# Why are C6 drills not standard



## m_a_c (19 Nov 2004)

I have a question, it seems every time I do refresher C6 drills they change in someway.  Having been from an Armoured background, I understand that the Armoured have a certain way of doing the drills, and these differ from infantry drills.  However with the use of the LAV III, in both infantry and armoured worlds why is there no standard?  On the other hand it seems that the reserve refresher training on the C6 changes with everyone who teaches it.  The thing that I have noticed during training is that the instructor will be teaching directly from the manual but will add things like hit the cover when closing or don't hit it.  Some instructors even teach based on their pet peeves.  I am not trying to anger, or upset anyone's way of doing things.  I am only asking why there is no real standard?


----------



## dutchie (19 Nov 2004)

There is a standard, the probelm is that it is not always followed or known.

Having said that, like every other procedure, drill, IA, etc, things changed reguarly, and IMHO, usually for the better.


----------



## westie47 (19 Nov 2004)

As far as the infantry is concerned, there is one standard for all weapons - what the pam says. The problem we have is called 'instructor fads', where an NCO has picked up or been taught something that is wrong and teaches it that way because that's the way he was taught. I am a firm believer in the Small Arms Instr Course/Advanced Small Arms Course/Whatever they call it now. I took it and I really learnt the weapons. I don't know why weapons classes aren't assessed to the same standard on the PLQ. The young MCpls are not taught how to teach a proper weapons class. Every BMQ/SQ I have taught on, the infantry NCO's with ASAC teach most of the weapons classes. So if you are in doubt, read the pam, it's all in there in black and white.


----------



## HollywoodHitman (19 Nov 2004)

bingo.

What Dean said.

He's right about the PLQ........The standard has usually been set by the infantry NCO's taking the course and that does not always mean that the drills being demonstrated from the pams are interpreted correctly, which can translate to not being taught correctly. 

The PLQ seems to be geared towards instructional technique, which does not demand competence in the weapons systems being taught. The individuals soldier skills should be such that weapons drill reviews are just that, reviews.

There is a standard. It is the Pam.

TM


----------



## veiled scout (19 Nov 2004)

Hello
I can add some insight to this as an armoured soldier. First off the armoured corp adopted the drills for the C-6 from the original conception and purchase of the Leopard, now if you dig up an old Leopard turret pam, you will see that it is very different from what the dismount drills are. Because the Armoured world had the C-6 long before the infantry did and strictley employed in the turret it became a systemic issue of "turret drills". Right from the conception of training for the crewman (QL3) they were taught C-6 drills as if they were in the turret. I also remember there being a lot of arguement in places such as Wainwright (WATC) as to the exact drills and since armoured QL3s were going through and being instructed by armour types....the drills would be done as per turret drills. In fact there was documentation published from the school (armoured) stating which drills to use. 
Now that being said, all of our INDIA friends are right, there is only one standard drill when the weapon leaves the vehicle, to make it clear and it does not matter what unit or trade you are, there is the BTS (Battle Task Standards) which clearly outlines who must do the drills (which is everyone in a Comabat arms unit) and the reference (PAM). So the bottom line is, when you are in the turret, use turret drills, when you dismount from the turret with your C-6, go to ground mount. If you are in a reserve recce unit, you will use dismounted drills as the platform you are using is not recognized as a turret. Besides that the drills are not hard, the only real difference is the "make safe". Don't let others tell you different, their is a reason why the "INDIA" c/s take the SAIC, they are the experts on small arms, leave the turret for the armoured guys. Remember, drills are there so you have a natural reaction to a familiar order!

TANKS


----------



## ArmyRick (19 Nov 2004)

The standard for using the C6 in the dismounted role (light or SF) can be found in the C6 PAM (give me awhile I'll get the reference)..
Anybody not using that is not UP TO THE STANDARD>...
1 Standard for the C6 in the ground mount roles..period..not open to interpretation...get my drift?...
NOTE the Co-axial C6 drills are different as the MG in that role has a different use..and yes there is publication for those drills (RCD and LdSH fill us in please?)


----------



## Lance Wiebe (19 Nov 2004)

A large, glaring problem exists.

There are two drills, one is used excluively by the Armour, no matter if the weapon is mounted as the MG (on top of the turret) or as the coax.  The other drill is the Infantry dril(s).  The Infantry, after arguments lasting years, finally agreed that the dismount drills are not suitable inside the turret.  However, once it leaves the turret, the dismount (Infantry drills) apply.  Which means, on a LAV III, if a C6 is mounted as the MG, the commander must use two drills.  The turret drill for the coax, and Infantry drills for the MG.

Can you say  "Someone is going to get confused, and someone will be hurt"?

I'm in the unique position of being retired Armour, and having the good fortune of being one of the two Armour soldiers trained Small Arm Instructor at the Infantry School.  The existing turf wars are absolutely insane, both sets of drills are proven safe, we have to adopt one set for use throughout our military.

Before someone really gets hurt, I hope that one set of drills will be approved and taught by all.


----------



## ArmyRick (19 Nov 2004)

Lance, I put a post about spike McGuire in the armour section, he retired yetserday, please check it out and ask your armour brothers to do the same.. Thanking you in advance..


----------



## nawk (20 Nov 2004)

What is this "pam" and where can I get my hands on one.  Is there a copy online?


----------



## 48Highlander (20 Nov 2004)

"Proper Drills" and "PAM standard" only apply in the classroom anyway.  Once you've learned the weapon, it's up to you to handle the weapon safely and keep it going.  I can't remember the last time I carried out a "proper" IA on a C6, but I can gaurantee you that I handle that weapon a hell of a lot better than any of the soldiers coming out of the new DP2A course.

on course, obviously the standard should be what's written in the pam.  but minor differences such as striking the feed cover or gently closing the feed cover (as long as I'm aware the PAM doesn't say either way) really don't make any difference, as long as the damn thing's closed.  If anyone's curious, the reasons for those two variations go something like this:

  -  STRIKE the damn thing!  you have to MAKE SURE it's closed!
  -  Whoa, whoa, don't slam the cover like that, you're damaging the latches.  Make sure you depress the latches fully and then close the cover.

both sides make some sense.  and both of them sound pretty dumb too.  in the end, it's just personal preference.  if I'm testing a candidate on his C6 skills, I really don't give a s**t which way he does it.


----------



## HollywoodHitman (20 Nov 2004)

48th,

yeah, I know what you're talking about. Once you have absolutely mastered the drills on the weapons system, you simply get a feel on how to make it work when it goes sideways. However, you and I both know that if you are required to teach another soldier how to use that weapon, the proper IA's and Stoppage drills are the only way to go. Only when they have mastered those, can they begin to instinctively do whatever it takes to remedy the stoppage and carry on. 

The pam is the bible, and it's the starting point for all soldiers in mastering their weapons systems. at the end of the day you'll do what it takes, but instinct is the key.

TM


----------



## X Royal (20 Nov 2004)

Well said HollywoodHitman: 
 The only way to instruct is by the book(pam). Yes with expierience we all have most likely taken short cuts, but to instruct teaching by the book is the only way.

Best Wishes


----------



## IPC10 (20 Nov 2004)

I am going to differ in opinion here slightly.

I think that the weapons drills have to be taught and executed as per the applicable pam.  Yes we can all argue should the feed tray cover be slammed or not (the good book does say â Å“closed as quickly as possibleâ ?) or what does the C7 pam mean by â Å“pushâ ? the forward assist assembly?

My view/opinion is that the drills are taught and enforced the same way for the following reasons:

First â â€œ (practical) during a stressful situation the gunner will conduct the drills automatically that will correct the fault (sometimes just repeatedly cocking a C6 or C9 will not work); and

Second â â€œ (bad officer talking) knowing the way things work in the Army that if there is a accident or incident with the weapon that the soldier cannot be found at fault by the genius up high as he/she was using the correct drills.

Yes I feel the frustration of the differences between the drills of the GPMG and when it is the co-ax in a turrent.

my two cents for consumption.


----------



## 48Highlander (20 Nov 2004)

IPC10 said:
			
		

> I think that the weapons drills have to be taught and executed as per the applicable pam.   Yes we can all argue should the feed tray cover be slammed or not (the good book does say â Å“closed as quickly as possibleâ ?) or what does the C7 pam mean by â Å“pushâ ? the forward assist assembly?



    As everyone pointed out, yes, the weapons drills have to be taught as per the pam standard.  The paragraph I just quoted though is what I meant when I said I don't care if soldiers do things slightly differently on a test.  There are many different ways to interpret certain parts of them pam, but they're all minor variations that don't affect safety and really don't matter much.  Is aggression when performing drills more important, or is reducing wear on the weapon more important?  Who knows.  My personal preference is speed and agression, the gun doctors probably swing the other way.  I don't really care either way though.  Certain things obviously must be taught to an exact standard.  If someone were to start teaching soldiers to strip a C7 with the mag on, that would be a pretty big problem.  As long as the variations don't affect safety though, and don't greatly change the drills, I don't see much of a problem with them.  But if someone wants to re-write the pam to make it more specific, hell go for it, at least it'll stop all the bickering about which way is correct.


----------



## ArmyRick (21 Nov 2004)

48th Highlander,
Have you even looked at a PAM?
There is no interpretation to performing small arms drills.
THERE IS ONE WAY. THE CORRECT WAY.
IPC10 is correct. Based on my expirience troops must stick with the proper drills because of the instinctive reaction it instills in combat and also (a liability issue) for the investigation afterwards.
Don't think about short cuts or crap like that. Do the drills properly as taught (hopefully proper drills were taught in the first place).
Final note, I know alot of the SR NCOs in your regt and they will freak if they catch you cuttin drills short during field firing or on ranges..
I will not take a light hearted side to this because I have seen soldiers get seriously injured because they didn't follow proper weapons handling.


----------



## 48Highlander (21 Nov 2004)

ArmyRick said:
			
		

> 48th Highlander,
> Have you even looked at a PAM?
> There is no interpretation to performing small arms drills.
> THERE IS ONE WAY. THE CORRECT WAY.



Bull.  As IPC pointed out, the C6 pam says that the feed cover should be closed "as quickly as possible".  With the right hand?  With the left hand?  Closed by slamming?  Closed "properly" while depressing the latches?  "one way the correct way" my a$$.  It all depends on how you interpret it.  And something IPC also pointed out:  the C7 pam says to "push" the forward assist.  Push how hard?  Strike it?  Tap it?  with the thumb?  the index finer?  the heel of the hand?  with your left nut?  pam doesn't specify.  so please, don't tell me there's no interpretation.  I've spent enough time arguing with other instructors over what the pam says that I know better.


----------



## ArmyRick (21 Nov 2004)

48thHighlander
Now I have got ya !
Listen up ! LISTEN GOOD! Want to split hairs do you ?

The PAM does not say to close as quickly as possible it says (I am copying directly from the PAM)
on safety precautions
"(1) lower the feed tray and close the feed cover"
on the load
" g. Hold the belt in position with the left hand and close the feed cover."
On the unload
"d. Close the feed cover."

You have spent enough time arguing with other instructors do ya ? Maybe you should listen. 
What hand do you use for some of the movements? THATS IN THE PAM !!! How do I know? I AM LOOKING AT IT RIGHT NOW. Not every movement has exactly what hand to use. In the case of closing feed cover, its up to the firer. It will not impede safe and effective operation of the weapon.

How much expirience do you have teaching? I have trained regular and reserve army SQ and BIQ. Right now I train regular army soldiers.
 I Stand by what I say their is NO interpretation of the PAM and yeah, you should look at the damn thing because you didn't even know what it said exactly.


----------



## 48Highlander (21 Nov 2004)

ArmyRick said:
			
		

> 48thHighlander
> Now I have got ya !
> Listen up ! LISTEN GOOD! Want to split hairs do you ?



whoa, relax.  this can't be good for your blood pressure  



			
				ArmyRick said:
			
		

> The PAM does not say to close as quickly as possible it says (I am copying directly from the PAM)
> on safety precautions
> "(1) lower the feed tray and close the feed cover"
> on the load
> ...



thanks for the update.  unfortiunately, I, like you, do not have the PAM memorized.  that's why I have a copy and review the relevant parts before each lesson.



			
				ArmyRick said:
			
		

> You have spent enough time arguing with other instructors do ya ? Maybe you should listen.
> What hand do you use for some of the movements? THATS IN THE PAM !!! How do I know? I AM LOOKING AT IT RIGHT NOW. Not every movement has exactly what hand to use. In the case of closing feed cover, its up to the firer. It will not impede safe and effective operation of the weapon.



that was my point.  if it's up to the firer then it's up to them to INTERPRET how the drill is intended to be carried out.  which is why different instructors will teach that drill in different ways.  some parts of the pam specify the exact hand to use, sure.  some don't.  they also do not generaly specify the exact speed and amount of force used.



			
				ArmyRick said:
			
		

> How much expirience do you have teaching? I have trained regular and reserve army SQ and BIQ. Right now I train regular army soldiers.
> I Stand by what I say their is NO interpretation of the PAM and yeah, you should look at the darn thing because you didn't even know what it said exactly.



I have trained reserve army QL2, QL3, QL4 MG, BIQ, BMQ, SQ, and DP2A.  I would have been in meaford teaching reular army courses right now if I hadn't gotten screwed by my unit.  long story.  anyway, let's not turn this into a pissing contest.  being a regforce Sgt I'm sure you have more experience.  you did however just contradict yourself.  in case you don't see the contradiction, I'll point it out more clearly:

"In the case of closing feed cover, its up to the firer"
"I Stand by what I say their is NO interpretation of the PAM"

which one is it?  either the PAM tells you exactly how to do it, or it's up to you to figure out how it should be done.  you can't have it both ways.


----------



## ArmyRick (21 Nov 2004)

Closing the feed cover with either left or right hand will not affect safety or effective use of the weapon


----------



## IPC10 (21 Nov 2004)

ArmyRick said:
			
		

> The PAM does not say to close as quickly as possible it says (I am copying directly from the PAM)
> on safety precautions



Fuel for the fire.

The pam, as mentioned above does say lower the feed tray cover for the safety precaution.

It also states during the Immediate Action drill:   "Open the feed cover, clear the feed tray, and close the feed cover again as quickly
as possible."

I was coming from the approach of addressing those times were you watch young soldiers just cock a C6/C9 when there is a stoppage instead of carrying out the proper IA.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (21 Nov 2004)

We Carry the C6 as a door gun on the Sea King and we follow the drills EXACTLY as laid out in the PAM, except for a minor change or two we had to make to account for the mount (and I can't remember them- but it didn't change the IA and stoppage drills). 

If we ever get in a peeing contest, we just refer back to what is written down.   For really sticky questions, we have phoned the infantry school in the past.


----------



## 48Highlander (21 Nov 2004)

ArmyRick said:
			
		

> Closing the feed cover with either left or right hand will not affect safety or effective use of the weapon



Heh, that's exactly what I was saying earlier.  This is from one of my earlier posts:

"Certain things obviously must be taught to an exact standard.  If someone were to start teaching soldiers to strip a C7 with the mag on, that would be a pretty big problem.  As long as the variations don't affect safety though, and don't greatly change the drills, I don't see much of a problem with them.  But if someone wants to re-write the pam to make it more specific, heck go for it, at least it'll stop all the bickering about which way is correct."

See where I said that certain things have to be taught right?  If the pam specifies exactly how to do it, teach it that way.

See where I said that as long as variations don't affect safety, I don't care about them?  If the pam isn't specific enough, figure out what way it's meant to be done and do it that way.  Or figure out what way works best for you.


Anyway, now I'm confused about what the heck we were arguing about.


----------



## foerestedwarrior (23 Nov 2004)

i think that the slammming the C6 was from the .50cal drills, correct me if i am wrong, i was told that you dont NEED to do it on the c6, but it has trikeld out form teh old gun course that included .50 and the c6. I think that the PAM is open to interpretaion to a point. I am tired and going to sleep so ill let you guys debate this more, it is actually very interesting.


----------



## Doug VT (23 Nov 2004)

Here is a linkto the C6 Pam
http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/ael/pubs/300-008/b-gl-385/004/PT-001/B-GL-385-004-PT-001_E.pdf


----------

