target shooting, I'm in there like a dirty shirt. Other Rangers are simply not as engaged as I am. If they applied themselves I'd likely be left in the dust wondering what just happened.

All of the CFSAC's in the world will not teach this, I don't think it is something that can be taught. It is something that must come from inside. Matches 1-12 or the new Matches 1-4. Sure it's good exposure but I'm not sure it will make a non-shooter better.

The majority of member's I've met in the CF have ZERO interest in shooting. I was very suprised by this. I think this has inspired good friendships from those members in the CF that have a passion for shooting. Army and Navy (not so much in the airforce) have build a cadre of credible marksmen that really enjoy the rare times they have to spend time on the competition field together and in the mess telling stories / lies.
 
Last edited:
capncrunch said:
As I recall the DCRA's original mandate was to improve the marksmanship skills of our citizen's, this resulting in our soldiers being better marksman.
Click to expand...

In my opinion the BCRA/DCRA IS keeping with its original mandate.The matches they run are a better set of matches to improve your skills by, than the CFSAC matches.You test your skills every time you shoot the SAME matches and judge how your skills are coming along by COMPARING your scores from previous matches.The new CFSAC matches are a good test of your skills...IF you already have those skills.Trying to learn basics about yourself and mental marksmanship while running through complicated matches isn't helping anyone other than those that already have those skills.If you look at the names of the top 12-15 shooters over the last few years you will see mostly the same names up there no matter what matches are run.And that is only because those folks HAVE the skills already.
 
Longshot said:
In my opinion the BCRA/DCRA IS keeping with its original mandate.The matches they run are a better set of matches to improve your skills by, than the CFSAC matches.You test your skills every time you shoot the SAME matches and judge how your skills are coming along by COMPARING your scores from previous matches.The new CFSAC matches are a good test of your skills...IF you already have those skills.Trying to learn basics about yourself and mental marksmanship while running through complicated matches isn't helping anyone other than those that already have those skills.If you look at the names of the top 12-15 shooters over the last few years you will see mostly the same names up there no matter what matches are run.And that is only because those folks HAVE the skills already.
Click to expand...


It seems the DCRA's mandate is interpreted differently from person to person.
Longshot is correct about the DCRA being within their arcs.

Their website is clear:

History and current organization of the DCRA

The Dominion of Canada Rifle Association was founded in 1868 and incorporated by an Act of Parliament 63-64 Victoria Chapter 99, assented to July 7, 1890, to promote and encourage the training of marksmanship throughout Canada.
Click to expand...

and specific to SR and CFSAC history:

The Connaught Ranges opened in time for the DCRA to hold its Annual Prize Meeting in 1921. With the exception of the period 1939 to 1946, the DCRA Annual Prize Meeting has been held on an annual basis at Connaught.

During the early years the Annual Prize Meetings consisted of smallbore, pistol, Service Rifle (A) (Military Targets) and Service Rifle (B) (Target Rifle Targets). Upwards of 3,000 competitors, including 800 Cadets, attended the 10 day competitions. All competitions were under the control of DCRA staff. Additionally, in those years all members of the DCRA Bisley Team were Military members, as was the majority of the membership.

In 1957 the Canadian Army introduced the FNC1 as the military rifle. DCRA members were entitled to borrow these firearms from DND for competition purposes in the Service Rifle matches. The .303 continued to be the firearm utilized for target rifle competitions. The matches continued to be conducted by DCRA staff members.

In the mid 1970's the military staff at the National Defence Headquarters decided to take over the conduct of the military Service Rifle competition. This arrangement lasted for about four years when DND approached the DCRA to again take responsibility for the conduct of the Service Rifle matches. This arrangement prevailed until the late 1980's when the Army staff again took control of the Service Rifle matches. Since that time the Canadian Forces Small Arms Competition (CFSAC) and the DCRA National Service Arms Competition (NSAC) have been conducted conjointly.
Click to expand...

Note that CFSAC and NSCC are now no longer run cojointly and their stated aims are completely different. Many people misunderstand CFSAC's new matches as as a replacement for a training plan in the fundamentals. The CF's training plan is their Operational Shooting Program, their operational test is the Personal Weapon's Tests, and CFSAC is a concentration whose chosen method of encouraging professional development is competition. This method is embedded and recommended directly from the CFOSP.

DCRA aim from their 2009 NSCC rule book:

The aim of the DCRA, through its associated PRA programs and the
National Matches it sponsors, is to encourage and develop marksmanship
within the DCRA membership and to assist with the promotion of
marksmanship excellence within the Canadian Forces and the RCMP.
Click to expand...

CFSAC Aim from the 2010 RAM:

The Aim of the Canadian Forces Small Arms Concentration is to encourage operationally relevant marksmanship through competition and professional development.
Click to expand...

So while the DCRA is within their arcs, at this years NSCC there were about 30 military SR shooters and 1 RCMP (who won in the open class eschewing his issue equipment). A handful of civilians rounded out the competition and most of them were the staff volunteers shooting in their own competition. Is this successfully meeting their aim to train less than 40 shooters?

CFSAC aims to have about 300 next year and has grown since changing. We may be going at this bass-ackwards in the CF to moderize the end product and then the training system but I think the fuse is lit to bring back marksmanship. The proof will be in performance overseas, not on the podium.
 
Very interesting article and study from the USMC whose ethos on marksmanship I have always admired:

The story

http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/2010/10/marine-corps-marksmanship-program-problems-101310w/

The study

http://militarytimes.com/static/projects/pages/marksmanship.pdf

I wish our doctrinal headquarters would undertake a similar study but nevertheless much should be familiar. Resist the urge to compare discussion about a competition and this. Perhaps it should go in another thread.
 
Maple Leaf article - CFSAC 2010

http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/commun/ml-fe/article-eng.asp?id=6519

Tradition always hits the mark
by Marie-Ève Gauthier

More than 250 military personnel participated in CF Small Arms Concentration (CFSAC) 2010, held September 6–18 at Connaught Range and Primary Training Centre in Ottawa.

The competition provided shooters with an opportunity to apply the tactics they had learned, improve their speed of execution and learn to manage their stress more effectively.

Competitors hailed not only from Canada but also from the Netherlands, New Zealand, the UK and the US. A variety of CF units, including the Canadian Rangers, were represented in the competition.

In addition to providing a good opportunity to improve competitors’ marksmanship, CFSAC enables participants to acquire skills in small arms handling. Shooters can use pistols, rifles and other small arms in individual and team competitions that are open to all CF personnel.

“We focus on marksmanship, which is a core principle of the Army,” said Master Corporal Jayme Lajoie, who was competing at CFSAC for the second time. “I’d rather have a soldier who is a good marksman at my side than a huge Leopard tank, because it’s the soldiers who win the war on the battlefield.”

The combat pistol competition is still one of the most thrilling events. Participants must knock down several different types of targets set up at distances from three to 25 metres.

“We have introduced tougher standards and new levels of instruction to make the competitions more exciting, especially for the pistol match,” said Commander Kristof Langland, chief range officer for the pistol match and designer of the pistol competition.

“So now, there are varied ranges, with moving and stationary targets, and participants are assigned missions. Not only that, but physical fitness is now part of the program. Participants have to move a 160-lb [72.6 kg] casualty in two of the four competitions, which have been completely overhauled.”

While the primary object of CFSAC is, of course, to allow CF personnel to test their marksmanship in various situations, the competition also provides an opportunity to meet with allied personnel and discuss techniques, weapons and tactics with them. This year, for example, the Canadians had a chance to try out the Glock pistol, which is apparently quite easy to use. f:P:
 
Diamondcutter13
Thanks for the link,, it is an interesting read, with some parallels to the CF.
I noted that the USMC still holds to individual shooting out to 500m and identifying targets out to 600m.
Also, the recommendations on the frequency of requals and refresher shoots to maintain the skills seem about right to me.
Being a 21st Century army,, it would be nice to see effective moving target ranges, simple shooting from veh stands and some development of how to train for shooting to incapacitation (ie. shooting til he is down and out for good) vice shooting to hit in a live situation (not simulation).
Ammo and funding is tight again this year from where I'm sitting,, not much formal support for working on these things at the unit level,, but there are ways to still make it interesting and challenging as you know.

diamondcutter13 said:
Very interesting article and study from the USMC whose ethos on marksmanship I have always admired:

The story

http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/2010/10/marine-corps-marksmanship-program-problems-101310w/

The study

http://militarytimes.com/static/projects/pages/marksmanship.pdf

I wish our doctrinal headquarters would undertake a similar study but nevertheless much should be familiar. Resist the urge to compare discussion about a competition and this. Perhaps it should go in another thread.
Click to expand...
 
AbbeyHill said:
The guys from Army News were there at the awards ceremony and interviewed the Reg F QM... Where did that interview go?
Click to expand...

Here's an army news article,, dated 15 October. It is penned by the same journalist as the Maple Leaf article, but they correctly identify the C8 and the MCpl in the photos. Bit of a spin overall,, but at least it mentions the Queen's Medalists.
******************
http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/land-terre/news-nouvelles/story-reportage-eng.asp?id=4782

Ottawa (Ontario) — From September 6 to 18, more than 250 military personnel assembled at the Connaught Range and Primary Training Centre, in Nepean, to take part in the Canadian Forces Small Arms Competition (CFSAC) 2010.

The competition is a golden opportunity for soldiers to apply the tactics they have learned and to improve their speed of execution, as well as learning to manage stress, in simulated combat situations.

The participants came not only from Canada, but also from the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, New Zealand and the United States. Various units of the Canadian Forces were represented, including the Canadian Rangers.

Master Corporal Jayme Lajoie, a vehicle technician from CFB/ASU Wainwright, aims a C8 rifle during the Canadian Forces Small Arms Competition.
CFSAC is intended to improve the firing techniques and marksmanship of military personnel, who show off their skill with pistol, rifle and other small arms in individual and team events open to all members of the CF.

Several trophies are awarded in various categories, but the most sought-after prize is the Queen’s Medal for Champion Shot. It is awarded to the best rifle shots in the CF Regular Force and Reserve.

One of the most exciting and dynamic events in the competition is the combat pistol tournament. In combat scenarios, the participants come up against several kinds of targets placed at distances of 3 to 25 metres.

“We have applied new, stricter standards and new instruction levels to make the events more dynamic, especially the pistol events,” said Commander Kristof Langland.

“So these are dynamic firing ranges, with both moving and static targets. Missions are assigned to the soldiers taking part in the activities. Physical conditioning has been built into the program. The participants have to move an inert weight—a 160-lb casualty—in two of the four advanced dynamic activities, which have been completely revamped.”

The presence of competitors from foreign militaries permitted exchanges on the techniques, weapons and tactics used in different countries. The Canadian soldiers were able to try the Glock pistol, which is favoured by the team from the Netherlands.

The Canadian Forces Small Arms Competition is the main way the Canadian Forces train and maintain a credible pool of shooting instructors for the various units.
This was the very first time the Netherlands pistol team took part in CFSAC. Although they all qualified, Lieutenant-Colonel Roosken underlined the shortcomings of team members in the areas of physical fitness and tactics in comparison with the Canadian teams.

“The exercise is very professional, very stimulating and very well structured, said LCol Roosken. “We learned a lot. This is a great activity, and I’m happy with our performance.”

The 2010 Reserve Force Queen's Medal went to Cpl David Ferguson, an Army Reservist with 1 Nova Scotia Highlanders. The winner of the 2010 Regular Force Queen's Medal was Pte Tim Hiscock from 1 RCR.

Article by Marie-Ève Gauthier, Army News, Ottawa
Photos by MCpl Daniel Merrell and Bradley Lowe

Project Number: 10-0592
 
Shelldrake, the reason the article in army news is correct is because the MCpl contacted the Army news guy and he corrected it. The female reporter was hard to understand and now I am not picking on francos here, but I think alot was lost in translation to her from whoever she interviewed. The article in Army news had the wrong Queen's Medalist as well. Commander Langland sorted the Army news guy out on that one. They had Will Mac Keigan and Marty Cashin as the respective medalists. They won in 09 not 2010.

Reporting FAIL!!!
 
Shelldrake said:
Diamondcutter13
Thanks for the link,, it is an interesting read, with some parallels to the CF.
I noted that the USMC still holds to individual shooting out to 500m and identifying targets out to 600m.
Also, the recommendations on the frequency of requals and refresher shoots to maintain the skills seem about right to me.
Being a 21st Century army,, it would be nice to see effective moving target ranges, simple shooting from veh stands and some development of how to train for shooting to incapacitation (ie. shooting til he is down and out for good) vice shooting to hit in a live situation (not simulation).
Ammo and funding is tight again this year from where I'm sitting,, not much formal support for working on these things at the unit level,, but there are ways to still make it interesting and challenging as you know.
Click to expand...

The study is a really good read, I am surprised there has not been more chatter on it considering they make some fairly radical statements like conventional range training having little to no correlation to good battlefield marksmanship.

I do agree with them that modern automated systems are key to good time spent on the range but as we know from our outdated systems they can be a headache once maintenance slips on them and you are back to the butts. I would love a system that actually reinforces good drills and gives you the ability to shoot pop-ups, movers etc. How they expect to sell the Corps on buying those systems and at the same time say - this kind of shooting does not help us much on the battlefield is odd:confused:.

Too bad about the budget out East, things are still rocking out West with little sign of slowing down. Just got back from a day on the range in Wainwright where we hammered some targets with 9mm and 12ga. Fun range mainly but better than a day in the cubicle farm. :shotgun::D
 
Some of the automated ranges at Bisley aren't too bad,like the FIBUA and MOVERS(you still have to mark them yourself) but the one in Pucka is by far the best i've been on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom