# Hard-pressed army forced to train with paintball guns



## McG (4 Jul 2005)

> Hard-pressed army forced to train with paintball guns
> Globe and Mail Online
> Sunday, July 3, 2005 Updated at 2:39 PM EDT
> Canadian Press
> ...


Visit Globe & Mail


----------



## KevinB (4 Jul 2005)

:

Please...

 Forced?  Realistic?  - Since when do weapon IA's and drills transfer to paintball and vice versa?  Rare Urban EX?

A reserve ex got screwed up since the regs prepping for Afghan needed the SIM guns ?  BIG FAT HAIRY DEAL.  Sorry if I can't shed a tear here - but I saw and heard stories from the guys who went down to Va.  Not only did they get SIM stuff down there (albiet US gear) but they got a lot more realistic training in some areas than our Roto got for Afghan.

 Maybe the Globe should get out and look at what budget has forced commanders make do to train the soldiers deploying...


----------



## Fishbone Jones (4 Jul 2005)

Kevin, Kevin, Kevin,

You know, coming from the G&M, it has NOTHING to do with logistics and training, and EVERYTHING with making the CF look chintzy and incompetent.


----------



## Bomber (4 Jul 2005)

"But the faux evacuation was marred when soldiers were unable to use their army-issue practice ammunition, which fits into their rifles but fires only low-speed powder balls, leaving a harmless mark on the target."

Let me put one of these into homers army or leg, low speed powder and harmless  .  The new stuff for the C9 is 660 fps, I got hit with a 495 fps pellet gun when I was a kid, and that was enough for me.  Harmless doesn't cause bleeding and leave scars.


----------



## KevinB (4 Jul 2005)

I've got two nice sim scars that look like I was hit with 7.62x39...


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin (4 Jul 2005)

This was on the radio (a call-in show of some sort) here in Edmonton today as an example of a military "cover-up".  Apparently, the author of the article had to resort to an access to information request to gather this nugget of information.  From what little I heard, the host was saying that this was an embarrassment, etc, etc, _ad nauseum_.

Frankly, I'm stunned that the chain of command would even consider renting commercial paintball equipment - even in the absence of alternatives.  Makes us - collectively - look like a bunch of walts and "airsofters"...  The objective could have easily been obtained by using blank and issue weapons, with no danger of picking up bad habits (as KevinB points out).  I strongly suspect that this has little to do with unavailability of "proper" equipment; instead, my guess is it can be chalked up to someone's bright idea to make training "interesting".  :


----------



## MikeM (4 Jul 2005)

Don't see any mention about using MILES, or was that tasked out somewhere else too? :


----------



## downinOZ (5 Jul 2005)

MikeM - MILES gear is a GI-NORMOUS logisitics exercise in just getting the stuff to the area, onto the people, calibrated, etc...  and, IMO, not worth the effort for a two day ex.  Anyone know costs for getting that stuff, with SMEs to training area for weekend ex?  TR, if you were a unit DCO who had to adapt because the gear was somewhere else, and, being well aware of the "Nothing is too good for the troops" environment the military has been in previously, wouldn't you make some attempt to put a bit of realism into the training if the opportunity exists?  The IA's don't transfer, but so what?  Entry drills and reaction time will be the same, a charged atmosphere with adrenalin pumping will be the same, and the ability to see some measure of success/improvement of drills and assess areas for further development will be the same.  I think the HQ did a great job weighing up using "Bang Bang"/"LIGHTNING BOLT, LIGHTNING BOLT  and adding the smallest measure of realism to what could have been, boring.

What an excellent positive spin on RSS staff - another chance to participate in creative and lateral thinking in an environment which requires adaptation on a regular basis.  No smiley as that's sincere.


----------



## Britney Spears (5 Jul 2005)

In my limited experience with commercial paintball, the biggest issue I've had is that the kit isn't nearly as durable or robust as a C-7 is. I can't seem to get through a single attack without breaking at least 3 of the guns, stumbling around in dark rooms, through windows, over obstacles, etc. Usually, there's enough casualties for most of us to have working weapons most of the time, but it seems to hamper the flow of the excercise if everyone keeps dropping their hopper every two steps.

The civive painball folks don't apprieciate us trying to smash mouseholes through drywall with their guns either.


----------



## 1feral1 (5 Jul 2005)

Ah MILES, here the Aussie version is called IWSS (Individual Weapon Simulation System), and is based on the US MILES. Yes its a nightmare, calibrating with 'god guns', and its a continious problem getting set up, new batts, old batts, dead batts, and the lads hate it.

Too much BS.

I have umpired many times with this crap, and it should be sold as ballast!

If soldiers must train with eqpt that deals in a 'sting' say simunition or something similar. This way, one learns to keep one's bum down, and one will feel the sting of getting shot. it becomes more than a game  ;D

Cheers,

Wes


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin (5 Jul 2005)

downinOZ said:
			
		

> MikeM - MILES gear is a GI-NORMOUS logisitics exercise in just getting the stuff to the area, onto the people, calibrated, etc...   and, IMO, not worth the effort for a two day ex.   Anyone know costs for getting that stuff, with SMEs to training area for weekend ex?   TR, if you were a unit DCO who had to adapt because the gear was somewhere else, and, being well aware of the "Nothing is too good for the troops" environment the military has been in previously, wouldn't you make some attempt to put a bit of realism into the training if the opportunity exists?   The IA's don't transfer, but so what?   Entry drills and reaction time will be the same, a charged atmosphere with adrenalin pumping will be the same, and the ability to see some measure of success/improvement of drills and assess areas for further development will be the same.   I think the HQ did a great job weighing up using "Bang Bang"/"LIGHTNING BOLT, LIGHTNING BOLT  and adding the smallest measure of realism to what could have been, boring.
> 
> What an excellent positive spin on RSS staff - another chance to participate in creative and lateral thinking in an environment which requires adaptation on a regular basis.   No smiley as that's sincere.



Been there, and as the story points out, the optics are terrible.  When the Reserves are desparately attempting to shake off the "social club" image, they need to start thinking inside the box a bit more.  I doubt (and will stand corrected by those in the know) that a Regular Force unit/formation would have rented civilian paintball equipment for an exercise, no matter what the justification, particularly one so much in the civilian eye.  After all, this was work up training for a much more realistic exercise in the US, as KevinB points out.  "Nothing" is hardly what these soldiers got in this instance, but that seems forgotten in the midst of all the hand-wringing.


----------



## devil39 (5 Jul 2005)

Wes,

I have always enjoyed training with MILES, and as an Infantryman I have always felt that I have learned many valuable lessons as a result of MILES training.

I trained with MILES 2000 (newer version) in Autumn 2001, and I found it to be an excellent and practically transparent system.  It was simple to calibrate (no more aiming grid boxes), rarely malfunctioned, was easy to reset, and gave very useful readings, such as which person made which kill, at what time, and against who (especially useful for analyzing Blue on Blue... which happens).

There is still a requirement for umpiring, but it is far better now than how we had to umpire in the old days with only an umpire guide book, experience and common sense (rarely were all three found in the same place  )


----------



## KevinB (5 Jul 2005)

I will admit that one day elelments of B and A Coy 1VP did go paintballing - but at our own expence and on a "adventure training day" as somethign for fun - nothing serious.

I've gone paintballing three time in my life - while it is somewaht fun it is nothing near realistic.

Anyone suggesting it is a tool needs their head examined.   Miles and Miles 2000 have their places - but they fall short for urban operations due to the size and location of the sensors and the divergence (or lack there of) of the beam.

Lastly - The biggest problem I have observed both REG and RES is units trying to do CQB on the cheap.   1) Training needs to be done by a REAL (as opposed to imagined) UOI, clowing aroudn force on force with no basics is a WASTE of $.   2) Excersises need to be observed by UOI's - cause we all tend to lose focus at times - this is not a game and CANNOT be treated like one - this is the bread and butter - KILLING THE ENEMY.

 3) Factor in a Tactical Casualty care system for downed members - this is the biggest problem I have observed - since a number of times the site may onyl have 1 UOI and he is busy watching the movements and drills he cannot 'drop in' to give a sitrep on the members who are hit so they can be factored into play.

 4) Weapons handling - it is still a weapon treat it with the respect it deserves.


----------



## MikeM (5 Jul 2005)

Agree with you on that Devil, few months back I was on a large exercise with the MILES 2000 and there wasn't too many problems that couldn't be resolved quicky.

 However, point noted on the logistical nightmare, although I found the MILES 2000 Equipment to be quite good on all the occasions I have used it. Had a fair share of bad experiences too with the older system in Kentucky though.


----------



## mcnutt_p (5 Jul 2005)

Wesley H. Allen said:
			
		

> *If soldiers must train with eqpt that deals in a 'sting' say simunition or something similar. This way, one learns to keep one's bum down, and one will feel the sting of getting shot*. it becomes more than a game   ;D
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Wes



Training with civvy paintball guns is not a new method. I remember reading an article in the Maple Leaf in 2004 where the Royal Winnipeg Rifles and other units in 38 Bde were training that way.

If it works, and it is all you can get might as well use it.


----------



## KevinB (5 Jul 2005)

mcnutt_p said:
			
		

> Training with civvy paintball guns is not a new method. I remember reading an article in the Maple Leaf in 2004 where the Royal Winnipeg Rifles and other units in 38 Bde were training that way.
> 
> If it works, and it is all you can get might as well use it.



 : So some other fucked up organization did it makes it right?

IT DOES NOT WORK


----------



## devil39 (5 Jul 2005)

Only did civvy paintball once.... seemed like there were lots of bad lessons to be learned


----------



## mcnutt_p (5 Jul 2005)

It is not perfect, but if it can train someone with basic tactics, and how to operate as a team. Then they got what they wanted.


----------



## Infanteer (5 Jul 2005)

If you bothered to read the thread, you'd have noticed that it can't be used to teach basic tactics and teamwork because it doesn't effectively simulate dismounted combat.


----------



## KevinB (6 Jul 2005)

mcnutt_p said:
			
		

> It is not perfect, but if it can train someone with basic tactics, and how to operate as a team. Then they got what they wanted.



Please enlighten me with your Infantry experience.

Since three of us - specifically Devil_39 - a senior PPCLI officer with a company command in Afghanistan under OEF.
Infanteer and I have all said it is a BAD idea both of who have operational INFANTRY experience.

I can teach urban operations with a stick - and BETTER - than I could to troops with paint ball toys.


----------



## McG (6 Jul 2005)

mcnutt_p said:
			
		

> ... if it can train someone with basic tactics, and how to operate as a team . . .


Blank rounds do this much.


----------



## Bomber (6 Jul 2005)

I am still amazed that the made promotional posters heralding that RWR paintball adventure.  I can see the realism of using a plastic, air powered, 200 round blow gun.  Watch those paintball game son TV and tell me that is real training, those guys just dump about 10 000 rounds at the opponents and are amazed when they actually hit someone.  Even with no ammo, just a C7 with a bolt in it, and a bunch of tennis balls, I have got better training than what I would expect from one of those limitless free for alls.  Simunition is a great training tool, once the kits are in service for the support weapons, training will change, and a bunch of this macho lamo crap about training will be replaced with scars, blood, and lessons learned.  Once a C6 and C9 start spitting pain, a lot of tactics will change, no more just running up to a machine gunner and firing your couple of rounds, being declared the victor, and then taking over the captured machine gun.


----------



## Haggis (6 Jul 2005)

downinOZ said:
			
		

> MILES gear is a GI-NORMOUS logisitics exercise in just getting the stuff to the area, onto the people, calibrated, etc...   and, IMO, not worth the effort for a two day ex.



I disagree.

33 CBG got about 3 companies worth of MILES on loan from the US Army for an exercise in late April 05.   I was an umpire on that ex.  They drove the stuff from Ft Drum to CFB Petawawa. On friday evening they issued and calibrated it production line fashion during inclearance (at which time they AAG'd everyone, and also issued IMPs, blank ammo and EXCON stores).

I went off like a well oiled machine. Logisitcally challenging?  Yes.  Worth the effort?  You betcha!


----------



## mcnutt_p (6 Jul 2005)

MCG said:
			
		

> Blank rounds do this much.



_"Maj. Chris Lemay also said the 150 soldiers who participated, most of them reservists, could have used blanks in their C-7 rifles but the operation would have been less realistic because *blanks give no indication whether a target has been hit*.

â Å“The exercise had to do with house clearing â â€ you kick the door open and fire,â ? Mr. Lemay said.

*â Å“With blanks, you're not sure you're doing the right thing because you don't know if you hit your enemy*.â ?_

I understand what you are saying, about blank round, as we used them in Meaford and they worked. Alright they couldn't get Simunition or MILES gear.



			
				Bomber said:
			
		

> no more just running up to a machine gunner and firing your couple of rounds, being declared the victor, and then taking over the captured machine gun.



I think that was the whole point of using paintball, yes it is not effective, but it was at the time, what they needed. At least the were not using airsoft.


----------



## 392 (6 Jul 2005)

> â Å“The exercise had to do with house clearing â â€ you kick the door open and fire,â ? Mr. Lemay said.



This is NOT how you do house clearing in this day and age. As I'm sure the Op Apollo / OP Athena pers who have done raids and US pers on this board with operational experience in Iraq can attest, there are friendlies or non combatants in the buildings that are being searched or "cleared", and indiscriminate firing after "kicking" open the door can turn a so so day into a really bad one.

As far as no simunition kits available, I call BS. If 2CER can get sim kits for a troop level (platoon) exercise, then I'm sure a reserve CBG could have gotten them as well for workups to a larger _multinational_ ex. Besides, helos are hard are not the easiest to get, so if LFAA deemed those important enough for the execution of the "mission", why not deem simunition kits as important? Sounds like the ball got dropped somewhere along the line.



> Known under the trade name Simunition, the 5.56-calibre soft bullets are manufactured by SNC Technologies Inc.



I'm surprised no one picked up on this yet - Simunition is not 5.56, it's 9mm - hence why you have to use their upper receiver and magazines when simunition is in play.


----------



## devil39 (6 Jul 2005)

392 said:
			
		

> I'm surprised no one picked up on this yet - Simunition is not 5.56, it's 9mm - hence why you have to use their upper receiver and magazines when simunition is in play.



Simunition is available in both calibres.


----------



## Michael OLeary (6 Jul 2005)

392 said:
			
		

> This is NOT how you do house clearing in this day and age. As I'm sure the Op Apollo / OP Athena pers who have done raids and US pers on this board with operational experience in Iraq can attest, there are friendlies or non combatants in the buildings that are being searched or "cleared", and indiscriminate firing after "kicking" open the door can turn a so so day into a really bad one.



Considering the readiness of many on the boards to emphasize the importance of maintaining 'war-fighting' skills vice those variants used in peace support ops; there's nothing wrong with a little old school door kicking and house clearing. It's in mission preparation and rehearsals that troops will have confirmed to them threat levels and permissive behaviour.



			
				392 said:
			
		

> As far as no simunition kits available, I call BS. If 2CER can get sim kits for a troop level (platoon) exercise, then I'm sure a reserve CBG could have gotten them as well for workups to a larger _multinational_ ex. Besides, helos are hard are not the easiest to get, so if LFAA deemed those important enough for the execution of the "mission", why not deem simunition kits as important? Sounds like the ball got dropped somewhere along the line.



Actually, Exercise SOUTHBOUND TROOPER, for the five years it has been conducted, is a unit led and executed exercise run by the Princess Louise Fusiliers. It is not an Area or Brigade HQ conducted training activity. In my experience with the exercise, it received little special support or prioritization of effort from the Area HQ short of the usual staffing of unit submited requests.

Rather then criticizing without supporting facts, perhaps you should admire how efficient the reserve unit's training capability is to organize not only these supporting activities but the annual exercise to Fort Pickett (which had IIRC 350 Canadian participants and nearly as many US participants this year) within its existing budget. Don't fall into the trap of accepting the media's negative spin, they also failed to identify and emphasize the unique accomplishments of this annual training endeavour.


----------



## Haggis (6 Jul 2005)

devil39 said:
			
		

> Simunition is available in both calibres.



Sure is.  Lots of great info at: http://www.simunition.com/index.php?section_id=51


----------



## KevinB (6 Jul 2005)

Michael O'Leary said:
			
		

> Considering the readiness of many on the boards to emphasize the importance of maintaining 'war-fighting' skills vice those variants used in peace support ops; there's nothing wrong with a little old school door kicking and house clearing. It's in mission preparation and rehearsals that troops will have confirmed to them threat levels and permissive behaviour.



Sorry thats crap - the old school methods are dangerous - it is recommend by NCO's and Officers not familiar with newer methods.  Even in high intensity situations there is no excsue for the boot door and spray crap.  It is dangerous to both our troops and any potnetial non combatants in the area.  Got a house you know there are no friends in - BURN it - the flaming marshmellows will run out when they have had enough.  Our job is killing with the least loss to friendlies, so NEVER reinforce or teach a fault.

IF you try precision entry versus the old school blaster method - you will notice two things - Precision kills quicker with less rounds, Spraying wasted a lot of ammo for limited sucesses and many failures.
This can be painfully observed by catwalking a unit doing entry's with sim kits force on force or live against fig/ tgt's.


----------



## Michael OLeary (6 Jul 2005)

Actually, since neither of us were there, and the news story offers very few details; neither of us should presume how indiscriminate the firing during the clearing drills may or may not have been.


----------



## Haggis (6 Jul 2005)

This exercise was no big secret and wasn't "covered up".  In fact the Maple Leaf gave it a full page: http://www.dnd.ca/site/Community/MapleLeaf/vol_8/vol8_09/809_13.pdf

The focus of the G&M article isnt the training methodology, it's the damn paintball gear.  So what???

The fact is, paintball or not, the units involved at least made an attempt  to give the troops some relevant, meaningful and different training.  Clearly, they even filed a PXR that the G&M reporter got hold of. 

This ex probably resulted in unintended recruting and retention benefits for the units involved, without expending more scarce Class A $$$ sitting in a mall passing out flyers or visiting high schools at lunch hour.

They tried.... at least give them credit for that.


----------



## 2 Cdo (6 Jul 2005)

It's really quite simple, simmunition and miles are training tools, paintball is a game! :threat:


----------



## purple peguin (6 Jul 2005)

It's all fun and games until someone gets hurt... Then its a sport   ;D .


----------



## 392 (6 Jul 2005)

devil39 said:
			
		

> Simunition is available in both calibres.



My apologies - the kits I've used are 9mm and require the transfer of upper receivers.


----------



## 392 (6 Jul 2005)

Michael O'Leary said:
			
		

> Rather then criticizing without supporting facts, perhaps you should admire how efficient the reserve unit's training capability is to organize not only these supporting activities but the annual exercise to Fort Pickett (which had IIRC 350 Canadian participants and nearly as many US participants this year) within its existing budget. Don't fall into the trap of accepting the media's negative spin, they also failed to identify and emphasize the unique accomplishments of this annual training endeavour.



With or without supporting facts, the fact is they still trained without the proper equipment. I am sorry if that doesn't make an ounce of difference to you, but it does to me. Too often I have seen the "let's make do with what we have" attitude with notional or improper equipment for the job. I am of the belief that if you're gonna do it, do it right or don't do it at all. I am sorry, but paintballing (regardless of location, tactics, etc.) IS NOT the same as training with the proper equipment. 

I congratulate them on being able to hold this ex in the US while staying within budget, but I don't recall that being an issue.


----------



## mcnutt_p (6 Jul 2005)

purple peguin said:
			
		

> It's all fun and games until someone gets hurt... Then its a sport     ;D .



I don't think it works in this context though.

I do not think thought that it is just reserves using paintball. I've gone to H-110 to pick up parts and got back to work and opened the tri-wall and it would be Eagle Brand paintballs intended for 2 Svc Bn.


----------



## Haggis (6 Jul 2005)

392 said:
			
		

> With or without supporting facts, the fact is they still trained without the proper equipment. I am sorry if that doesn't make an ounce of difference to you, but it does to me. Too often I have seen the "let's make do with what we have" attitude with notional or improper equipment for the job. I am of the belief that if you're gonna do it, do it right or don't do it at all. I am sorry, but paintballing (regardless of location, tactics, etc.) IS NOT the same as training with the proper equipment.



It would be nice if a planner or participant in this exercise could weigh in with some facts because: 

- "Without supporting facts" we will never know if they tried to get the proper equipment.

- "Without supporting facts" we will never know if they were turned down at the last minute and had to improvise rather than cancel so that 150 odd soldiers wouldn't get screwed out of a weekends pay from the Army and/or the civvy job they booked off so they can train.

- "Without supporting facts" we also will never know if their Reg F staff deemed the ex a success (some of whom could have been UOI) and why.

The Reserves and, to a lesser but still significant extent, the Regular Force have been using the "let's make do with what we have" attitude for over 20 years.  Improvisation and adaptability is what makes good exercises great in our Army.


----------



## McG (6 Jul 2005)

mcnutt_p said:
			
		

> ... if it can train someone with basic tactics, and how to operate as a team . . .





			
				MCG said:
			
		

> Blank rounds do this much.





			
				mcnutt_p said:
			
		

> _"Maj. Chris Lemay also said the 150 soldiers who participated, most of them reservists, could have used blanks in their C-7 rifles but the operation would have been less realistic because *blanks give no indication whether a target has been hit*.
> 
> The exercise had to do with house clearing you kick the door open and fire, Mr. Lemay said.
> 
> ...


mcnutt,
Your getting your arguments crossed.  If the intent was to "train someone with basic tactics, and how to operate as a team" then blanks would have been the better option.  However, with a different rate of fire, different balistics, different sights, different drills, etc how well can a paint gun show where a C7 would have shot?


----------



## Steel Badger (6 Jul 2005)

I have had the oppourtunity to use Miles and Simunition...

While sim covers the close range battle, it falls short in covering the entirety of the battle space (it also has those Helmets, Quick-Fogging, Useless,   Mark6)...

Miles (When it works!) allows the operations at most ranges...again...when it works....

Surely a trained Umpire / Observer cadre armed with motorolas could take the place of MIles etc in situations where those systems are not available or of limited use.

From personal experience I will say that without competent Umpires / Battle Controllers, even Sim degenerates into a shoot em up.....The value of bang leads to ouch falls off when a unit transitions from battle exercises to "playing guns"...

 I agree with some of bretheren from the Regular Army that paintball / sim appears to be a ploy in creating "interesting" training for the reserves...
It's a very funny thing tho that higher HQ's version of "interesting training" is not always the same one as held by the private soldier: to quote good old Rudyard Kipling : "Tommy aint a bloody fool....You bet that Tommy sees!"

My NCO's and soldier's are not fooled by claims that just having SiM etc will "make" the ex.....and they expect their leadership (me, along with others) to provide them with meaningful, relevant training that they can be proud off, WITHOUT trying to masquerade as Scuba-Ninjas....

I know that I have put alot of thought and effort into creating a Battle Controller staff for exercises..
Note: i am not talking about Soviet Style exercise choreography.....rather the provision of Weapons Effect Umpires as part of a Battle Controllers. The Battle control cadre would have a command cell and several dets. They would funciton as EXCON as well as Umpires in an integrated staff that would exercise ALL levels   of the unit....

But this is hard work at my level especially when my colleagues in our RSS det barely keep their heads above water fighting to keep my soldier's equipped at a basic level...

*****PLEASE NOTE: I am NOT crying that "The mean old regs took our kit."   My soldiers and I understand clearly the requirement to fully equip and train the units heading overseas.......(Especially as more and more of our own are accompanying you)****

To sum up......

Just Paintball is just playing.....and Miles without a coherent FTX structure and Battle Control staff can also be "just playing" 
The leaders in the reserve world owe it to our soldiers and our regiments to listen to comments like those posted by KevinB and others We should carefully consider ALL ideas and criticism........The final goal being a highly trained soldier..........

SB


----------



## Roche (6 Jul 2005)

This reporter seems to want to make the army only look bad here. It was a good training weekend, until it came to the paintball. however, once people got a hold of those paintball guns things turned into a game, Kinda totally got rid of any realism that was there, plus the enemy force weren't thinking about realism at all and decided not to "play the game" properly (as in act as if you are actually being fired upon with real ammo). Simunition would have been a much better training aid though.  Things are a million times more serious when it's in use because it can easily hurt people, you'll know if you've ever been hit with the stuff. Along with that, sim makes people acountable for the rounds they're firing.


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin (6 Jul 2005)

I would put Roche's fine post into the "supporting facts" category... and I'll leave it at that.  

Roche:  very valuable input to this discussion - thanks.

TR


----------



## Haggis (6 Jul 2005)

Haggis said:
			
		

> It would be nice if a planner or participant in this exercise could weigh in with some facts



Looks like I got my wish!

Thanks, Roche.



			
				Steel Badger said:
			
		

> ...without competent Umpires / Battle Controllers, even Sim degenerates into a shoot em up.....The value of bang leads to ouch falls off when a unit transitions from battle exercises to "playing guns"...



Well said.  Both MILES and Simuntion are useful training aids, but they should not be used to prop up an otherwise shaky and poorly controlled exercise plan.

Unless the leadership learns it's lessons in a formal atmosphere, such as the AAR process with trained O/Cs and umpires, the troops will quickly tire of being killed by leaders making the same mistakes ad nauseum.


----------



## mo-litia (6 Jul 2005)

Bomber said:
			
		

> Simunition is a great training tool, once the kits are in service for the support weapons, training will change, and a bunch of this macho lamo crap about training will be replaced with scars, blood, and lessons learned.   Once a C6 and C9 start spitting pain, a lot of tactics will change, no more just running up to a machine gunner and firing your couple of rounds, being declared the victor, and then taking over the captured machine gun.



It'll be a good day for training when this stuff is finally ready to be used on a regular basis by all troops; reg and reserve.


----------



## sjm (12 Jul 2005)

Used to run a paintball field in the Ottawa area with a few high school buddies from '82 to '90.  On several occasions we had formed platoons come down from Pet for "fun".  Always in civvies and always on weekends, why? Because it was fun, not work.  No one considered it realistic training, even in the dark ages.

The days usually started with one game of capture the flag.  Them (15 to 30 most times, high of 40 one time) vs us (there were 4, sometimes 5 of us operators).  We *always* won the first game.  While they tried to actually capture the flag we would eliminate them and eventually walk off with their flag.  The groups always came down for fun while we were using their own manuals against them.  Fire and movement was the secret to that GAME.  No paint ball gun will hit a man sprinting through the woods.  We worked in two man teams. We were either stopped briefly to take an aimed shot or moving like madmen.  Find an enemy, one guy shoot the other flank.  Of course home field advantage was a given.

It did teach a few things that the senior members would point out during the day to the troops.  Three of the big lessons learned are here, not necessarily the top three but my memory isn't quite what it used to be.


a. Teamwork, no individuals stood a chance in the firefight against even a slightly organized opponent.
              -Both guys can't be reloading or clearing a stoppage at the same time
              -one guy shoots or watches, the other moves(as quickly as possible)

b. The junior leaders, sometimes down to the fireteam commanders would have to make instant decisions.  The worst decision is no decision and by the end of the day there were very few bodies playing the static game.

c. Good communications will usually guarantee success regardless of how well an attack is planned.  We had the old MK 1 voice box.  Needs no batteries, works in the rain...  The level of noise didn't come close to firearms but one of the biggest challenges was getting the troops to give decent firecontrol orders. By the end of the day it was hard to think over all the yelling.

Paint ball has its place, I'd put it in the teambuilding category and not necessarily in the training category but there are areas where the two can't be divided.

I'm sure old "KevinB" remembers the paint ball jungle lanes with pop up targets the Regt use to run during the family fun days for the troops 



kids. 


It was fun sure but not a complete waste of time.


----------



## KevinB (13 Jul 2005)

Stef - yes - for teamwork and fun - sure I but dont included it in training - especially for CQB.  

 The problem paintball teaches is you can outrun it -- sadly bullets have a tendance of catching up to you. -- Sims on the other hand  ;D they catch the runner too.

As I think many of us have pointed out a trained Observer Controller team is key - since even sims and miles have faults (hiding on the otherside of a door...)

 To be an ass (and instill trg value) I kicked open a door in our Sim house - knowing one of the troops would try to close it - and when he tried I shot him in the underarm 6 times while he had exposed (thru the crack in the doorjamb) his arm to close the door.  

Realistically we need live killhouses as well - for you can see in your troops that a lot of skills and common sense goes out the window as soon as the live round gets chambered.  I had one of my troops decide to "meander" across a room - so much for kick door turn right - and he literally walked in front of my muzzle while I was engaging two tgts in my zone (lucky for him I did not have tunnel vision).

We need training - and we need it regularily - but more importantly we need it properly structured and controlled while executing it.

The problem we face is HOW to make a realsitic and useful trainign environment and still make it safe

Naturally we cant use breaching shotguns while using a live opfor - and due to the construct of most of our SIM rnages we can't properly execute breaches - nor can we use DD's or other explosive sims due to the firehazards - so the poor shmoe wearing the MOE kit has to lug around a bunch of stuff wear cant use in our trainign environment - well other than C Coy 1VP who demo'd a buildign two weeks ago on base - same goes with the demise of Pioneers we have VERY few Infanteers qualified to conduct a hasty explosive breach 







Even Delta wears helmets  





Ammo point - at nearly $1 a rd sims HAVE to be properly employed - anything else is just stupid.
















and yes they sometimes hurt.


----------



## Jarnhamar (15 Jul 2005)

> Ottawa â â€ Canadian soldiers testing their fighting skills in a rare urban exercise were forced to rent commercial paintball weapons because they couldn't get proper army gear, a newly disclosed document shows.



So instead of us using blanks and running around arguing Your dead NOOOO your dead, we used paintballs to show soldiers if they don't keep their heads down their going to get shot and somehow this is a stupid idea?

Troops who only train with blanks develop some stupid stupid habbits which is always apparent the first time they use paintballs or simunition.


----------



## KevinB (16 Jul 2005)

Ghost - blanks by themselves are useless too.


----------



## Jarnhamar (16 Jul 2005)

> Ghost - blanks by themselves are useless too.



Thats what I ment.   Using blanks teach a soldier only the most basic of drills. I don't know how many times i've just seen troops firing off their weapon without even aming. 'It's only blanks who cares.'


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (16 Jul 2005)

Though I am far from an expert on Infantry training, I never forgot [to this day even] my first encounter with a blank. Doing the march out to Granville in 78, we got "attacked". Well, little Brucie ran off to a knoll on the side of the trail, jumped over it and was then "shot" by a blank from mere feet away. I had ran right into the firing lane and never forgot that my first "encounter" with the enemy made me a moronic causality in mere seconds cause I wanted to play "ninjasnipercommando".
Like I said, I never forgot this simple life lesson and I have the blank to thank for it, so I would say they are not totally useless, just need to be "played" right and to the right level of soldier.


----------



## Jacqueline (14 Nov 2006)

The Israelis are training paint ball guns.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061113/ap_on_re_mi_ea/israel_guerilla_training


----------



## Synthos (14 Nov 2006)

This thread is an interesting read, but the end game is pretty clear:

Paint ball guns are -very- inaccurate. The balls drop like 1 foot in the first 10 meters if you have a poo gun (which most rentals are).
Paint balls are much slower than bullets obviously.
The above two points combined make for fast paced running action, but inaccurate depictions of real combat.

Paint ball guns can do some things for you:
Train instinctive shooting, possibly even target identification as well.
CQC. Yes they would work sufficiently for these areas....  if you only loaded 30 rounds into the hopper at a time.
Any weapons training that doesn't involved weapon IAs, reloading, or accuracy of any kind. (leaves very little doesn't it?)

Notice that for all the things that paint ball guns *can* do for you can BE DONE WITH BLANKS! Because paint ball guns are so inaccurate it doesn't matter if you use paint ball guns or blanks, both don't hit your intended target!

Yes paint ball guns are fun because you can shoot buddy and run around and such, and you don't have to clean them before or afterwords, but they do nothing that can't be done with blanks


----------



## Dissident (14 Nov 2006)

Joint Thunder '06, South Dakota. Training with the SD NG.

JT is a huge exercise for the SD NG, its their main concentration for the year, NG units come from as far as Colorado and elsewhere to "play".

During the 2 weeks of the ex, there are many different "lanes" they go through. One of which is MOUT/FIBUA with paintball. Sure, it gets the adrenaline going and you can identify some shortcomings, like GRIT, how to keep control of the section and what happens when a plan unravels. 

But there is a serious limitation when you can use the "cover" of a small bush a mere 40m away from one of the bad guys unloading on you. 

Top notch instructors, we learned a lot. Paintballs remains a toy nonetheless.


----------



## Wookilar (14 Nov 2006)

I've been playing paintball since '88. Joined the CF in '93.

The two have little in common. There are magazine feed paintball slingers out there that are made to "simulate" military drills. But they suck.

Trying to follow/teach proper doctrine/training procedures is almost impossible with the wrong training aids. This was someones bright idea and they were looking for an "ataboy" when they should have been given a slap to the back of the head.

Oh, and the original story may have published in the Globe, but it's from the CP. And we all know that the CP is a very factual news organization and would never dream of putting a negative slant on anything the military does... ...whatever.

Wook


----------



## MP101 (15 Nov 2006)

Synthos said:
			
		

> This thread is an interesting read, but the end game is pretty clear:
> 
> Paint ball guns are -very- inaccurate. The balls drop like 1 foot in the first 10 meters if you have a poo gun (which most rentals are).
> Paint balls are much slower than bullets obviously.
> ...



Although many paintball guns are inaccurate and hard to load, they have SIM-ulation guns that actually look like MP5's and other guns that load like a real gun (With a 30 round mag) and can shoot like a gun (accurate and reliable). Some are inaccurate ($20-50 ones) and some are deadly accurate ($30-1000) which shoot in excess of 400 FPS. 

I find it to be prety good to train with these guns in close quarters because they are similar in accuracy (most of the time)


----------



## Wookilar (15 Nov 2006)

MP101,

In short, NO!! I checked your profile, so I will go a little easy on you and be polite.

There is only one model of paintball marker that uses a magazine feed system. It sucks. I have used it. The milsim ones you are speaking about are all cosmetic. Just because it looks like a magazine, doesn't mean it is. At best, they are an expansion chamber to improve CO2 efficiency.

Accuracy: if you think a paintball is as accurate as a bullet, you are mistaken. They are not and the reasons are way too lengthy to post here. PM me if you want some more info.

And just a point: Let me know where you play, because if you've got markers running over 300 fps (the international safety limit, just to let you know) then my friends and I will stay away.


----------



## patrick666 (15 Nov 2006)

> Although many paintball guns are inaccurate and hard to load, they have SIM-ulation guns that actually look like MP5's and other guns that load like a real gun (With a 30 round mag) and can shoot like a gun (accurate and reliable). Some are inaccurate ($20-50 ones) and some are deadly accurate ($30-1000) which shoot in excess of 400 FPS.



Those are Airsoft guns, I believe. They fire pellets rather than paintballs. I've seen replicas pistols, shotguns, sniper rifles, m16s, mp5s and all sorts of things. It's scarey how realistic they are. Some people who play Airsoft are just right into it with full combat gear and mics. To each his own, I suppose!


----------



## Jarnhamar (15 Nov 2006)

> MP101,
> 
> In short, NO!! I checked your profile, so I will go a little easy on you and be polite.



So what's the deciding factor in someones profile that dictates whether your polite with them or not?


----------



## Thorvald (15 Nov 2006)

Patrick H. said:
			
		

> Those are Airsoft guns, I believe. They fire pellets rather than paintballs. I've seen replicas pistols, shotguns, sniper rifles, m16s, mp5s and all sorts of things. It's scarey how realistic they are. Some people who play Airsoft are just right into it with full combat gear and mics. To each his own, I suppose!



He may be referring to the "Professional Training Weapon" (read: bloody expensive airsoft gun) that they are trying to get the Law Enforcement community to adopt down in the states.  Promo/intro videos are posted on youtube for your entertainment during lunch:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKcqJIgrz0o
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Dq9KO2T7XM




> There is only one model of paintball marker that uses a magazine feed system. It sucks. I have used it.



I assume you are referring to the "Real Action Marker", RAP4/5.  That one even ejects "shells".

http://rap4.com/video/MV.WMV
http://www.rap4.com/paintball/

Cheers


----------



## brihard (15 Nov 2006)

Wookilar said:
			
		

> MP101,
> 
> In short, NO!! I checked your profile, so I will go a little easy on you and be polite.
> 
> ...



Begging your pardon, but you're out to lunch- there are a lot of relatively newly developed markers that operate using magazine fed systems, with more coming out regularly. Some of them are impressively realistic looking, and some of them work damned well. Gradually those two qualities are coming together. I'd suggest you look up the ATS markers for examples of a quality mag-fed system. The (c)Rap-4 guns are mostly junk, but even they're starting to get their act together with the gen 5 stuff.

Paintball's use as a training tool is still dubious, but please endeavour to furnish the guys interested in discussing it with complete information. Just because you've not seen them out at Ground Zero doesn't mean they aren't on the market. companies recognize that there is a very active military and law enforcement market if they can get a good .68 calibre mag-fed system on the market, and many companies are working to accommodate that.

EDIT TO ADD: You're nonetheless correct in that MP101 did not present the information accurately either. The markers he was mentioning are definitely dubious.


----------



## Wookilar (15 Nov 2006)

I agree that the RAP's are mostly garbage (but getting better, quality wise) but the ATS is hardly new. I think that the RAP system has more promise (mechanically speaking). ATS has been working on their system for almost a decade now. It still sucks and while they certainly look and feel proper now (the balance has certainly improved over the years) you can not do the proper drills on them. Also, the issues with the conveyor belt system (jamming, coming off the rollers, etc) are huge especially given the current trend toward more brittle, higher-end paint and the quality of the plastic used to make the magazines, especially the 200 rnd ones that are supposed to simulate light machine guns.

It is the drills that are important, not the equipment. We can argue all day long about whether X-gun is better than Y-gun and give our reasons why. In the end it doesn't really matter. It is not possible, at this time, to realistically simulate C-7/C-9/C-6 drills using paintball guns. I mean equipment drills and tactical procedures.

Simunition uses the same drills (yes, I know the upper receiver is modified) as the C-7, that is what is required. Using even the highest quality mil-sim paintslingers out there (which cost as much or more than a complete C-7), you are not going to teach anything that will keep them alive. Except maybe don't stand in front of the door.

I am no infanteer, but I am an avid shooter (shootist?). I am quite familiar and comfortable using my weapons in all sorts of training scenarios (live fire, ambush drills, Miles old and new, simunitions and even the militia bullets of the mid-90's  ;D) and my own personal activities. But, I have far more time with a paintball gun in my hand than I have doing up-he-sees-me-down across the frozen tundra of Wainright (my knees and elbows are aching just thinking about that) or doing close quarters drills.

IMHO Paintball = dubious training value. 

But can be a lot of fun.

And don't even get me started on what I think of Airsoft. To each their own.

note: Ground Zero,.....only played there once so far, not overly impressed. But thanks for looking at my profile.

Ohh, and the polite thing: MP101 has filled out a truthful profile and I saw no reason to hammer him because he does not appear to know the difference between shooting a gelatin capsule and shooting a bullet. Hence the offer of more info if he is interested. Many current 17 year old's can build you a kick-@ss gaming computer, but have never fired a rifle. Didn't mean to be condescending (but ninerD says I can be).


----------



## Red 6 (15 Nov 2006)

I've used MILES since way back when and Simunitions also. MILES gear comes in a much broader choice for different weapon systems and is about as grunt-proof nowadays as they can make it. Sims are good for certain training applications too. It depends on what you're doing and how many troops are involved. Even just using blanks alone is good for some battle drills.

The critical factors no matter what sort of training, in my opinion:

1) Realistic training to standard that has a clear task, mission and standard. 
2) Observer/Controllers for externally evaluated training who are outside the unit command loop and bring a disinterested set of eyes to the event.
3) The same equipment that you would use in combat as close as you can replicate in a training environment.
4) A solid AAR to bring out weak points and areas to sustain.


----------



## MP101 (15 Nov 2006)

Wookilar said:
			
		

> MP101,
> 
> In short, NO!! I checked your profile, so I will go a little easy on you and be polite.
> 
> ...



Oh, i heard that it is an accurate gun and is reliable, but i guess it is not. and i didnt really mean that is an accurate gun (at far ranges) and i also meant that you would use it at 400 fps on training purposes at a military base or military practicing. Since i do not paintball anymore, i am not 100% on all the newer products.


----------

