New Rifle Qualification and Standards for the Army?

[sfshooter]

Do any of you active types have any info on this?


In addition to a completely new course of fire called Table VI, standards have also changed. This is the most significant change to small arms marksmanship in decades.

http://soldiersystems.net/page/9/

[sfshooter]

I agree. The Army's BRM course has been lacking for many, many years behind what the USMC has. It has been a check the block thing for basic and for regular units who go to the range once a year.
I heard a couple of years back a radio host arguing that every soldier ought to be allowed to carry firearms while they were on base. If he had ever spent anytime in Iraq and seen all those "trained" soldiers having accidental discharges (AD), yes that's what it was called then although the negligent discharge (ND) is much more appropriate, which is the term now.
Much more firearms hands on is what is needed, and get rid of the risk adverse mindset that is prevalent on Army ranges. All that has done is scare the shit out of joe when it comes to handling live rounds.

[sfshooter]

Sorry, I keep forgetting we are in the age of the snowflake and special care needs to be taken so no one gets their feelings hurt or feels threatened by that live round in the magazine.

[Badger52]

Originally Posted by sfshooter

I heard a couple of years back a radio host arguing that every soldier ought to be allowed to carry firearms while they were on base. If he had ever spent anytime in Iraq and seen all those "trained" soldiers having accidental discharges (AD), yes that's what it was called then although the negligent discharge (ND) is much more appropriate, which is the term now.
Much more firearms hands on is what is needed, and get rid of the risk adverse mindset that is prevalent on Army ranges. All that has done is scare the shit out of joe when it comes to handling live rounds.

LTG Honore' beat 'em to it some years ago with his directive for deploying NG/AR of "weapons immersion" on some CONUS bases as they trained up to go downrange. You don't even need to watch it; you can hear the mistakes being made that result in holes in clearing barrels in the cantonment area. This doesn't endear one to support staff inside the building where you are heading because you need something from them.

I suspect, but do not know, that one may get in more trouble for jacking someone up by the stacking swivel than for the offender's actual ND; you know because "mah feelings was hurt." Bonehead is bonehead, but then I'm of a certain vintage.

[Team Sergeant]

Originally Posted by Brush Okie

Worthless until they start better and more training on shooting. They have it ass backwards. Better training first then different Qual course. I like the idea of a standing position but again they could have spent the time and money they put into this to buy ammo and train more by giving the troops more trigger time. Quals scores don't mean shit on the two way range.

And I'm guessing you're going to foot the bill for all this?

Especially knowing that 90% of the infantry just throws rounds down range and only about 10% do the actual killing?

The marines have 2 naval infantry divisions.

The army has what 14 and how many in NG and reserves? I'm glad you're not in charge of spending the armies money.......

[Team Sergeant]

Originally Posted by Brush Okie

10% putting rounds on target even more reason to give them more trigger time. You are right, the Army always spends money wisely like millions on a new PT uniform, Millions on the ACU that worked so well, EEO training. Yes money better spent on these instead of ammo and range time. Good thing I am not in charge of spending money on frivolous things like ammo.

And you got out as a CSM? Humor me.

[Razor]

Originally Posted by Brush Okie

Worthless until they start better and more training on shooting. They have it ass backwards. Better training first then different Qual course. I like the idea of a standing position but again they could have spent the time and money they put into this to buy ammo and train more by giving the troops more trigger time. Quals scores don't mean shit on the two way range.

Just a suggestion, but maybe you should download and read TC 3-22.9 C2, dated 31 Aug 17. There are numerous, fundamental changes in the guidance and requirements for training soldiers in marksmanship, including standards-based dry fire. Then go to Primary & Secondary (or the FB page for the 82nd ABN Division Small Arms Master Gunner) and read up on what Ray Miller is doing to improve small arms training.

[Peregrino]

Readiness reporting now includes marksmanship qualifications on their assigned weapon(s) for every person in an MTOE unit. The stats are (supposed to be) automatically pulled from DTMS. Short of pencil whipping the data entry it's fairly difficult to hide whether or not a unit is training as required. There are a few good things coming out of OBJ-T.

[Penn]

Upload issues

[JimP]

The Army has it ass-backwards. They think "qualification" and/or "certification" IS training. Far from it. I tell of how AWG did it when I was there. You had to go through their skills course either once a year or prior to deployment -whichever was first. It consisted of (varied from one week to two weeks) of very good training: shooting, communication, medical trauma, some movement/vehicle stuff, etc. Basically a good program to get your skills back up to snuff. When training was done and we were heading back to the barn at the end of the program, we'd swing by the range to complete the "paper trail." Almost everyone smoked the range with 300's and we were back on the road very quickly.

I can't tell you how many units I've been in when the first question prior to deployment was "Have you been to the range yet?" rather than, "Have you trained yet?"

It is similar to how we handle ROE/RUF. They don't care about actually TRAINING to the requirements, all they care about is that everyone has that stupid card so they can be prosecuted when they screw up and the Commander can point his finger at them and claim he did his part.

Remember, the GO's/Flags of of today are the lieutenants who survived the Clinton draw-down by sticking their heads in the sand and not making any waves.

[Team Sergeant]

Originally Posted by Brush Okie

.

I asked your rank at ETS? Retirement? And yeah it has an impact, like if you're just a pissed off E-5 that's spent little to no time in any Sr. roles but just likes to bitch. Again, humor me.

[Team Sergeant]

Originally Posted by Brush Okie

whole thing.

But you’re not pissed off……….

Generals spend the money, not sergeants. Generals prioritize the budgets, again, not sergeants. Like the air farce fighter pilots run the show as do generals in the army. Tanker generals don’t care about how skilled the infantrymen is or how well he can or can’t shoot. Some generals absolutely hate special operations, most because they didn’t measure up themselves. And those same individuals refuse to gainfully employ SO. While others are the opposite.

Then you have the joint idiots. Sometimes run by a know nothing admiral, sometimes an AF sissy, sometimes a jarhead and sometimes an army kissass. All have their own agenda and all prioritize their own service first.

Why am I stating the obvious. Because until you serve time in the G-J levels of the military you don’t even get a glance at the absolute idiocracy military “leadership” is capable of……..

You speak of being more lethal while the military “leadership” is mandating sensitivity/diversity training. Sensitivity/diversity training as far as I’m aware has never killed anyone, but its now mandated. That 50 million that was earmarked for advanced marksmanship training is now being used to cut dicks off of mentally ill patients and turning them into femauls, all mandated by your civilian masters.


My point, your training desires will always take a backseat to some asshole wearing 4 stars and wanting to be in the white house as a butt-boy for some moron president, or a vice president for some asshole corporation that sends you VA mortgage refinancing requests. They all have agendas and your marksmanship training is not on their list.

You suck it up and make the best with what you have on hand, or you bitch.

[Badger52]

Originally Posted by Team Sergeant

Sensitivity/diversity training as far as I’m aware has never killed anyone, but its now mandated.

So the phrase "Death by PowerPoint" is strictly rhetorical.

[SF_BHT]

Originally Posted by Brush Okie

No not pissed at all. . But it is not about my rank.Coming back in at over 40 and then injuring myself I did not expect to make CSM.

I not sure how you did the J level without having a stroke. I can't imagine it would have been a good move on my part to work at that level. I probably would have had a stroke. . As Dirty Harry said, a man has got to know his limitations.

Hummmm J level is what SOF prepares for and does on a regular basis.

[frostfire]

Originally Posted by JimP

The Army has it ass-backwards. They think "qualification" and/or "certification" IS training. Far from it. I tell of how AWG did it when I was there. You had to go through their skills course either once a year or prior to deployment -whichever was first. It consisted of (varied from one week to two weeks) of very good training: shooting, communication, medical trauma, some movement/vehicle stuff, etc. Basically a good program to get your skills back up to snuff. When training was done and we were heading back to the barn at the end of the program, we'd swing by the range to complete the "paper trail." Almost everyone smoked the range with 300's and we were back on the road very quickly.

I can't tell you how many units I've been in when the first question prior to deployment was "Have you been to the range yet?" rather than, "Have you trained yet?"

Outstanding post!

When I did MTT with the marksmanship team, we used to say qualification is not training, it is validation of training. One does not rise to the challenge, but sink to the level of training. Good times. Worked with 1SG who truly bought the idea and led from the front.

Originally Posted by Razor

Just a suggestion, but maybe you should download and read TC 3-22.9 C2, dated 31 Aug 17. There are numerous, fundamental changes in the guidance and requirements for training soldiers in marksmanship, including standards-based dry fire. Then go to Primary & Secondary (or the FB page for the 82nd ABN Division Small Arms Master Gunner) and read up on what Ray Miller is doing to improve small arms training.

I was shown the latest TC and TM to give feedback prior to the release, as well as the latest sniper manual. I don't know about the implementation side, but from doctrinal standpoint, the manuals and standards are dead solid, incorporating the latest and greatest from lesson learned, competition, private sector tech, and so on. Several dedicated and passionate NCO's did an excellent job on those.

If fully implemented, I have no doubt we would steal the phrase Rifleman from the Marines. Imagine that, every soldier is a rifle man. The jossing will never get old. I spoke to a Marine E4 recently who said he has NEVER used irons from boot camp all the way to his current assignment. Yea, perhaps the Army will get it right after all these years.

A soldier who can't shoot...isn't.... well ok, maybe the cyber command is an exception

Originally Posted by Peregrino

Readiness reporting now includes marksmanship qualifications on their assigned weapon(s) for every person in an MTOE unit. The stats are (supposed to be) automatically pulled from DTMS. Short of pencil whipping the data entry it's fairly difficult to hide whether or not a unit is training as required. There are a few good things coming out of OBJ-T.

That is delightful to hear! So now failing to qualify has same repercussions as failing APFT?