# Troops carrying pistols outside the gate



## Jarnhamar (3 Aug 2006)

Just stemming from a friendly army chat debate on whether soldiers leaving the camp (KAF) should ALL carry pistols as well as rifles.

My argument for all soldiers carrying pistols.
-A soldier may find themself without a their rifle through negligence (God forbid) or it may be destroyed during an IED/mine strike
-A rifle may be rendered inoperable due to damage caused while fighting etc.., the pistol acting as self defense until the soldier can get another long barreled weapon.
-Using a rifle while in the confines of a vehicle could be tricky.
-Better to air on the side of caution than be cause weaponless for whatever reason.


----------



## George Wallace (3 Aug 2006)

I do agree with your sentiments, and think that all Troops outside the wire should have pistols also for close-in fighting and emergency, but I doubt that we have the amount to properly equip all.  We will have to be happy if we can equip those who fill 'specialty' positions presently.  Long barrels are still going to be the main means employed, and we should concentrate on equipping everyone with them first.  Pistols would be a luxury afterwards.


----------



## big bad john (3 Aug 2006)

As I said in the chat room, if you were meant to have a pistol, God or the Forces would have issued you one.


----------



## armyrules (3 Aug 2006)

I think its safer to have bothjust in case something happens better to be safe than sorry. 


:cheers:


----------



## paracowboy (3 Aug 2006)

absolutely! Every troop should have a pistol and be taught to use it properly, as well as how to transition.


----------



## Kat Stevens (3 Aug 2006)

100% in agreement, pistolas all around!!


----------



## Haggis (3 Aug 2006)

Pistol+decent training=good!
Pistol+poor/no training= an ND waiting to happen.

If you are going to carry a pistol outside the wire, you must be competent and cofident in it's use.

George:  A reliable source recently told me there are several thousand Browning HPs in depot stocks.


----------



## Wookilar (3 Aug 2006)

Yes,. BUT... as Haggis and para have already stated, they would be no good without the requisite training. Just a famil shoot and safe handling procedures are not enough. Need to know how to use sidearms and long barrel equally well and together.


----------



## Kat Stevens (3 Aug 2006)

So instead of practicing roadblocks and traffic control ad vomitum, let's use that time on workup training to train on the pistols.  If you issue them out when the TF forms up, and expect the troops to follow the proper handling rules that are pounded into you for every other weapon, within 5 years you've got an army full of competent pistol shooters.  Whew, longest sentence I ever wrote.


----------



## George Wallace (3 Aug 2006)

Haggis

As I understand it, many of those are being used to slowly replace the 'old'* worn operational stock currently used.  ( * 'Old' refers to the weapons that have been in use by the Units, not age.  All these pistols were manufactured at the same time.)


----------



## Infanteer (4 Aug 2006)

I remember watching a PAFFO trying to unload a pistol into the bay; scary.  My buddy had to go give her a hand because she was about to drop the thing....


----------



## Haggis (4 Aug 2006)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Haggis
> 
> As I understand it, many of those are being used to slowly replace the 'old'* worn operational stock currently used.  ( * 'Old' refers to the weapons that have been in use by the Units, not age.  All these pistols were manufactured at the same time.)



The problem isn't so much the age of the pistols, it's the condition of the mags.  As this has been beat dead in another thread, I don't want to drag this off topic.  On my last tour I went through three mags in six months.  They just gave up (baseplates fell off, lips bent).  Recently we did some unit CQB shooting.  Every single stoppage we experienced could be remedied by changing to a new(er) magazine.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (4 Aug 2006)

I've been told by a wpn tech that they don't bother fixing anything major on the pistol anymore as there is so many they just replace it with a newer one.  I have a 1TXXX in my vault. ;D 
The tech was surprised and amused.

I would also like to see all carrying pistols, esp vehicle crews ie drivers etc.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (4 Aug 2006)

How about newer pistols Haggis. ;D


----------



## George Wallace (4 Aug 2006)

Quagmire said:
			
		

> How about newer pistols Haggis. ;D



Let's not derail this.  As Haggis stated, we have had a rather indepth discussion on the pros and cons of pistols and various pistol types in several other threads.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (4 Aug 2006)

So now you want to set a precedent. ;D

Derailing stopped.


----------



## Black Watch (4 Aug 2006)

I too would like all personnel equiped with pistols. The point is, I don't think it will happen, because training soldiers costs money and takes time, although I think we should focus more on weapons when training.


----------



## TangoTwoBravo (4 Aug 2006)

Pistols are good for drivers.  Having one or two in the section can also be handy for going into confined spaces.  I'm not sure that everyone needs one, though.  They get in the way and we already have a metric ****load of gear already.

Still, all drivers should have them and if you are going to be in a vehicle then having a pistol is not a bad idea.


----------



## Jammer (4 Aug 2006)

From my experience pistols are essential. Particularly for armd veh crews. You cannot depress your '6 fast enough to fend off a poss VBIED, and your '7A2 will be just as much of a pain in the ass. My team all had pistols, and we will have them again this time.


----------



## armyrules (4 Aug 2006)

So would pistols only be good for armour sice they're inside and wouldn't have to mees with a rifle?


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (4 Aug 2006)

Rifleman drive LAV's which would benifit from having a pistol.  Armoured also have rifles as well.


----------



## George Wallace (4 Aug 2006)

armyrules said:
			
		

> So would pistols only be good for armour sice they're inside and wouldn't have to mees with a rifle?



No.  It doesn't matter what Trade you are.  It depends more on what job you are doing, whether or not you should have the pistol.  It would be easier to equip everyone with pistols as well as carbines or rifles or other weapons (C6 or C9).  The reason we may not see this has been mentioned in other posts, referring to availability, training, etc.


----------



## Jammer (4 Aug 2006)

What I'm saying is that pistols are essential...I believe they should be issued as a sidearm as well. Regardless of rank and or social status.


----------



## Haggis (4 Aug 2006)

Jammer said:
			
		

> What I'm saying is that pistols are essential...I believe they should be issued as a sidearm as well. Regardless of rank and or social status.



Funny you should mention this.  On my last tour I was accompanying my Coy 2IC on a Cordon and Search op (the OC was on leave).  He, being a CFR'd CWO, always liked to carry a rifle.  I carried a pistol most of the time.  The op was conducted with a new unit of the local PD who wouldn't talk with the Coy 2IC, but only with me.  When he asked about this it became apparent that in their culture, the guy with the pistol was "obviously" in charge of the guys with the rifles.  So, in some parts of the world, the pistol does convey "rank and/or social status".

An interesting aside to this is that if everyone carries a pistol, it could make it more difficult for the bad guys to target the leaders.


----------



## Jarnhamar (4 Aug 2006)

> An interesting aside to this is that if everyone carries a pistol, it could make it more difficult for the bad guys to target the leaders.


I remember asking a certain platoon commander overseas why he carried the radio when I was his signaller. He just looked at me and smiled. Took me a second to figure it out, he obviously found it more humorous than I did.

I agree it does seem like carrying a pistol has a huge social status attached to it.  I used to get pissed off seeing guys (who never left the camp) walking around with their pistol on their hip like they were some kind of gun slinger. I also remember the frustrations of constantly passing around the few pistols we had to search teams when we were in houses checking for weapons. The rifles would bang into everything and it was a psychological factor. The people were a lot more friendly when we didn't have assault rifles in their house. (security teams still had em)
Of course we could get away with that because of the low threat level, I just mean to point out we couldn't get pistols for operation reasons yet everyone in camp seemed to have one.



> What I'm saying is that pistols are essential...I believe they should be issued as a sidearm as well. Regardless of rank and or social status.


Exactly.


----------



## TangoTwoBravo (4 Aug 2006)

For vehicle crews (and dismounts) the C8 with the heavy barrel should suffice with the exception of the drivers.  It is handy enough to manipulate from the vehicle hatches in the city.  

Don't neglect the C6 up top.  It has saved lives.

When I've gone on foot I've ditched the pistol (or packed it in the ruck).  If you're always going to be in your vehicle then a pistol isn't going to hurt unless you have an ND.  Its mostly for walking around camp and still be "armed."  Please take a long gun when you go out.


----------



## Kat Stevens (4 Aug 2006)

One long gun is good. One long gun, plus a short "you'll never take me alive, jihadi!" gun is better, in my estimation... :threat:


----------



## geo (4 Aug 2006)

armyrules said:
			
		

> So would pistols only be good for armour sice they're inside and wouldn't have to mees with a rifle?


Pistols can come in handy for sappers too..............


----------



## KevinB (4 Aug 2006)

Everyone should have a pistol and a carbine. PERIOD

The training issue is double edged -- pistols are already issued to people who dont know how to use them properly... (mind you so are rifles and carbines...)

The CF has more than enough pistols to go around for a Bn+ sized force for ops and trg.

 However since the CF does not allocate enough time and ammo to train those currently issued pistol on the TO&E - adding more pistols will not solve anything.


I carried a pistol and carbine when I was in Afghan with the CF -- I certainly dont think it was just for LCF...


----------



## Centurian1985 (4 Aug 2006)

From past experience, having a pistol is preferable to a long barrel when travelling in a regular vehicle, especially for small groups travelling to 'meetings' etc.  However, if travelling in a convoy, where there are dozens of soldiers with weapons, including larger calibers mounted on the vehicles, it may be redundant to have every single member armed with both pistol and rifle. That said, I personally prefered to carry the extra pistol regardless of the extra weight it entailed.


----------



## Big Red (4 Aug 2006)

Nobody should be carrying JUST a pistol around unless they are inside a relatively safe camp.

As Kevin said most of the people carrying pistols aren't competent with them anyways.   Issue them to everyone and implement a basic Fighting/Tactical pistol class prior to deployment with high round count, realistic shooting.

This isn't a problem confined to our military. I see people carrying pistols that have an empty chamber or BHPs in the half cock everyday.  People that make way more money than a soldier and who *should* know better.


----------



## Good2Golf (4 Aug 2006)

Infidel-6 said:
			
		

> Everyone should have a pistol and a carbine. PERIOD
> 
> The training issue is double edged -- pistols are already issued to people who don't know how to use them properly... (mind you so are rifles and carbines...)
> 
> ...



+1

Chopper or Land cruiser, most cases I would pack pistol and take C8 with me, especially when not deploying to "friendly (Gov't of AFG buildings) turf" or as dictated by TFA Orders.  There were also times when I'd carry 9mm with an inside-waist holster which fit in well when moving around in circles where having weapons was frowned upon, but a good enough rapport had not been built yet for me to fully trust the locals.

I-6's points about competency are very important!  Touch wood that I didn't and wouldn't have an ND with either weapon, no scratch that...no wood needed...I was trained on both and felt confident in handling both weapons.  What is important is to follow the TOETs/IA&Ss without variation.  Departing from them is what opens you up to unintended occurrences.  It also helps that I have a long "salute" finger and could de-cock the BHP without an empty mag in it.  If there were one and one only mod to the BHP I'd make, it would be a proper de-cocking lever (with properly modified TOETs).

Cheers,
Duey


----------



## KevinB (4 Aug 2006)

Duey - pull the trigger plunger/mag disconnect -- voila no mag safety and same manual of arms as the C8/C7...


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (4 Aug 2006)

What no pictures?   :

 >


----------



## armyrules (4 Aug 2006)

I just think that pistols are easier to handle when suprised and are lighter they should be mandatory. Plus aren't they not cheaper to manufacture? So it would save the big boys $$


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (4 Aug 2006)

The pistol is a supplement not a replacement to the rifle or machine gun.


----------



## George Wallace (4 Aug 2006)

armyrules said:
			
		

> I just think that pistols are easier to handle when suprised and are lighter they should be mandatory. Plus aren't they not cheaper to manufacture? So it would save the big boys $$



Well.....You failed in this account.  Nice try.


----------



## axeman (4 Aug 2006)

while i was deployed in agghanistan i had the pleasure of being a driver which means a pistol. with thati was also part of the QRF which means i need a long rifle .  i was also  one of the grenadeers so a M203 . oh yes a radio operator  so a radio., lots of kit and each one of them necassary.i hadn to use rules of engagement to protect another soldier . the long rifle would of taken too long to employ so out with my trusty not rusty browning.with one pistol shot i restored  some semeblance of order to the situation. with a rifle I could of reached out and shot the offender and probably found in the clear  with the mounted C-9 i would of caused colatteral damage far in excess of what was req. the pistol was what was req in the situation tyhey are a good thing IF given the PROPER training . of 5 ND's 4 were with pistols , 3 of those not trained but tried to justufy to have one much to the betterment of the situation.  pistols good WITH training...

 :threat:


----------



## zipperhead_cop (5 Aug 2006)

I will not presume to speak on operational requirements of a side arm.  However, training wise hand guns are not a simple thing to pick up.  Rifles provide far more stability and accuracy.  For hand guns, grip and trigger control become really critical.  Our Department provides a full week of training, plus you get another week at Police College.  And even then, you are just good enough to be safe on the road.  We requalify every year, but more often would be better.  
For close quarters street battle we get taught body indexing.  Since most police fire fights happen within two meters, you don't have time to aim.  Thus body indexing is used, which is basically wherever the gun is pointed the bullets go.  It is more about muscle memory than lining up sights with you eyes, and that needs repetetive training.  We train to get off two center of mass shots in under two seconds.  However, we also have snap retention holsters, and no safety on the gun.  If you have to take time to draw the weapon and disengage the safety, then you might have had time to snap your rifle up for a shot.  
I am not familiar with operational pistol ammo.  Are hollow point ie) Winchester Ranger SXT, rounds used or are they full jacketed?  The point being if you find yourself in a situation where you don't want the full penetration of a rifle round, a pistol can be a real bonus.  Particularly with the hollow point that will likely dump all it's energy into buddy.  How frequently do the bad guys have ballistic armour?  Side arms generally won't get through that.
Just some thoughts.


----------



## FightingIrish (5 Aug 2006)

i think troops should have the choice. carry a pistol and ammo is going to add so extra weight plus u are now going to have to get a holster on your tac vest or somewhere


----------



## Jammer (5 Aug 2006)

Many of us have purchased leg and thigh rigs. The weight is inconsequential


----------



## Jammer (5 Aug 2006)

A choice????


----------



## KevinB (5 Aug 2006)

IF troops wear a leg rig - it should be up high - jst low enough to clear the armour.  It provides both a cleaner draw stroke and reduces weight on the leg -- no so much an issue for short walks from the truck - but an issue if your playing green army 










Pistols (especially Glocks) are fairly simply weapons - people put way too much mystique into them.  Within a few days I can get troops walking, talkign and shooting all at the same time -- and if they are really good - some can chew gun.

With BHP's or Sigs it add a bit more - Sigs must decock after the scan -- while BHP shooter remove the safe when punching out -- my 8 year old son can do that...


----------



## Good2Golf (5 Aug 2006)

FightingIrish said:
			
		

> i think troops should have the choice. carry a pistol and ammo is going to add so extra weight plus u are now going to have to get a holster on your tac vest or somewhere



Disagree.  Policy must be standardized, troop choice should not be an option.

As Jammer said, many guys opted for a decent hip/thigh rig...the issue "Bianchi" for the BHP is a P.O.S.!  I like a nice adjustable drop leg rig with dual straps for the holster.  I got mine at the NATO Blue store at KAIA, but I also saw similar rigs in the KAF PX.  BTW, you don't really notice the 2.5-3 lbs on your leg, and with the adjustability you can make it hug your leg so you barely feel it's there.

Cheers,
Duey


----------



## Centurian1985 (5 Aug 2006)

Duey said:
			
		

> Chopper or Land cruiser, most cases I would pack pistol and take C8 with me, especially when not deploying to "friendly (Gov't of AFG buildings) turf" or as dictated by TFA Orders.  There were also times when I'd carry 9mm with an inside-waist holster which fit in well when moving around in circles where having weapons was frowned upon, but a good enough rapport had not been built yet for me to fully trust the locals.



+1!


----------



## Jammer (5 Aug 2006)

Mine is a Spec-Ops rig I picked up in KAF...luv it!!!


----------



## Farmboy (5 Aug 2006)

> Everyone should have a pistol and a carbine. PERIOD



 This says it all right here.

 Again it comes down to the training.


----------



## FightingIrish (6 Aug 2006)

ok question now. im a recruit so i was just wondering if you owned one like a glock or something if u would be allowed to bring it on deployment with you and then bring it on a patrol or what have you


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (6 Aug 2006)

No.  You can only use the weapons you are issued.


----------



## paracowboy (6 Aug 2006)

FightingIrish said:
			
		

> ok question now. im a recruit so i was just wondering if you owned one like a glock or something if u would be allowed to bring it on deployment with you and then bring it on a patrol or what have you


8 posts. Enough to know the rules about msn-speak and searching. More effort in your posts, or disciplinary actions will follow.

para-mod-boy


----------



## KevinB (6 Aug 2006)

Nope -- but if you know a friendly security contractor -- he made able to source a Glock locally for you


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (6 Aug 2006)

I-6 keep it down. ;D


----------



## armyrules (6 Aug 2006)

A Glock.. whoa I wish I had that kinda firepower lying around!! 

:cheers:


----------



## HItorMiss (6 Aug 2006)

I-6 friendly contractor you say... source it localy you say......

I'll be your best friend....  ;D


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (6 Aug 2006)

Get in line.


----------



## HItorMiss (6 Aug 2006)

Boooooo! LOL


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (6 Aug 2006)

;D


----------



## KevinB (7 Aug 2006)

FWIW - Beretta M9's are a lot easier to source.  - but due to the problem of running BHP/SIG/Glock drills on them (I contstanty put them on safe after a reload or other IA   ) I will not use a Beretta in theatre.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (7 Aug 2006)

SOME of us can't be so picky can we.


----------



## zipperhead_cop (7 Aug 2006)

Not trying to be too hijacky, but I was curious about operational pistol ammo?  Dealers choice for spec ops?


----------



## Big Red (7 Aug 2006)

I wouldn't run anything but ball in a BHP.  I had several stoppages using hollowpoints especially ones with a wide blunt nose. 

Legally I believe CF soldiers can only carry ball ammo.  I carry Speer Gold Dot in my mags.


----------



## zipperhead_cop (7 Aug 2006)

Thanks for that


----------



## KevinB (7 Aug 2006)

9mm Ball for conventional troops

JHP or GreenShield Frangible for others...

Mind you legally the conventional guys could use the GreenShield -- it is a poor terminal performer - a bit better than ball - it is a ceramic/powdered metal (leadfree) round nose round (60gr?)  -- It feeds in Sig's and Glocks - not sure about the BHP's


----------



## zipperhead_cop (8 Aug 2006)

So nobody uses the Ranger SXT rounds?  That is the standard for LEO's these days around these parts (used to be called Black Talons until they got all PC)  In a .40 cal they are 180 grain.  Supposed to have pretty good stopping power.


----------



## KevinB (8 Aug 2006)

I'm not sure what the current annual Federal buy for JHP 9mm ammo is.
I have had Remington Golden Saber, Winchester Ranger SXT, Federal BPLE you name it.

If a round satifies the criteria for performance - they go with the best value.


Do to Hague Convention restraints on ammunition - conventional forces are forbiden from using JHP or other open tipped or soft lead tipped ammuntion.


----------



## zipperhead_cop (9 Aug 2006)

Infidel-6 said:
			
		

> Due to Hague Convention restraints on ammunition - conventional forces are forbiden from using JHP or other open tipped or soft lead tipped ammuntion.



That I did not know.  Thanks for another quality brain nugget.


----------



## Kilroy (10 Feb 2008)

Had an instance in Afghanistan that makes me firmly beleive that carrying a pistol outside the wire is a must! I was right-seater in an HLVW w/flatbed. Our load had shifted, and we where told by the vehicle following us, that we would not make it outside the city. WELL... 10:00 o'clock at night, JUST as the stores are closing, here I am running around the flatbed adjusting straps while my driver was ontop. Due to the circumstances, carrying my rifle with me would of been impractible, so it was left in the cab. I heard a comotion behind me, and a local was walking toward me. I turned around, pulled the pistol, pointed it at his head, and was about to pull the trigger, when a soldier form the vehicle infront of me, and one from behind, both with C7's Came toward him and told him to back the hell up. I figured 60 rounds of automatic fire, versus 12 rounds of 9mm in the hands of a nervous soldier was a better idea. I slowly backed away and let the boys handle it. Luckily it turned out the guy just wanted to walk on the road, and didn't understand why we took offence to it. I was literally a half second away from shooting this guy!!! I quickly got back to securing the load, and we got out of there as quickly as possible. Think it took a day and a half to get a normal heartbeat back!!! I had visions of this guy going kaboom!!

For this reason, I firmly beleive that the addition of a pistol is vital to those outside the wire.


----------



## Canadian Sig (10 Feb 2008)

We were told the other day that it is the opinion of "someone" in Ottawa that there are too many pistols in theater and they are going to be restricted to Sgt and above only. While i'm sure that rule will be gotten around by some (it wont apply to myself for example) it does make me wonder why someone would think more firepower and options is a bad thing.


----------



## KevinB (10 Feb 2008)

Canadian Sig said:
			
		

> We were told the other day that it is the opinion of "someone" in Ottawa that there are too many pistols in theater and they are going to be restricted to Sgt and above only. While i'm sure that rule will be gotten around by some (it wont apply to myself for example) it does make me wonder why someone would think more firepower and options is a bad thing.



Fricken retarded - another Dinosaur who thinks the pistol is an ornament not a combat tool (transition is the #1 IA).  This guy probably likes the TacVest too...


----------



## George Wallace (10 Feb 2008)

Canadian Sig said:
			
		

> We were told the other day that it is the opinion of "someone" in Ottawa



Now see what you have done?   First off, you were told, not ordered.  Second, it is someone's "opinion".  Right now you are working on the "Rumour Net".   As for numpty's opinion; see response above by Infidel-6.


----------



## Retired AF Guy (10 Feb 2008)

Caught an episode of "Truth, Duty, Valour" last night on the TV. The episode dealt with the next contingent of RCR that will be deploying to Afghanistan this August and showed the urban combat training . Not once did they show anybody using a pistol while searching the buildings, just carbines and in one case a shotgun. I'm sure there 
would be situations where having a pistol would be more advantageous than using a rifle (e.g. engineer preparing demolitions, climbing through windows, searching confined spaces, etc). 

As an aside, I found the training and equipment depicted used very interesting, especially when I compared to the urban warfare training I had been taught back in the late '70s. Love the look of those sci-fi helmets they used when training with the paint ball guns!


----------



## George Wallace (10 Feb 2008)

Now this brings to mind the "Tunnel Rats" in the Vietnam War.  These guys actually went into the Viet Cong tunnel systems to clear them.  In those tight quarters, there was no room for bringing in a rifle or carbine.  Pistols and grenades were thier tools.  So, it is foolish in this day of age to take no precautions for the unexpected.  Just because you saw "Truth, Duty, Valour" last night on TV doesn't mean that it portrayed an accurate image of what goes on outside of the wire.  You can just as easily state that last night you stayed at a Holiday INN.


----------



## KevinB (10 Feb 2008)

I dont think the CF has sim kits for the BHP's which may explain the lack of pistol in that circumstance

 They have them for the Sig's but most units dont get them...


----------



## Blakey (10 Feb 2008)

There are plenty of pistols to go around, at least in "Gunny Hwy's" platoon   (so we've been told  :-\), although I'd like to see a 226 or a .45 S&W instead of the BHP.

As for the rest of the wagon train, I have no idea so, I won't comment.


----------



## Canadian Sig (10 Feb 2008)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Now see what you have done?   First off, you were told, not ordered.  Second, it is someone's "opinion".  Right now you are working on the "Rumour Net".



The "someone" has two crossed sword and a leaf on his chest. 

It's more than rumor. If your a MCpl or below in our unit and go into QM to sign for a pistol for roto you will be told it's now policy that pistols are issued to Sgts and above only.

As for whether I was ordered I guess if someone with more than two bones and a leaf tells me then it's an order...so I have been ordered.

I agree with Kev by the way.


----------



## George Wallace (10 Feb 2008)

Canadian Sig said:
			
		

> I agree with Kev by the way.



So do I.

The only stipulation that I can agree with, would be that the person, no matter the rank, must be 'qualified' and 'skilled' enough on the weapon to have it issued.  That negates that "person of rank's opinion" as many in the category that he has 'stated' are not qualified, nor skilled, on the BHP.   Thus this policy is a farce, and ill-conceived. 


Wouldn't this in effect take pistols away from the majority of MP pers in Theatre?   ;D


----------



## PhilB (10 Feb 2008)

The problem is the allocation of pistols. When I was there there were a lot of pistols floating around but every "office worker" and officer had one, regardless of their job. I think a pistol going to a guy outside the wire that might use it is much more important than to a clerk that can just as easily carry their rifle to their office and leave it in a rifle rack. Like Kevin said, the pistol, or dinner pistol as we were calling it, is a status symbol and are being issued more for peoples convenience than for any tactical consideration.


----------



## George Wallace (10 Feb 2008)

PhilB

The pistol is a status symbol in Afghan culture.  Usually it is a sign of leadership.  It may be a case that someone thinks only the CO and OC and their senior people should have pistols outside the wire as an "identifier".  There are serious problems with that philosophy.  That now makes it easier for snipers to identify 'leaders'.  

I don't agree with your comments on people anywhere placing their wpns in wpns racks, no matter where they may be working.  I do think that the job a person does should have some relevance as to what wpn they are issued, as per my previous stipulations regarding their proficiency in the use of that wpn.


----------



## Haggis (10 Feb 2008)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> The pistol is a status symbol in Afghan culture.  Usually it is a sign of leadership.



Not only Afghan culture.  Many cultures that have been exposed to the former Warsaw Pact, have a similar belief about the status of a person who carried a pistol.  In one case, the local politicians and police refused to deal with my Coy 2IC because, as an old school CFR'd RSM, he carried a rifle.  I, on the other hand, carried a pistol and generally left my rifle in the vehicle (with my driver).



> It may be a case that someone thinks only the CO and OC and their senior people should have pistols outside the wire as an "identifier".  There are serious problems with that philosophy.  That now makes it easier for snipers to identify 'leaders'.


  Throw some soft hatted Reservists into the mix just for fun. A WO I know from a "Toronto area Scottish regiment" was routinely saluted by the locals in Bosnia and Croatia.  Apparently the locals believed that the guy with the fanciest hat was, obviously, in charge!


----------



## medaid (10 Feb 2008)

Phil my man, I agree with you on many things, but this I don't. All med personnel inside the wire is mandated to carry a PISTOL, and PISTOL only when they're working. Many people don't even mandate that depending on where they are working at the time. However, once they step out side of the office they have to strap on their pistol. This isn't their fault, but what they're allocated and issued mate. 

That's all from me.


----------



## Good2Golf (10 Feb 2008)

The weapons load out for anyone should be consistent with their assigned duties, with due consideration of the conditions that they will be operating in.  Several examples provided already whereby the carbine may have not been practical for the soldier given the circumstances, yet they should have had a personal weapon (working on loads, in med facility, working with locals building/office, etc...)  I always had my BHP with me, but I didn't always take my C8.   It shouldn't be considered a hard and fast rule that officers and sr NCOs only should have a pistol; that can be a starting point, but appreciation of the situation should also provide for pistol use by any soldier.  The other point is also an excellent one, training on personal weapons, not matter the specific type, must be thorough - we're talking "proficient", not just "current".  It seems there's a discreet sentiment by some that limiting weapon load outs might somehow reduce things like NDs....that would be incorrect thinking, IMO.  Proper training, and continued practice to maintain proficiency is what keeps things like NDs from happening.  I don't think "lack of avail BHPs is an issue at all.

mein 2¢
G2G


----------



## George Wallace (10 Feb 2008)

I think that was a fairly good way to put it.  

Job and proficiency should be the factor; not rank.  This would preclude some of 'rank' being issued a pistol, but it would be the result of a safety concern more than anything else.  I have known of an instance where an officer was issued a pistol and did not know how to assemble it.  That should have been the Warning Sign.  While deployed, he had an ND and shot himself.  Rank did not save him.  Proficiency with the weapon would have.


----------



## geo (11 Feb 2008)

A certain individual in Afghanistan
Ended up firing a round between the knees of his GWagon driver..... Twice!

Proficient with the BHP ..... not!


----------



## Sig_Des (11 Feb 2008)

Weapon's assignment should very much be based on what you'll be doing.

When I was there, I was working in vehicles, tight spaces, moving back and forth between multiple vehicles. Having a rifle slung on my back would have been very awkward when my arms are deep in the guts of a LAV turret. When outside the wire, I carried both. When working outside the wire, rifle stayed withing reach, pistol on me at all times.

The flip side of this, I remember talking to a tech who stayed in his shop, and he asked me "how the hell" I got a pistol, as it seemed to be a status thing for some. But I also know of Sgt Majors who would do a random check. They'd see someone with a pistol, tell them to disassemble and reassemble it. If they couldn't do so, they'd have the soldier in question turn in their pistol. To me, the fact that weapons were given to people who couldn't even maintain it, BIG no-no.

To me, the pistol is just another tool in the toolbox, that depending on what you're doing, may very well be effective. Besides, I don't need a pistol to look cool. I wear Oakley's  8)


----------



## dangerboy (11 Feb 2008)

As a Sect Comd overseas I was issued a pistol, if there was a requirement for one of my soldiers to use a pistol (IE doing searches) I would lend him mine as he would have in my mind a higher priority.


----------



## OldSolduer (11 Feb 2008)

I agree with Sig Des.

But let's say this.....we, as leaders, must TRAIN the privates to a level where we feel comfortable issuing them a 9mm BHP. This takes time and ammo, and pistol shooting in the infantry is an afterthought. It needs more work and more ammo.
Clerks don't need pistols and most of them aren't very proficient with the C-7 either. It is OUR responsibility to ensure that they are trained.
Medics need pistols for their personal protection and the protection of their patients.


----------



## Sig_Des (11 Feb 2008)

OldSolduer said:
			
		

> I agree with Sig Des.
> 
> But let's say this.....we, as leaders, must TRAIN the privates to a level where we feel comfortable issuing them a 9mm BHP. This takes time and ammo, and pistol shooting in the infantry is an afterthought. It needs more work and more ammo.
> Clerks don't need pistols and most of them aren't very proficient with the C-7 either. It is OUR responsibility to ensure that they are trained.
> Medics need pistols for their personal protection and the protection of their patients.



I agree very much with you regarding the training. But it's not just the Privates and lower level ranks. ANYONE who'll be issued a pistol should be proficient with it. In fact, the same applies to ANY weapons system, really. When I was in Ottawa, and did a weapons refresher at Connaught, there were lot's of NDHQ types, who from their handling of the BHP in a controlled training environment, well, I would have been scared to drive them in theater for sure. And many of us know the story of the Sgt in KAF who had the ND playing "quickdraw cowboy"

As far as clerks, when I at KAF on Roto 3, every clerk at the NCE OR had a pistol, while very few of the V techs, who were always crawling around vehicles, did. I'll let everyone form their own opinions on that.


----------



## OldSolduer (11 Feb 2008)

Good points Sig Des.

As far as I'm concerned, clerks should carry a C7 or C8 and take their pistol away. "I work in an office" is no excuse. Well, in Croatia and Bosnia, I worked in an office too, but was never issued a pistol. And we had a Sgt in Croatia in 93 who had an ND as well.
When a private or cpl has an ND, the hue and cry goes up and the knee jerk reaction is to ban all cpls and ptes from carrying a weapon that they should be proficient with. 
What they don't address is a leadership issue: Train the troops to handle it properly. Then give them the instruction, time and ammo to become deadly with it, like we do the C7 and C9.


----------



## geo (11 Feb 2008)

With the C7A2s on issue, the clerks certainly don't need C8s OR pistols.  Let them carry a rifle

WRT to Officers & Sr NCOs: having a pistol is nice -  but it isn't a substitute for a good service rifle.


----------



## Sig_Des (11 Feb 2008)

OldSolduer said:
			
		

> What they don't address is a leadership issue: Train the troops to handle it properly. Then give them the instruction, time and ammo to become deadly with it, like we do the C7 and C9.



Agreed. And all in all, while a pistol isn't a substitute to a Rifle, but a supplement, IMHO, it all comes back to one thing. It's not limiting who has it, it's getting ANYONE who may have to use it, up-to-date training and trigger time.


----------



## OldSolduer (11 Feb 2008)

geo and Sig Des....agreed.

Now, I'm with a reserve unit after 25 years in the Regular Force infantry. We attempt to have our troops at least fire it, under supervision, a few times a year. We don't have enough ammo for them to become deadly with it.
In 93, our clerks carried C7s, not pistols, at least in my unit. In fact, one of our clerks almoast shot  someone when he had an ND. 
Where clerks got the idea they needed pistols is beyond me. The pistols should go to those who may actually have to use it, not sit in a desk drawer being neglected.
The idea of vehicle techs being issued a pistol is a good one. Same with someone who is tasked to conduct a vehicle search. Opinions??


----------



## medaid (11 Feb 2008)

Everyone carried a rifle in the states don't they? Even a doc or a nurse had a carbine and a pistol from hospital to sleeping area. 

No one is without a rifle or carbine of some sort from everything that I saw, and pistols for most if not all the pers regardless of rank or position.


----------



## blacktriangle (11 Feb 2008)

I don't even get why a clerk would want a pistol...do they go outside the wire ever, such as on convoy escort duty?

Also, I'll be the first to admit that I only have maybe 1000 rds through the browning 9mm, but from my experiences, it would not be something I'd want to rely soley on, as opposed to just serving as a backup for my rifle.


----------



## daftandbarmy (12 Feb 2008)

FWIW...

C6 gunners - Yes
C9 gunners - Meh
Medics - Yes
Officers & SNCOs - No
Sect Comds - Discretionary


----------



## Greymatters (12 Feb 2008)

OldSolduer said:
			
		

> As far as I'm concerned, clerks should carry a C7 or C8 and take their pistol away. "I work in an office" is no excuse. Well, in Croatia and Bosnia, I worked in an office too, but was never issued a pistol. And we had a Sgt in Croatia in 93 who had an ND as well.



Agree with that - pistols should be considered a backup weapon, or of higher value in confined spaces, or use in close quarters (among other criteria).   A pistol also requries a higher level of skill to use properly than a C7/C8 requires, and very few clerks are likely to be proficient with them.  Clerks at a headquarters rarely fit any of those needs or capabilities, and the only justification left over is is the 'look-cool factor'. Did they also use the issued under-arm shoulder holsters :  or did they were the pistol on a belt?


----------



## Sig_Des (12 Feb 2008)

Greymatters said:
			
		

> Clerks at a headquarters rarely fit any of those needs or capabilities, and the only justification left over is is the 'look-cool factor'. Did they also use the issued under-arm shoulder holsters :  or did they were the pistol on a belt?



http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/lf/English/6_1_1.asp?ID=1825

First and Second paragraph:



> It dawned on me just how lucky I am to be here. I don't have to cook, wash dishes, wash or fold laundry. *And I get to carry around a rifle everywhere I go*. Except to the gym or to the washroom.
> 
> *That's the latest kick in the pants*. The position I am filling is a Master Corporal position and they don't want it over ranked. *So I willingly gave up my rank for the operation. Then I am advised that because I am not a Sergeant I am not entitled to a pistol, which is less cumbersome and awkward than my rifle*.



http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/lf/English/6_1_1.asp?ID=1825

couple letters later, in the first paragraph:



> What a cool day I had yesterday (Thursday).  *First of all, they found a pistol for me so I got to go lock up my C7 rifle*.



The bold's are my own. And no, that _isn't_ an issued shoulder holster. Blackhawk (or whatever they called it) store on the boardwalk at KAF, or Afghan Market.


----------



## Blakey (12 Feb 2008)

Sig_Des, same links you have there, this is the second one.
http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/lf/English/6_1_1.asp?id=1849


----------



## Sig_Des (12 Feb 2008)

Cataract Kid said:
			
		

> Sig_Des, same links you have there, this is the second one.
> http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/lf/English/6_1_1.asp?id=1849



Cheers. So I think my point is made.


----------



## 1feral1 (12 Feb 2008)

On my tour ALL trades had both a BHP Mk III pistol, F88SA1C carbine and frags too. Generically speaking. Spl wpns such as M79, M203, Para Minimi etc were issued as required.

Yes, the clerk had a pistol as did the CSM, as did us all. We were part of a Combat Team, with 3RAR (Para) the mainstay, follwed by RAAC, and the rrest of us. We are all soldiers first and tradesmen second.

Ya, and we had to submit justification to keep them as after Jake Kovco shot himself in the head with his, a few months earlier (google jake kovco for yourselves). Seems the folk back in Canberra were about to place a pistol ban on us in theatre, claiming we did not need them.

The only time I did not carry my pistol was when I slept, and when I showered. It was glued to me 

Yes I agree with Kev on this one too.

Cheers,

Wes


----------



## OldSolduer (12 Feb 2008)

Sig_Des:

Good points. Pictures are worth a thousand words. "So I got to lock up my rifle" or words to that effect. hmmmmm. That tells you where the mind set is.
A comedian (Billy Crystal) used to say "It's more important to look good than to feel good" I'll plagiarize this - It's more important to look cool than carry a C7 that may save your or your buddy's life!
And the rear echelon types wonder why the "outside the wire" guys disrespect them.

Good thing for the clerks etc I'm not the comd. The pistols would ge gone and issued to the troops that need them, rank not withstanding.


----------



## Big Red (12 Feb 2008)

Wesley  Down Under said:
			
		

> On my tour ALL trades had both a BHP Mk III pistol, F88SA1C carbine and frags too. Generically speaking. Spl wpns such as M79, M203, Para Minimi etc were issued as required.
> 
> Yes, the clerk had a pistol as did the CSM, as did us all. We were part of a Combat Team, with 3RAR (Para) the mainstay, follwed by RAAC, and the rrest of us. We are all soldiers first and tradesmen second.
> 
> ...




I actually overhead a conversation between several Aussie officers at the Victory Cinnabon a few months ago. One officer with a put on Etonian/Aussie accent was commenting on how logistics could be greatly streamlined if they just removed the pistols from those who "don't need them" such as the troops. Think of all the ammunition paperwork that could be saved if you didn't have to requalify the peons on their weapons if you just took their weapons away. Of course he needed a handgun because walking around with a Steyr would be terribly inconvenient.

I had to bite my tongue as the whole discussion showed how out of touch some leadership is with the situation on the ground.


----------



## OldSolduer (12 Feb 2008)

Do you notice after every ND with a pistol, there is a knee jerk reaction to pull the pistols. No one ever checks the qualifications to see if the troop should have had one in the first place. A thorough investigation should be conducted to ascertain if the troop was qualified. I f he wans't, who should be charged? Section Comd? Pl Comd? OC?
There is a rush to charge the individual, pronounce him guilty and carry on.


----------



## Greymatters (12 Feb 2008)

OldSolduer said:
			
		

> Do you notice after every ND with a pistol, there is a knee jerk reaction to pull the pistols. No one ever checks the qualifications to see if the troop should have had one in the first place. A thorough investigation should be conducted to ascertain if the troop was qualified. I f he wans't, who should be charged? Section Comd? Pl Comd? OC?
> There is a rush to charge the individual, pronounce him guilty and carry on.



Why are there so many NDs with pistols?  Do they have a habit of walking around with a pistol that has a round already chambered? I can see this outside the wire, but not the smartest of moves when you are inside the camp...


----------



## OldSolduer (12 Feb 2008)

Reason for NDs? Lack of training, pure and simple. Who is to blame for that?
 I've heard if you are "inside the wire" the weapons can be loaded but not readied. Is this the case?


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (12 Feb 2008)

I think it may have something to do with 1. having to put the mag back in the housing to fire off the action and 2. people horsing around.

Weapons are not to be loaded in KAF until you leave the front gate.


----------



## OldSolduer (12 Feb 2008)

OK that is good....so either the individual has forgotten their training OR.....they were never properly trained in the first place.

I don't know if anyone remembers Ed Witt, former RSM 1CMBG. He gave a MCpl the goods one day because the MCpl didn't know how to strip and assemble a .32 cal (7.65 mm if memory serves me correctly) pistol that at one time was issued to Generals.
RSM Witt stated that it was a weapon of war and the MCpl should learn how to use it.....in not so genteel terms.


----------



## riggermade (12 Feb 2008)

Oh the memories of Uncle Eddie, that could be a whole thread on it's own


----------



## 1feral1 (12 Feb 2008)

Big Red said:
			
		

> I actually overhead a conversation between several Aussie officers at the Victory Cinnabon a few months ago. One officer with a put on Etonian/Aussie accent was commenting on how logistics could be greatly streamlined if they just removed the pistols from those who "don't need them" such as the troops. Think of all the ammunition paperwork that could be saved if you didn't have to requalify the peons on their weapons if you just took their weapons away. Of course he needed a handgun because walking around with a Steyr would be terribly inconvenient.
> 
> I had to bite my tongue as the whole discussion showed how out of touch some leadership is with the situation on the ground.



Ah, that Cinnabon, between the PX and Bazaar complex. Been there the odd occasion  ;D.

Sure figures the JTF633 staff weenies would be there discussing crap like that, making decisions which they don't have a clue about.

Reminds me of an incident between a 633 Knob and our OC. We had demanded thru the system some polar fleece jackets and some  G-Shock watches. Needless to say 633 shot that down. The irony of it all was the staff weenies who never left their thrones in the pallace, where it was always heated etc (they even had a HEATED pool at Australia Island), well they had the polar fleece and the watches. We were out and about in our LAVs etc, on missions, where such demands were justified, and we got nothing. That goes to show you the mentality of some 'bean counters', and how little touch they have with those at the coalface. Idiots is too good of a word!  >

We were disgusted beyond a joke. Ya, there was our OC (damn good bloke) arguing with another MAJ about kit the lads could not have, yet openly wore his, when he did not even need it. The OC was furious! 

As for Old Soldeur's mentality WRT pistol, etc. Its time to come out of the dark ages, regardless of what things were like in your day? I've been in the system since 1976, not that means anything.

As for pistol training, we did T'sOET weekly on both systems, and those issues with spl wpns did the T'sOET on them too. Lack of training for us was never an issue. Shot every Wed at the Memorial Range, near the 14th July Bridge. Ammo was never an issue.

Jake Kovco's UD was probably suicide.

Cheers,

Wes


----------



## daftandbarmy (12 Feb 2008)

Lessons learned from OIF: "The Infantry want more pistols". One or two per section seems reasonable to me. 

http://www.strategypage.com/iraqlessonslearned/iraqwarlessonslearned.asp

May 14, 2003: In Iraq, there was a lot of infantry fighting, and reports are coming back about the performance of various infantry weapons. The 5.56mm round used by most coalition infantry rifles had no trouble knocking down enemy troops, especially if they were hit in the head or chest. Hits in arms and legs were less likely to stop the bad guys, but this has always been the case with infantry rifles. Some troops asked for the heavier, 77 grain, 5.56mm bullet, rather than the current 62 grain bullet in the NATO standard SS-109 5.56mm round. Debate over adopting the 77 grain bullet has been going on for some time. Some Special Forces troops are thought to have been obtaining 5.56mm ammo with 77 grain bullets for their M-4 rifles and using it in Afghan and Iraqi operations. The heavier bullet is supposed to be more likely to knock down men it hits.

In Iraq, the average range of engagement for infantry was under a hundred meters, more often 20-30 meters. Even the snipers rarely took a shot farther than 300 meters. A lot of thing fighting was in urban areas, where the Iraqis preferred to stand and fight. This raised two more issues. *The infantry want more pistols. There were many situations in buildings where a pistol was a better weapon than a rifle. Also, more pistols in the infantry (at least one or two per squad), provided back up weapons when rifles or machine-guns broke down.* It was also noted that many of the 5.56mm M249 squad machine-guns, first introduced in the early 1980s, were wearing out. The M249s got a work out in Iraq and many literally fell apart, especially among the Marines. But the Marines were also quite happy with their new 7.62mm M240 machine-guns, which they had just received to replace their ancient M-60s. The army had adopted the M240 years ago and both services use the M240 on vehicles and as a "medium machine-gun" in infantry units. The heavier bullet of the M240 came in handy in city fighting, where you often wanted to shoot through doors and some walls. 

Support troops, and crews of armored vehicles, wanted a small weapon than the M-16, and many mentioned the M-4 (an M-16 with a shorter barrel, 33.3 inches long overall). But even infantry complained about the length of the M-16 (40.3 inches) when operating in cramped urban environments. Some troops used captured AK-47s (34.5 inches long) for city fighting.

The 9mm pistols continued to have problems. The big one was weak springs in the magazines, which tended to cause failure to fire, and the tendency of bullets to fall out of magazines not loaded.


----------



## Greymatters (13 Feb 2008)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> Lessons learned from OIF: "The Infantry want more pistols". One or two per section seems reasonable to me.
> 
> http://www.strategypage.com/iraqlessonslearned/iraqwarlessonslearned.asp
> 
> ...



A mentor pointed out to me that basically what was happening was leaving pistol mags fully packed all the time wore out the mag springs.  The way he suggested to deal with mag spring issues was to have at least three magazines, load two and leave the third empty, and each day rotate the mags so that the spring in the unused mag had a chance to 'recover'.  Time consuming, but it worked.


----------



## KevinB (13 Feb 2008)

Your mentor is wrong -- static compression pressure on the spring does relatively nothing -- it is the compression and release cycles that wear the spring out.

 They dont recover -- its not like a body taking an off day.  Springs and the whole magazine are a consumable item.


----------



## COBRA-6 (13 Feb 2008)

I've heard the same thing about how leaving mags loaded will weaken the spring and cause malfunctions from DLR reps, it's WRONG! Springs do not weaken from being under tension, they weaken by either exceeding their elastic deformation limits or by repeated cycling...   :


----------



## Journeyman (13 Feb 2008)

I unload all my magazines, multiple times, _at least_ once per week....."re-stressing them" with both ball and frange.   ;D

As Kev said, they're consumables -- get new ones.


----------



## COBRA-6 (13 Feb 2008)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> I unload all my magazines, multiple times, _at least_ once per week....."re-stressing them" with both ball and frange.   ;D



Into the air or into the hesco?  ;D


----------



## Greymatters (13 Feb 2008)

Infidel-6 said:
			
		

> Your mentor is wrong -- static compression pressure on the spring does relatively nothing -- it is the compression and release cycles that wear the spring out.



I'll let him know if I ever see him again... but I've heard the same comment from others before - is this a myth that is heard quite often?


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (13 Feb 2008)

I've heard it too from different people as well.


----------



## Big Red (13 Feb 2008)

The myth is so widespread it was even countered by an article in American Handgunner (?) a few years ago.


----------



## Good2Golf (13 Feb 2008)

All the more reason to drop the 30-yr old Inglis mag on the ground during engagement after emptying them, rather than filling your drop bag with them (not that some staff wanks would even know what a drop bag was   )  RQ would then top you up with fresh mags.

G2G

p.s.  the mouth of the mag gets frigged up to with all the in, out, clear, in, out, clear......don't know how many times I had to re-tune the mag's mouth with my Gerber to re-establish decent feed characteristics.  Lucky I-6 was able to draw upon his gun plumbing past and give me tips and pointers on how to keep the puppies in good shape (well that and to have entertainment during TGITFWTAWP)


----------



## mudgunner49 (14 Feb 2008)

Good2Golf said:
			
		

> All the more reason to drop the 30-yr old Inglis mag on the ground during engagement after emptying them, rather than filling your drop bag with them (not that some staff wanks would even know what a drop bag was   )  RQ would then top you up with fresh mags.
> 
> G2G
> 
> p.s.  the mouth of the mag gets frigged up to with all the in, out, clear, in, out, clear......don't know how many times I had to re-tune the mag's mouth with my Gerber to re-establish decent feed characteristics.  Lucky I-6 was able to draw upon his gun plumbing past and give me tips and pointers on how to keep the puppies in good shape (well that and to have entertainment during TGITFWTAWP)



G2G - the myth WRT springs is totally fallacious (sp?) and there is actually a very technical article on the Wolff Gun Springs website if you care to look it up.

In my own experience, in 1996 I personally fired 5 1911 mags that had been loaded since 1947 when my Dad's oldest brother mustered out of the USN (taking his 1911, belt, holster and 2 double mag pouches with him).  The pistol was a Remington-Rand 1911A1, the ammo was Rem-UMC steel-cased ball and it all fired and functioned without a hitch.  I have left mags for some of my pistols loaded for more than a year (misplaced in the safe or ammo locker) and never had a function issue.

As per Kevin, mags are a wear item and need to be replaced periodically.  Good quality Browning mags are $15-20 apiece and last for a goodly amount of time.  I use MecGar in mine and get them from Brownell's for $16 each, dealer cost.  They are an investment in security.  FWIW, I shot the pistol PWT in Pet in December and was the only one on the line with my own mags, and (coincidentally???) the only one on the line who missed the opportunity to practice my malfunction clearance drills... 8)

Re-engineering pistol mags avec Gerber is a ractice to be avoided if at all possible.  It has the potential to "not end well"...


blake


----------



## Good2Golf (14 Feb 2008)

Blake, yeah...next time, I'll perhaps mirror the practice of own mags.  I'm sure our BHP mags are as old as the pistols.  BTW, I'm assuming that was known to you only and the RSO didn't have the opportunity to flip out on you?  

G2G


----------



## daftandbarmy (15 Feb 2008)

COBRA-6 said:
			
		

> I've heard the same thing about how leaving mags loaded will weaken the spring and cause malfunctions from DLR reps, it's WRONG! Springs do not weaken from being under tension, they weaken by either exceeding their elastic deformation limits or by repeated cycling...   :



I used to reload all my mags weekly to make sure they weren't dented or clogged with dust etc. If you leave them in your tac vest all the time, you might get a ding or some dirt that can screw you up. I sometimes loaded different ammo natures in a different order (trace/ball/AP) based on the primary threat, which sometimes changed, or if I was doing more night vs. day ops.

It's also a good thing to commune with your ammo on a regular basis, especially during long, lonely operations. I mean, people talk to their pets and plants, don't they?


----------



## mudgunner49 (15 Feb 2008)

Good2Golf said:
			
		

> Blake, yeah...next time, I'll perhaps mirror the practice of own mags.  I'm sure our BHP mags are as old as the pistols.  BTW, I'm assuming that was known to you only and the RSO didn't have the opportunity to flip out on you?
> 
> G2G



G2G,

The RSO was standing beside the ammo table when I was loading my mags and asked me where I got them - nothing further was said.  It is fairly obvious that they were non-issue as they are blued (not parkerized) and have machined  aluminium CPMI base pads.  Nobody flipped out on me.

As an aside, there was an ND on the range that day, due in my opinion to the range staff not wanting the soldiers to wear the holster, but instead to hold the pistol in their hands while we wnt up to check targets.  The soldier who had the ND (young female corporal 031)inserted the mag, ran the slide fwd, and dropped the hammer on a live (duh) round.  

Doing away with the magazine disconnect (not safety) would eliminate 99% of these type of incidents as the mag would be almost totally removed from the unload process (no pun intended).


----------



## Colin Parkinson (15 Feb 2008)

Also make sure the people know to cycle the rounds, if they keep dropping the slide on the same round, the OAL will shorten. possibly causing feed problems or worse.


----------



## Good2Golf (15 Feb 2008)

Colin P said:
			
		

> Also make sure the people know to cycle the rounds, if they keep dropping the slide on the same round, the OAL will shorten. possibly causing feed problems or worse.



Colin, excellent point.  I-6 can probably confirm, but I remember hearing that a round really should be chambered only a few times (2-3?) and no more, otherwise there is a risk of the casing potentially rupturing and jamming in the barrel (or worse).  Can gun nuts confirm this?

Blake, yup...TOETs notwithstanding, that's why I think the mag safety is "not optimal".

G2G


----------



## GAP (15 Feb 2008)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> It's also a good thing to commune with your ammo on a regular basis, especially during long, lonely operations. I mean, people talk to their pets and plants, don't they?



Yes, and they are great conversationalists.......can you imagine the stories your ammo could tell? Never thought of that, maybe that's why they get balky and all......(I didn't talk to them....hmmmm)  ;D


----------



## 1feral1 (15 Feb 2008)

mudgunner49 said:
			
		

> G2G,
> 
> As an aside, there was an ND on the range that day, due in my opinion to the range staff not wanting the soldiers to wear the holster, but instead to hold the pistol in their hands while we wnt up to check targets.  The soldier who had the ND (young female corporal 031)inserted the mag, ran the slide fwd, and dropped the hammer on a live (duh) round.
> 
> Doing away with the magazine disconnect (not safety) would eliminate 99% of these type of incidents as the mag would be almost totally removed from the unload process (no pun intended).




We did that. It used to be a SF mod only, and now force wide, all 9mm BHP MkIII pistols have no mag safeties now. Sure, the pam had to be rewritten, and maybe the CF will follow this???

All BHP L9A1 and Mk I and II, plus any surviving Inglis models have been removed from service, pending smelt. The latest 9 x19mm BHP Vigilante MKIII is now the ADF standard.

In theatre, as for the tension on mag spring issue. It was SOP each Friday to unload all mags, clean the ammo and mags of that desert dust, and reloadd them, giving the springs a rest for 30 mins (ha!). We just did what we were told about the 30 mins. Another urban military legend. If we had spring or other mag issues, this was brought to me, the mag was smashed, and replaced through our Q Store.


----------



## mudgunner49 (15 Feb 2008)

Good2Golf said:
			
		

> Colin, excellent point.  I-6 can probably confirm, but I remember hearing that a round really should be chambered only a few times (2-3?) and no more, otherwise there is a risk of the casing potentially rupturing and jamming in the barrel (or worse).  Can gun nuts confirm this?
> 
> Blake, yup...TOETs notwithstanding, that's why I think the mag safety is "not optimal".
> 
> G2G



While bullet set-back is *possible* in the 9x19, it is more problematic in cartridges with a much sharper pressure curve (like .40 Smith & Wesson).  1/8" of bullet set-back in a 180 gr. .40 S&W will almost *double* the peak chamber pressure - not so much with the 9x19, though it is still possible.  I am under the impression that this has to do with a number of factors, not the least of which are  a) OAL to diameter ratio of CIQ (ctg in ?);  b) case-neck tension; and c) angle of entry into the chamber (straighter is better).

These are not the only things that effect the chamber pressure, but are the most easily managed.  As was stated earlier, limiting the number of times that a round is chambered and comparing it to a new round periodically WRT OAL is probably the easiest.

It is highly unlikely that set-back will cause the case to rupture unless it is fired with an attendant over-pressure incident occurring.  Then all bets are off...

Wes - I was composing while you were posting.  Care to elaborate on chamber pressure from the gun-plumber POV???


blake


----------



## Colin Parkinson (15 Feb 2008)

If I recall, NATO standard ball is very close to +p  so short OAL would be more critical than in a standard civilian 124gr.


----------



## mudgunner49 (15 Feb 2008)

Colin P said:
			
		

> If I recall, NATO standard ball is very close to +p  so short OAL would be more critical than in a standard civilian 124gr.



It's also set up to cycle in an SMG (usually), so the case neck tension issue has been ironed out with 9x10 long ago.  Pressure is still less than for .40...


----------



## KevinB (16 Feb 2008)

While I've not really noticed bulelt setback issues in 9mm -- I do notice it a lot in .45ACP  -- Since we are now playing the 'game' more often than not with unloading on FOB's I tend to have to a pitch a 230gr JHP a week (sometimes more often) due to setback issues -- 

  In our compound or whenever I can I dont unload and just leave it readied.

In Kevin's world -- pers weapons would only get cleared for cleaning...


----------



## Journeyman (16 Feb 2008)

COBRA-6 said:
			
		

> > I unload all my magazines, multiple times, _at least _ once per week....."re-stressing them" with both ball and frange.  ;D
> 
> 
> *Into the air or into the hesco?  ;D*


For some reason celebratory gunfire is frowned upon.    
In camp, frangible is obviously for steel plates, and ball is for shooting cardboard and staff officers

In addition to plain bulls-eyes, Fig. 11s and 12s, we've got a bunch of paper targets with "multiple choices" -- who's the bad guy? Can I get the bad guy and not the hostage? We've got one that is terrific for making people cringe -- a very pregnant woman threatening with a gun (the object is to take down the bad mommy and not the unborn child who is _clearly_ destined to cure cancer and not be a crack-whore terrorist like mom  [apologies to all you crack-whore terrorist moms out there   ] )

[tangent ends]


----------



## KevinB (16 Feb 2008)

www.letargets.com

specifically http://www.letargets.com/html/full_color.html

We got these off the USSOC guys a while back -- and I still have not seen a better source for them.

I know several units/commands are still buying them -- and Journeyman's pregnant girl is there too.






plus they have add on itmes so you can add badges, skewdrivers, cellphones etc -to make non threat tgt's look a little more threatening - and get the shooter to rapidly and properly id threat and kill them -- rather than the poor schmuck with the cell phone.


----------



## lone bugler (16 Feb 2008)

i pray that no member of the Canadian forces will be unarmed in a combat zone.... pistol is always better than nothing plus i do remember seeing articles how troops are doing searches in confined spaces in Afghanistan, such as houses, caves, cellars etc. pistol is a must


----------



## KevinB (16 Feb 2008)

One other comment is that the NATO Fig11 tgt gives troop a woeful COM -- and tends to direct them to fire too low - and avoid the ideal aiming point of the centre of the upper chest (well head if your that good) 

   The photorealistic decision maker targets are a lot better as well as other with a better "scoring ring" defined low vis on them.


----------



## Loachman (17 Feb 2008)

Infidel-6 said:
			
		

> Journeyman's pregnant girl is there too.



Pregnant, or bad shoplifter?


----------



## TangoTwoBravo (18 Feb 2008)

Infidel-6 said:
			
		

> In Kevin's world -- pers weapons would only get cleared for cleaning...



This would also cut down on the 'change of weapon state' NDs that happen when people are in a rush coming into the gate.


----------



## darmil (19 Feb 2008)

> Weapons are not to be loaded in KAF until you leave the front gate.



Well I can carry a loaded weapon, not readied on KAF I have force exemption.I think all troops should carry a pistol.I like having to firearms.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (19 Feb 2008)

Well I bet Glock would happily sell us 2,000 G19's with 3 mags each for about $500 a gun, throw in spare parts, manuals, mags, some training for the gun plumbers, likely 1.25mil. Not a total Glock fan but the G19 is a decent little pistol, light, smallish and easy to learn on.

Of course by the time the CF and the treasury board policies are followed, the contract will be $16 million and 10 years in the making.


----------



## NL_engineer (19 Feb 2008)

Colin P said:
			
		

> Well I bet Glock would happily sell us 2,000 G19's with 3 mags each for about $500 a gun, throw in spare parts, manuals, mags, some training for the gun plumbers, likely 1.25mil. Not a total Glock fan but the G19 is a decent little pistol, light, smallish and easy to learn on.
> 
> Of course by the time the CF and the treasury board policies are followed, the contract will be $16 million and 10 years in the making.



For half the ammount  :


----------



## medaid (19 Feb 2008)

G19 is a good pistol for Mil and LEO service from many that have had experienxe in both worlds. It's a favoured CCW weapon as well in the States. Me wants one ;D


----------



## OldSolduer (19 Feb 2008)

I would love a pistol as a secondary. Now being a cheap b**tard, I refuse to buy one. I'll stick with a Browning for now.
If you need to use a pistol, things have gone badly....very very badly.


----------



## Good2Golf (19 Feb 2008)

OldSolduer said:
			
		

> I would love a pistol as a secondary. Now being a cheap b**tard, I refuse to buy one. I'll stick with a Browning for now.
> If you need to use a pistol, things have gone badly....very very badly.



Very true, and most likely because I ran out of XXX rounds of 5.56...


----------



## OldSolduer (19 Feb 2008)

:warstory: I remember the 6' wall climb you were supposed to do post 13km march. I used to say(as a platoon 2 I/C) if you guys haven't knocked it down yet, things have gone badly!
I used to fill the post of Duty Officer in the Company from time to time in Bosnia and they gave be a pistol to carry. I used to tell the officers that if I ever had to use it, things have gone very very badly....


----------



## QV (20 Feb 2008)

OldSolduer said:
			
		

> .....If you need to use a pistol, things have gone badly....very very badly.



Imagine how bad it would be if you needed one and didn't have it, like during a primary wpn stoppage in close quarters.


----------



## medaid (20 Feb 2008)

QV said:
			
		

> Imagine how bad it would be if you needed one and didn't have it, like during a primary wpn stoppage in close quarters.



A BHP isnt going to help much in most cases, because that'll likely jam the instant you present it... I'd just throw it as a distraction tool while clearing that stoppage. Swoosh!  :warstory:


----------



## LordOsborne (20 Feb 2008)

Some of my unit's BHPs are apparently in the shop to get some repairs and re-blueing. I think it makes a difference, at least bringing the reliability up significantly. For CFSAC last year, we took four BHPs; three of the shooters had to drop out because their pistols encountered stoppages nearly every other round. Mine was one of the refurb jobs and i picked the best mags from the litter, and i still had stoppages roughly once every 30-40 rounds.  :-\


----------



## KevinB (20 Feb 2008)

I've never had a problem with issued BHP's -- of course I knew how to maintain them -- and filtered out the crappy mags.
  If the guns have a problem -- they need to be tagged for the wpn's techs can do their work.

 FYI -- LE/GOV/MIL pricing on a G19 w/ nightsights and 5 mags is around $215 USD when you buy them on bulk US DOS orders...


----------



## Colin Parkinson (20 Feb 2008)

Thanks for the price I had taken the average US price and reduced it by 25%, but clearly Glock has already paid for most of it's ma chinary and injection molds, makes you realize how much it really costs to make a gun. It also shows that replacing the pistol is less about cost than about time and energy. A 1.25mil contract would bring in 4,000 pistols & 20,000 mags at least.


I would have thought that everyone overseas would be using their own mags for the BHP, the bad mag issue has been around for the last 20 years.


----------



## Eric_911 (20 Feb 2008)

Colin P said:
			
		

> I would have thought that everyone overseas would be using their own mags for the BHP, the bad mag issue has been around for the last 20 years.



The old mags were definately an issue, but I have used brand spanking new, shiny DND issue BHP mags on two or three occasions in the last year. (Both in Edmonton and Ottawa) The CF must have bought more. If your unit only has old crappy mags, they should start squashing a batch and requisition some new ones.


----------



## LordOsborne (20 Feb 2008)

The shooting team from 19 Wing Comox actually went so far as to make a unit purchase of shiny FN Herstal magazines for their BHPs. I was very envious, especially at how cleanly they ejected.


----------



## darmil (2 Mar 2008)

When i got my BHP issued when i came here.I got a new mag and old one.The pistol its self is in good shape some guys got issued almost brand new ones.I cant wait until i can wear my own pistol holster the issued one is crap :


----------



## zipperhead_cop (3 Mar 2008)

MikeH said:
			
		

> When i got my BHP issued when i came here.I got a new mag and old one.The pistol its self is in good shape some guys got issued almost brand new ones.I cant wait until i can wear my own pistol holster the issued one is crap :



The issued holster is borderline criminal negligence.  You might as well put the pistol in your cargo pants pocket 
(not an actual suggested course of action)


----------



## OldSolduer (3 Mar 2008)

I used to carry the BHP in my jacket pocket.....no holster required!!!


----------



## 1feral1 (3 Mar 2008)

Infidel-6 said:
			
		

> I've never had a problem with issued BHP's



Same here, never a problem.

The design has been around since 1935, and the Inglis is one of the most robust.

If there is problems with a particular pistol, its most likely user related.


----------



## mudgunner49 (4 Mar 2008)

Wesley  Down Under said:
			
		

> Same here, never a problem.
> 
> The design has been around since 1935, and the Inglis is one of the most robust.
> 
> If there is problems with a particular pistol, its most likely user *or mag * related.




... I fixed your post for you Wes... ;D


----------



## geo (4 Mar 2008)

Note that there are a lot ob BHPs around in reserve units that have 1T serial numbers.....  
the barrels have been brushed through so many times 
The mags have been banged around for so many years....

But if the individual pistol is worn out & does not function in a satisfactory manner OR the mags have bent lips.... it's a simple process to replace the darned things.... so long as people do the job they are paid to do, there should not be a problem.


----------



## 421 EME (4 Mar 2008)

As a weapons tech I am here to tell you that the BHP mags a the major with this weapon. The lips on the mag are being pushed outward by the rounds in the mag, this will cause double feeds and that is the most common problem that I have come across at the user end of things. At the weapons tech end of things, there are not very many things that go wrong with the BHP. Yes its old and heavy when compared to modern pistols, but its all we have till someone at DLR get there act together and get us a new pistol.

Bellow is the the mag lip measurement from the CFTO that your unit Weapons Tech uses.

and the opening
between the lips is between 8.99 millimetres
(0.354 inch) and 9.19 millimetres (0.362 inch).

If you have a problem with your BHP having double feeds, take the mag and put it on the ground, find a big rock and drop it on the mag, pick the mag up and go to your CQ or a weapons tech and say you need a new one. (just dont let anyone see you do this)


----------



## Colin Parkinson (4 Mar 2008)

The BHP is heavy? Hmm you should try my 226ST


----------



## geo (4 Mar 2008)

the BHP is lighter than that big ROCK you used on your mag..... >


----------



## George Wallace (4 Mar 2008)

421 EME said:
			
		

> If you have a problem with your BHP having double feeds, take the mag and put it on the ground, find a big rock and drop it on the mag, pick the mag up and go to your CQ or a weapons tech and say you need a new one. (just dont let anyone see you do this)



Now if all those "Cold Warriors" hadn't used those mags as bottle openers we wouldn't have these problems.

I wonder if you also gave the advice to place the Colman Stove under the left track and back over it, in order to get a new one?   >


----------



## 421 EME (4 Mar 2008)

No George, I don't have to tell the troops to do that, they already know that's the fastest way to get a new one. As for the BHP mags, there is no repair that can be done to fix them, even if I tried to bend the mag lips back to the specs, all I have done is now is make the metal lips weak and the same problem with double feeding will happen again. Once a BHP mag hit my bench and I find it N/S for this problem, I crush it to make sure that when it goes back to supply or the CQ's, they know that's its N/S and wont issue it out again because they think it looks fine.


----------



## Dirty Patricia (4 Mar 2008)

Overseas my BHP was my "camp gun".  It is excellent at satisfying the KAF weapon requirement because even though it doesn't work like one, it really looks like a pistol.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (4 Mar 2008)

If the Government sold those pistol to the public they would be snapped up so fast it would make your head spin. They could likely pay for a new replacement for what they would get for them. With a little TLC they make a great pistol.


----------



## Redeye (4 Mar 2008)

Colin P said:
			
		

> If the Government sold those pistol to the public they would be snapped up so fast it would make your head spin. They could likely pay for a new replacement for what they would get for them. With a little TLC they make a great pistol.



They should do that just so we could all see the embolism that would hit David Miller and his ilk.  They would raise a fortune that way though, with a little work and new mags they would be great at the range - a little change when I get bored of my M&P.


----------



## medaid (4 Mar 2008)

Rumor has it they still got a war stock of those things in packaged, cosmoline soaked cases with Chinese Nationalist marking on them. Truth to that? If it is, whip em out  no point in letting them just sitting there :S


----------



## Redeye (4 Mar 2008)

MedTech said:
			
		

> Rumor has it they still got a war stock of those things in packaged, cosmoline soaked cases with Chinese Nationalist marking on them. Truth to that? If it is, whip em out  no point in letting them just sitting there :S



Are those the ones with the 500m sights?  I'd love one of those, just for comedic value.  Imagine the angle you'd need to hold a 9mm at to get the bullet to go 500m!


----------



## Colin Parkinson (4 Mar 2008)

Just saw a Mk II Inglis for sale on CGN, $525, almost twice as much as Glock will sell the G19 to the military for....


----------



## geo (4 Mar 2008)

Remember an old BHP at my 1st reserve unit.... part of the original INGLIS decal still on the body.  I believe that one was part of the batch that was to have gone to the Chinese.  I don't think we have any more "war stock" of anything anymore though....


----------



## 1feral1 (4 Mar 2008)

geo said:
			
		

> Note that there are a lot ob BHPs around in reserve units that have 1T serial numbers.....
> the barrels have been brushed through so many times
> The mags have been banged around for so many years....
> 
> But if the individual pistol is worn out & does not function in a satisfactory manner OR the mags have bent lips.... it's a simple process to replace the darned things.... so long as people do the job they are paid to do, there should not be a problem.



Whether its 1T or 10T Inglis, they are all wartime manufacture, sadly most CF mags I have seen are also marked JI, and wartimers too.

These pistols do get FTR'ds as required, two piece FNH barrrels were in the system when I left in late 1994. However, if there is a problem with any pistols, such as condition, this should be picked up by the user, tagged and passed up to the Q pers. If not ,the fault should be picked up on ATIs, even in outlying Militia units. 

I guess at the end of the day the onus is on getting the defect reported, and many times it never does, the pistol is returned, tag comes off, and out it goes again.

As for mags, if in doubt - get rid of them. Plenty of mags out there, and again the mag(s) must be first identified as U/S-N/S, tagged, quarantined and replaced.

Nothing happens unless the paperwork is done and followed up on.

The BHP was also used in lend-lease during WW2, the decal in question was in English, Russian and Chinese. Less than 10 yrs ago here in Australia there was the odd 0T Inglis floating around, and some with tangent rear sights.

Both fixed rear sight, and tangent with slot for shoulder stock were produced by John Inglis.

Back in Saskatchewan, I still have my 3T Inglis, yes now with ergo grips, and ambo safety, she's a beauty. Oh ya and modified 10rd mags too. Gotta be PC compliant in the gun world, ")

Cheers,

Wes


----------



## mudgunner49 (5 Mar 2008)

Wesley  Down Under said:
			
		

> Whether its 1T or 10T Inglis, they are all wartime manufacture, sadly most CF mags I have seen are also marked JI, and wartimers too.
> 
> These pistols do get FTR'ds as required, two piece FNH barrrels were in the system when I left in late 1994. However, if there is a problem with any pistols, such as condition, this should be picked up by the user, tagged and passed up to the Q pers. If not ,the fault should be picked up on ATIs, even in outlying Militia units.
> 
> ...



Heaven only knows what kind of havoc you could wreak with those extra three *(3)* rounds... :


blake


----------



## rambo123 (13 Mar 2008)

I do agree that all soldiers should carry a pistol as a secondary firearm, but we must replace our aging 9mm Browings with something new, the browing has had it day, and in some cases the old firearms cannot be relied upon, espically with a round in the chamber, alot of the safety's and starting to wear out, and I do not believe that the canadian soldier what to shoot himself.


----------



## Loachman (13 Mar 2008)

I was issued with a Browning stamped with Chinese markings while on Inf Officer training in Gagnam in 1979. It was slotted for the shoulder stock, but the rear sight had been replaced with the standard fixed sight.

I traded a nylon shoulder holster for a Browning shoulder stock in very good condition in 1984 or 1985, and bought the pistol (Inglis, slotted and with tangent rear sight) for it while in Lahr a year or two later. At the time of purchase, the stock was worth five or six hundred dollars. I paid less than a third of that for the pistol.

It's probably largely familiarity, but I have yet to find a more modern pistol that I like as much.


----------



## geo (13 Mar 2008)

rambo123 said:
			
		

> I do agree that all soldiers should carry a pistol as a secondary firearm, but we must replace our aging 9mm Browings with something new, the browing has had it day, and in some cases the old firearms cannot be relied upon, espically with a round in the chamber, alot of the safety's and starting to wear out, and I do not believe that the canadian soldier what to shoot himself.


Rambo,
Don't know your expertise (blank profile) but, the points you are bringing up have been brought up in the previous 12 pages.  Most people will tell you that the biggest problems the BHPs have right now is the MAG.  With 35+ yrs hands on with the BHP, I have as yet, not had safety problems with the pistol that could be traced back to worn out safeties.

If anything, we have skimped on Pistol training and most of the accidents can be traced back to a lack of training with the darned thing.... unless you know something I don't?


----------



## OldSolduer (13 Mar 2008)

Well said geo:
I've stated in the past that if you want the soldiers to carry pistols, train them PROPERLY!!
All we've heard is this pistol. that pistol, the safeties are worn out etc.

All excuses.....we are issued, for the most part,  the Browning 9mm, and we have to use it. So lets get the troops trained PROPERLY on it. :rage:


----------



## 1feral1 (14 Mar 2008)

rambo123 said:
			
		

> I do agree that all soldiers should carry a pistol as a secondary firearm, but we must replace our aging 9mm Browings with something new, the browing has had it day, and in some cases the old firearms cannot be relied upon, espically with a round in the chamber, alot of the safety's and starting to wear out, and I do not believe that the canadian soldier what to shoot himself.



A spade is a shovel, reality check, over!

Mini rant on - I am over the wannabees, but this one I am going to bite.

You know what pisses me off, is when SME 'know it alls' gob off, and dribble shyte from their mouths.

Just what do you know?? Had its day?  Can't be relied on? Especially with a rd in the chamber? Safeties starting to wear????? To shoot one's self??? Holy shyte, over! 

Who are you to make accusations like that? A classic example of someone who knows SFA about nothing. 

I don't know who you think you are, or pretend to, there is nothing wrong with the BHP for military use. Its proven, soldier proof, and reliable. Today not only Canada still use it, but so do the UK and Australia along with a host of Commonwealth nations. Its the most common military 9mm pistol in the world.

Your information you present in unfounded, and with YET another EMPTY PROFILE and a name like RAMBO, I think I have made my point PERFECTLY clear. Stick your your lane of expertise Rambo. Play the game or pack it in, as I am getting rather jack with the GMK on the BHP you 'present'.

I have known this pistol since 1976, owned one since 1980, and carried on in theatre, in a desert environment, yes loaded. The only time I did not have it with me was when I slept, and showered. I am also an armourer, and been involved in the national rebuild program. So, unless you really know the kit STFU!

Mini rant off.


----------



## BinRat55 (14 Mar 2008)

Just to put a different spin on the topic (i apologise if it HAS been covered in the preceding 12 pages, as I have not read ALL of the posts) but here is my story:

Picture it - Eritrea, 2001.  LPO runs into Asmara - me and the Sarge in an LSVW.  Ok, if the LSVW coming to a really loud screeching halt in front of the local businesses we went into on a daily basis didn't draw enough attention, the 2 unknown soldiers walking up to Ahmed with machine guns did.  It wasn't ... conducive ... to fostering a great business relationship with the local community.  After the first 3 weeks of paying almost $30 US for 4 rolls of TP it was decided that we would wear a 9mm on our leg vice carrying the C-7.  The presence of being armed was still there, but the threat towards friendlies was all but gone.  Worked great - until we were ordered to leave the BHP back at camp. Nope, the C-& WILL be carried, as it is the "Jr NCO weapon of choice".  So after a week of carting the C-7 into local shops again, we were asked not to return.  That led to me securing the C-7's in the LSVW and my Sgt entering a local civilian establishment UNARMED and ALONE - just to do business.  And some people don't see how a Supply Tech can put his or her life on the line - that man did it every day - 2 and 3 times a day - to get the job done!!


----------



## geo (14 Mar 2008)

There is no doubt that carrying a C7 is, at times, an inconvenience.  The concept of having 2 people wandering around unarmed is enough to make me cringe.
Might I suggest that one person standing at the door with the C7 while the other would be wearing the BHP might have been the better compromise.


----------



## BinRat55 (14 Mar 2008)

geo said:
			
		

> There is no doubt that carrying a C7 is, at times, an inconvenience.  The concept of having 2 people wandering around unarmed is enough to make me cringe.
> Might I suggest that one person standing at the door with the C7 while the other would be wearing the BHP might have been the better compromise.



Great Ceaser's GHOST no!!!  You misunderstood - I was stationed at the LSVW WITH the C-7's - I would take up a position starting on the street directly in front of our piece of  LSVW and pace to about 5 feet from the entrance and back again, never to the same spot twice.  The Sarge DID go inside unarmed, and I cringed everytime.  He taught me a lot.  We actually attempted to carry one 9mm off camp (claim stupidity when caught) but we ended up claiming stupitity (we got caught!!) The Cpl (me) wasn't aware of the new policy. The Sgt (him) was told to discipline the Cpl for his ignorance. The Cpl (me) was given a very stern talking to by the Sgt over a BBQ steak and a beer - both of which were bought and cooked respectively by the Sgt in question!!  He taught me a lot.


----------



## OldSolduer (14 Mar 2008)

BinRat I empathize with your position. There are farrrrr tooooo many "rule book followers" and not enough THINKERS in the military.
Common sense has to prevail. It's too bad its not an initial issue upon commencing training. ;D


----------



## geo (14 Mar 2008)

Binrat.... given that we are now a fighting army once more, I would venture to say that with all that experience outside the wire, attitudes will change and the situation you experienced probably would not happen today (or maybe next year).  (Dinos do retire - they don't die (though the smell may suggest otherwise  )


----------



## Command-Sense-Act 105 (14 Mar 2008)

BinRat, good story.  There are times when even a "short" long arm is not the right one for the job.  This 'pistols or not' decision should be a tactical one made by the folks going into a situation as needed, not some sort of 'blanket' decision.


----------



## Jarnhamar (14 Mar 2008)

I think the pistol is still being used as a status symbol in a lot of places.

In training in Texas I heard a few indicators of it.
-We don't need to put troops through the pistol range their not going to use them anyways
-Only section commanders and 2ICs will have pistols.

Me I figure a C9 gunner, medic or door kicker are in a position to actually _need_ a pistol before a section commander. Especially more than an NCO or Officer working on base 99% of the time.

Everyone thinks pistols are cool and wants one, sadly in the game of paper rock rank the guys and girls who could make the most use of them don't win.


----------



## BinRat55 (14 Mar 2008)

geo said:
			
		

> Binrat.... given that we are now a fighting army once more, I would venture to say that with all that experience outside the wire, attitudes will change and the situation you experienced probably would not happen today (or maybe next year).  (Dinos do retire - they don't die (though the smell may suggest otherwise  )



I would have to agree 100% on that one.  It's good to see that we are learning through experience these days instead of "white papers".  Something I always tell my people - it takes a good supply tech to go by the book, but it takes a better supply tech to know when to _not _ go by the book.  Works for everyone I think...


----------



## geo (14 Mar 2008)

An even better supply tech would look at what the book says, identify it as being wrong for all of the following reasons and try his damnest to have it changed..... 8)

I always considered "white paper" to be two ply and dispensed by the roll.... uhh.... isn't that what you and your Sgt were buying at $$$ per pack?


----------



## BinRat55 (14 Mar 2008)

geo said:
			
		

> An even better supply tech would look at what the book says, identify it as being wrong for all of the following reasons and try his damnest to have it changed..... 8)



Geo, you just described ArmyVern to a TEE!!!  Good one.



> I always considered "white paper" to be two ply and dispensed by the roll.... uhh.... isn't that what you and your Sgt were buying at $$$ per pack?



LOL!!  Actually it was off white and closer to sandpaper.  Curious...maybe that's why it was so expensive?  I told him I didn't think ACE Hardware carried Charmin...  ;D


----------



## zipperhead_cop (14 Mar 2008)

Flawed Design said:
			
		

> I think the pistol is still being used as a status symbol in a lot of places.
> In training in Texas I heard a few indicators of it.



I was entitled to one and didn't bother drawing it.  I won't wear a holster that has practicality just lower than duct taping the weapon to your leg.  I'll pass for now.


----------



## Teeps74 (14 Mar 2008)

zipperhead_cop said:
			
		

> I was entitled to one and didn't bother drawing it.  I won't wear a holster that has practicality just lower than duct taping the weapon to your leg.  I'll pass for now.



Historically speaking, in Afghanistan, the Russians rarely if ever used their rifles for executions. They used pistols. Now, if you want to modify behaviour quickly, use a pistol as opposed to a rifle (but do take into account ROEs before doing so).

Having a pistol is also and inidcator to them of rank (ie a commander carries a pistol), another hold over from the Russian invasion. If you are in a position where face-to-face conversation is a possibility, I recommend drawing a pistol, and investing in a decent holster for it (the issue holster is junk through and through, because it was not designed for the Browning High-Power). Expect to spend about $80-120 on a decent to high end one SAFARILAND is fantastic, I got a HSGI from One Shot (in Brighton Ont, did I get the name right?), and I loved that holster.


----------



## BinRat55 (14 Mar 2008)

Teeps74 said:
			
		

> ...investing in a decent holster for it (the issue holster is junk through and through, because it was not designed for the Browning High-Power). Expect to spend about $80-120 on a decent to high end one SAFARILAND is fantastic, I got a HSGI from One Shot (in Brighton Ont, did I get the name right?), and I loved that holster.



Pardon my ignorance, but speaking strictly from the Supply trade, I wasn't aware we were allowed to buy and wear personal (non-issue) kit when it came to weapons. Not that I disagree - i'll be the first person to tell you if it's the best thing in an operational theater, i'll turn the other way - but some wouldn't.  I would think there is a culpability issue if the kit malfunctions. And yes (for the benefit of some, holsters CAN malfunction and cause AD's).  Is this a unit thing, or CF wide?


----------



## Dissident (14 Mar 2008)

Case by case, almost.

We wore non issued holster on my roto, shoulder, waist and drop leg. Next roto, no dice. 

If someone would have had an ND due to their non issued holster, I get a feeling we would have been hung to dry.


----------



## riggermade (14 Mar 2008)

I think it would be difficult to show an ND was caused by a holster, depending on the holster....I made shoulder rigs in CADPAT that were the same as the issued green ones....now some of the more modern ones with all the bells and whistles might be a different story


----------



## OldSolduer (14 Mar 2008)

OK troops:

Here's the skinny on Negligent Discharges......they are caused by negligence on the soldier's part, not the holster, not the weapon itself, but the soldier...
We used to call them Accidental Discharges...but in reality these are caused by negligence.


----------



## 421 EME (14 Mar 2008)

It is the responsible of a QL5 Weapons Tech L to do all investigations in to ND's with all weapons being used by the army, and I say this to all of you, we try everything to get a weapon to fail the serviceably test to keep the guy from getting charged, but if it passes the test and is serviceable your getting charged.
 Holsters don't cause a ND's, people cause ND's( poor training and drills). With the BHP one thing that may cause a ND is using your mag pouch on the TV as a holster. Because when you are putting the BHP into the mag pouch you can inadvertently cause the safety to come off and BANG you got a ND waiting to happen.


----------



## garb811 (15 Mar 2008)

Dissident said:
			
		

> Case by case, almost.
> 
> We wore non issued holster on my roto, shoulder, waist and drop leg. Next roto, no dice.
> 
> If someone would have had an ND due to their non issued holster, I get a feeling we would have been hung to dry.


Didn't you convert to Sig prior to deploying?  Any Reservists I ever took, it was the first thing we did to ensure commonality on pistols in the Det.  Even pre-Sig I never wore the issued holster on Ops, the unit did a bulk purchase of a suitable better holster and everyone wore that.


----------



## BinRat55 (15 Mar 2008)

garb811 said:
			
		

> the unit did a bulk purchase of a suitable better holster and everyone wore that.



Well I KNOW that shouldn't fly... but i've seen much weirder (is that even a word?) things in my years.  I guess for me, for my own piece of mind, if I were carrying a side arm in a non-issued holster, I would have an issued holster somewhere nearby!!

Soyou say the "unit" did a bulk purchase for an item that is restricted in the supply system?  Interesting...


----------



## BinRat55 (15 Mar 2008)

421 EME said:
			
		

> It is the responsible of a QL5 Weapons Tech L to do all investigations in to ND's with all weapons being used by the army, and I say this to all of you, we try everything to get a weapon to fail the serviceably test to keep the guy from getting charged, but if it passes the test and is serviceable your getting charged.



Sniff...I love you guys!!!  ;D


----------



## 421 EME (15 Mar 2008)

I hate doing ND investigations but its my job and I am not going to lie to get a guy out of the charge. But I do try everything I can to get the weapon to fail, but 95% of the time its the user that has caused it. Weapons safety is a big thing for me because a good Friend and fellow weapons tech lost the hearing in one of his ears when someone had a ND with a 25mm chaingun in the Stan while he was right under the muzzle. There are 5 safety's on the 25mm chaingun that you have to by pass to get it to fire and they all passed when the investigation was done. I guess the one safety that was not working was his trigger finger.


----------



## KevinB (15 Mar 2008)

BHP Safariland 6004


----------



## OldSolduer (15 Mar 2008)

Here is a simple old CSM's take on kit...like holsters.....Tac vests.....boots

Kitosauruses....its time to move into the enlightened age.
The day of having "inspection kit" and "field" kit is over....let it be. As long as the kit conforms to cam pattern etc...and I'm sure some of you will add more...and the kit is durable and simple....let it go!!
I'm sure the Army RSM won't like this,,,,but that is my opinion.


----------



## geo (15 Mar 2008)

OldSolduer said:
			
		

> Here is a simple old CSM's take on kit...like holsters.....Tac vests.....boots
> I'm sure the Army RSM won't like this,,,,but that is my opinion.



Huh?..... been there, done that and would NOT bust my sapper's chops for non standard but well thought out kit selection.


----------



## garb811 (15 Mar 2008)

BinRat55 said:
			
		

> Well I KNOW that shouldn't fly... but i've seen much weirder (is that even a word?) things in my years.  I guess for me, for my own piece of mind, if I were carrying a side arm in a non-issued holster, I would have an issued holster somewhere nearby!!
> 
> Soyou say the "unit" did a bulk purchase for an item that is restricted in the supply system?  Interesting...


Fear not my Sup Tech friend.  It was legit and above board with the blessing and funding of the Bde as an IOR due to identified and supported retention issues which are the very same issues everyone is still facing with that holster.  We even made sure it was our Sup Tech who went and made the purchase just to co-opt him as well.


----------



## Teeps74 (15 Mar 2008)

BinRat55 said:
			
		

> Well I KNOW that shouldn't fly... but i've seen much weirder (is that even a word?) things in my years.  I guess for me, for my own piece of mind, if I were carrying a side arm in a non-issued holster, I would have an issued holster somewhere nearby!!
> 
> Soyou say the "unit" did a bulk purchase for an item that is restricted in the supply system?  Interesting...



The current issue holster for the Browning is too big for the Browning. The only reason why I did not lose mine (twice) on my last trip to Bosnia, is because I had a non-issue retention strap tied off to my belt. The other option, is dumping a magazine, and puting the pistol in a mag pouch.

The holster is designed for a bigger Beretta (which is longer, and has a wider slide). The holster is perfectly functional on a parade square at the positions of attention and at ease. Anything like a mark time tho, and one runs the risk of dropping the pistol right out, even with the two points of retention engaged (the fastex buckles are lowest bider, and mine wore out to the point of not holding in place, I had to tape it).


----------



## zipperhead_cop (15 Mar 2008)

Infidel-6 said:
			
		

> BHP Safariland 6004



I-6, do you have a pic of the inside of the thumb break?  That looks like the sort of thing that I'm trying to find.
Also having a devil of a time finding drop magazine holders for the other leg, although I think I saw an all-in-one type device from CP Gear.  
Having your spare mags on the strong side is another idiocy of many military style holsters I've seen.


----------



## KevinB (15 Mar 2008)

Dude I will get you - one -- and I have the holster here in Ottawa if your interested -- I will be in Petawawa next w/e


----------



## Jarnhamar (16 Mar 2008)

Infidel-6 what kind of pistol is that in the picture you just posted?


----------



## KevinB (16 Mar 2008)

Browning Hi Power Inglis No.2 Mk1*

 issued to me at the time.
Mag safety removed
Spegel Coco Bolo thinline grips
issued really ghey lanyard
skateboard tape on front and backstrap.




*sorry I know I told you in the PM it was my custom Novak BHP - I needed to look at the pic here to remember which one it was.


----------



## Dissident (16 Mar 2008)

garb811 said:
			
		

> Didn't you convert to Sig prior to deploying?  Any Reservists I ever took, it was the first thing we did to ensure commonality on pistols in the Det.  Even pre-Sig I never wore the issued holster on Ops, the unit did a bulk purchase of a suitable better holster and everyone wore that.



We did get issued the 225. If by converting you mean showing up one day and doing the qualification shoot(without any instruction), then yeah.

We also got issued Uncle Mikes drop leg holster, which were an improvement over the Bianchi. Still, I decided against using it, since I could not reliably twist the pistol out of the holster. 

I went with a CQC Serpa holster from BlackHawk. This was a mistake. As a day to day holster for KAF, it did not offer retention and left the hammer exposed. The hammer would get pulled back by seat belts. Embarrassing. The worst part about this is that I was already a Safariland convert and changed to the Serpa because of someones (well meaning)advice.


----------



## medaid (16 Mar 2008)

Ah poor man... We all know that Safariland is superior to the Serpa in many ways


----------



## zipperhead_cop (17 Mar 2008)

Infidel-6 said:
			
		

> Dude I will get you - one -- and I have the holster here in Ottawa if your interested -- I will be in Petawawa next w/e



If that would be Easter weekend, I'm going to miss you.  And any chance the holster would be for a left handed freak?  
However, an Ottawa trip is a-brewin'....


----------



## KevinB (17 Mar 2008)

Unfortunately I am out the door on the 28th back to the world of sand and bad smeeling men with beards.

 It is also unfortunately for a righty (as I am perfect - and thus a righty...   )


Jay4th here has a BHP lefty rig -- but he is out and about trying to pick up random (female) reservists in WATC while he teaches.


----------



## TCBF (17 Mar 2008)

Teeps74 said:
			
		

> ... The current issue holster for the Browning is too big for the Browning. ... The holster is designed for a bigger Beretta (which is longer, and has a wider slide). ...



- Back in the day when we had probably more Inglis Browning pistols than we had FN C2s (both weapons made in Toronto, by the way), we had holsters that fit the BHPs.  A web type for the 1951 pattern webbing (with hooks) and a nylon type for 1964 pattern webbing, with loops.  I had one but I gave it away, as the loops were too small for the 1982 pattern web belt they gave me in 1986.

- One would think that simply purchasing a replacement holster system that fits the pistol would make sense. Too bad it they aren't like boots, and all we need is a chit from the doctor stating that issue holsters don't fit us...


----------



## Greymatters (17 Mar 2008)

TCBF said:
			
		

> - One would think that simply purchasing a replacement holster system that fits the pistol would make sense. Too bad it they aren't like boots, and all we need is a chit from the doctor stating that issue holsters don't fit us...



Makes you wonder why they selected that particular pattern...


----------



## KevinB (17 Mar 2008)

Someone like it and no-one else had input.

It was better than the 1982 pattern floppy holster -- I acquired a Uncle Mike's holster in the early 90's which was head and shoulders above the UM-84, it was made for the BHP (novel I know  : )   While it has been eclipsed it worked in its day and it was available when the idiots got us the UM-84 - its pretty bad to realised our holster is 20 years behind the 8 ball.


----------



## mudgunner49 (17 Mar 2008)

I have approved private-purchase Safariland 6004 and HSGI for the Browning.  Now to work on gov't funds to purchase so that troops aren't out of pocket...


blake


----------



## BLUE GRUNT (17 Mar 2008)

The decision to equip troops should not be a hard one in my mind, everyone should get them, and like several others have stated, training is the key as with all weapons, if the NCM's were issued pistols at the begining then eventually they would become second nature to the troops with regards to safety and accuracy.(Officers are another matter entirely) The big issue with that is number of and condition of equipment, this is the same for the C7A2, the amount a unit has is limited, or it is in my units case and this is sad, the soldier for the most part never becomes comfortable with it and this in turn leads to unsafe practices, especially by the John Wayne types. 
This is of course the ideal world and unfortunately we that have been around long enough have seen that nothing is ever an ideal world in the CF make do and adaptation by the troops is often what occurs to make things happen.


----------



## zipperhead_cop (17 Mar 2008)

Infidel-6 said:
			
		

> Jay4th here has a BHP lefty rig -- but he is out and about trying to pick up random (female) reservists in WATC while he teaches.



Completely understandable and respectable.   ;D
I still have lots of time before we go anywhere.  Hopefully I can gab with him before September.


----------



## mudgunner49 (17 Mar 2008)

BLUE GRUNT said:
			
		

> ... if the NCM's were issued pistols at the begining then eventually they would become second nature to the troops with regards to safety and accuracy.(*Officers are another matter entirely*) The big issue with that is number of and condition of equipment, this is the same for the C7A2, the amount a unit has is limited, or it is in my units case and this is sad, the soldier for the most part never becomes comfortable with it and this in turn leads to unsafe practices, especially by the John Wayne types....



Oh - let's not go there Sunshine...


----------



## daftandbarmy (17 Mar 2008)

mudgunner49 said:
			
		

> Oh - let's not go there Sunshine...



Ha! I was waiting for that one.


----------



## KevinB (17 Mar 2008)

mudgunner49 said:
			
		

> Oh - let's not go there Sunshine...


YUP - I must say that by far I see MORE officers than NCO's (scary when you think numbers) who are "shooters".

 Its fun to bash officer weapons handling -- but I see a lot more issues on the NCO side.

Like an RSM having an ND - come on WTF over.


----------



## COBRA-6 (17 Mar 2008)

mudgunner49 said:
			
		

> Oh - let's not go there Sunshine...



that's a diplomatic way to say it


----------



## mudgunner49 (17 Mar 2008)

COBRA-6 said:
			
		

> that's a diplomatic way to say it



You know me - the epitome of diplomacy... ;D


blake


----------



## BLUE GRUNT (17 Mar 2008)

Just thought I would clarify my point.....I was not suggesting that the officer core in general doesn't have any ability what so ever, my meaning was that since the NCM's do not as a practice carry the pistol they are less familiar with it than the officier. i know there are enough NCM's who do not have a clue as illustrated when our unit went to the range a few weeks ago, one of the Sgt's asked me to show him how to put the thing together,. This again goes back to the basic skill set people in general have, those that use it frequently will be more adapt than those that do not.

 As for Nd's I know of some that recently took place at a range, they were door gunning, nothing done about that, no person or A/C were injured, typical it would seem for our place that no charges or other was brought up

I am not officer bashing, infact I know of many good ones who handle their weapon well, the  same can be said for NCM's, conversely I see just as many that should not even get near a weapon. A perfect example is someone I know from the CP140 community, he had not one clue concerning weapons, he has no exposure to them in his job, the same can be said of other trades who do not handle weapons on a regular basis, staff types who go out to play because there is no one left.

Love how people read to much into what is said in here, very excitable group , does stimulate the conversations though.

Woo Aha


----------



## Franko (17 Mar 2008)

BLUE GRUNT said:
			
		

> Just thought I would clarify my point.....I was not suggesting that the officer core in general doesn't have any ability what so ever, my meaning was that since the NCM's do not as a practice carry the pistol they are less familiar with it than the officier. i know there are enough NCM's who do not have a clue as illustrated when our unit went to the range a few weeks ago, one of the Sgt's asked me to show him how to put the thing together,.



Perhaps in *your* unit that is the norm. 

It is not, however, common in any combat arms unit that I've ever heard of.

Training, at *all *rank levels, with it properly alleviates the stigma of "elitism" and some sort of weird status symbol that some people think the bloody thing is.

It's a weapon...nothing more. Not some sort of FOBbit jewelery so someone can put their C7 away and carry it as a fashion statement.

Regards


----------



## KevinB (17 Mar 2008)

Recce By Death said:
			
		

> It's a weapon...nothing more. Not some sort of FOBbit jewelery so someone can put their C7 away and carry it as a fashion statement.



OH SO TRUE


----------



## OldSolduer (17 Mar 2008)

Ain't that the truth Infidel 6....seen farrr too much of FOBbit jewellery.


----------



## TCBF (18 Mar 2008)

Recce By Death said:
			
		

> It's a weapon...nothing more. Not some sort of FOBbit jewelery so someone can put their C7 away and carry it as a fashion statement.



- As the cliche goes, the pistol is used to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have put down.

- As for the fashion statement, perhaps those afraid of rifles should be given pistols - less energy going downrange when the inevitable ND occurs.  

- I never could figure out why people who hate and fear guns join the Canadian ARMED Forces.


----------



## Jarnhamar (18 Mar 2008)

BLUE GRUNT said:
			
		

> ...as illustrated when our unit went to the range a few weeks ago, one of the Sgt's asked me to show him how to put the thing together,.



Funny but I'd respect the fact that this SGT realized he didn't know what he was doing and asked for help instead of just acting like he knew.
I've seen someone get a stoppage with the browning, eject the round then somehow load the round in the chamber backwards attempt to fire it then ask for a C7 cleaning rod so he can insert it into the barrel and attempt to pop out the round.

EVERYONE needs more time with the pistols but it's hard because they are so scarce. They are so scarce because people who don't need them, have them.

Too bad troops weren't allowed to bring their own 9mms or .45s


----------



## TCBF (18 Mar 2008)

- The other reason they are so scarce might be because we keep thousands in 'war stocks' while not replacing the ones BLR'd/BER'd over the years.


----------



## zipperhead_cop (18 Mar 2008)

TCBF said:
			
		

> - As the cliche goes, the pistol is used to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have put down.



See, I think this pervasive idea is part of the problem.  I have also hear repeatedly "If I have to use *this POS*, things have gotten really f**ked up".  I don't get where that comes from.  Lack of interest and lack of confidence is what I have been seeing, not a Gucci attitude.  
The pistol is a tool, like everything else.  Probably because I am so comfortable with it, I would rather use it in a CQB situation than a rifle (no, this is not an invitation for all the sexy gunfighters to argue CQB).  Hell, I'd like someone to teach me how to use my bayonet again.  I would also like to have an M203 on my personal rifle, which I would like to be a C-9, but sometimes I have cheese dreams.  
My point is that there seems to be a culture in the Army that using the pistol is somehow a bad thing.  Getting past this idea IMO would go a long way to sorting out some of these training issues.  Currently, it feels like many people think of the BHP as a "nice-to-have".


----------



## Jarnhamar (18 Mar 2008)

My 2ICs G-Wagon was hit by an IED and it sucked the door open and actually sucked his rifle right out. When he dismounted all he had for a few minutes was his pistol.


----------



## Big Red (18 Mar 2008)

Flawed Design said:
			
		

> My 2ICs G-Wagon was hit by an IED and it sucked the door open and actually sucked his rifle right out. When he dismounted all he had for a few minutes was his pistol.



Good reason to have the rifle attached to your body.


----------



## geo (18 Mar 2008)

TCBF said:
			
		

> - The other reason they are so scarce might be because we keep thousands in 'war stocks' while not replacing the ones BLR'd/BER'd over the years.


THAT may be the fault of the unit personnel who, seeing how often the pistols actualy got used, didn't put much importance in the darned thing and returned the pistols to the vault - defects and all ...... THAT's how come we had so many defective mags... that's why those thousands of BHP stayed in war stock.

That having been said, over the past couple of years and going forward, that problem is, at long last, being addressed.  We get rid of what is broken and demand kit that works.


----------



## geo (18 Mar 2008)

Years and years ago, we said the pistol came with a lanyard so that the young officer would not lose his "personal weapon"..... we also suggested that the lanyard could be used to bring back the weapon to same said young officer after he had thrown it at his foe... a salute to his shooting prowess


----------



## Redeye (18 Mar 2008)

Didn't they change the manual of arms on that - 12 rounds for the enemy, 1 for you if it gets that bad?



			
				geo said:
			
		

> Years and years ago, we said the pistol came with a lanyard so that the young officer would not lose his "personal weapon"..... we also suggested that the lanyard could be used to bring back the weapon to same said young officer after he had thrown it at his foe... a salute to his shooting prowess


----------



## geo (18 Mar 2008)

.... to save time, only issue the last one >


----------



## daftandbarmy (18 Mar 2008)

geo said:
			
		

> Years and years ago, we said the pistol came with a lanyard so that the young officer would not lose his "personal weapon"..... we also suggested that the lanyard could be used to bring back the weapon to same said young officer after he had thrown it at his foe... a salute to his shooting prowess



That would be me.... give me a rifle over a pistol anytime (or a sharpened shovel...)


----------



## OldSolduer (18 Mar 2008)

The use of pistols in combat....has anyone seriously studied that?
The US Army used to arm the tunnel rats with Colt 45's. Confined areas are conducive to pistols as well, but I'm preaching to the choir now.
 :blotto:


----------



## Panzer Grenadier (18 Mar 2008)

OldSolduer said:
			
		

> The use of pistols in combat....has anyone seriously studied that?
> The US Army used to arm the tunnel rats with Colt 45's. Confined areas are conducive to pistols as well, but I'm preaching to the choir now.
> :blotto:



Choir, can I get an AMEN.


----------



## medaid (18 Mar 2008)

Im no a big fan of the pistol. Rifle or carbine any day.


----------



## MedTechStudent (18 Mar 2008)

Although I have no experience...just my simple imput.

The system in place now for the arms distribution is most likely there for a reason, what ever that may be.  Depending on your situation, ANYONE could find themselves needing a sidearm.  So even if somehow, a specific group of militants were deemed needing of pistols, every other group would just think of reasons or situations in which they too would need them.  Bad analogy time, BUT, its sort of like back in grade school where if you gave that one kid a piece of gum everyone else felt entitled to one as well  

I went through a lot of gum in school ;D

Anyways, just the way I see the situation!

Cheers everyone!


----------



## KevinB (18 Mar 2008)

Please dont post.  Your stealing my oxygen as it is -- your not required to needlessly kill my brain cells in these posts too.


----------



## 1feral1 (19 Mar 2008)

MedTechStudent said:
			
		

> I have no experience...
> 
> Bad analogy time, BUT, its sort of like back in grade school where if you gave that one kid a piece of gum everyone else felt entitled to one as well



No experience eh? Too right.

Well you bloody well shot yourself in the foot, making a notably foolish idiotic post like the above. Its the worst of the best for this week, maybe even for the month or quarter for that matter.

I don't think comparing the real NEED for a pistol on OPERATIONS equates to your SILLY (too kind of a word) 'gum' theory.

Your post is a Darwin award winner for sure!

Keep it up  : you'll go places.


----------



## medicineman (19 Mar 2008)

MedTechStudent said:
			
		

> Although I have no experience...



You did stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night?

MM


----------



## Command-Sense-Act 105 (19 Mar 2008)

MedTechStudent, you deserved what you got for your comments above.  

Guys, I think that's enough chastising for MTS, who should learn his lesson about making unfounded comments with little relevance to the discussion.

No need for further dogpile - let's get back on track.
*The Army.ca Staff*


----------



## mudgunner49 (19 Mar 2008)

Ahhh CRAP!!!  I missed it... 


blake


----------



## KevinB (19 Mar 2008)

Because I have too....


  ;D


----------



## TCBF (21 Mar 2008)

Well, My 1911 is in 10mm.  That count?

 8)


----------



## Jarnhamar (21 Mar 2008)

Indifel-6 Is that a para ordance coyote brown night tac?

THis may sound crazy but considering we have a A) a pistol shortage and B) mags that border on criminal negligence for their performance, how crazy is the idea of troops bringing their own pistols overseas?

Obviously nothing out of control but if troops brought their own 9mms or .45s?


----------



## Franko (21 Mar 2008)

Flawed Design said:
			
		

> THis may sound crazy but considering we have a A) a pistol shortage and B) mags that border on criminal negligence for their performance, how crazy is the idea of troops bringing their own pistols overseas?
> 
> Obviously nothing out of control but if troops brought their own 9mms or .45s?



It will never happen. Think of this:

- How do you transport them? 
- What if you have an ND with it? 
- What if it requires servicing? Our techs are not qualified to work on Desert Eagles, even though many probably could with no problems.
- Who would secure them when you go on HLTA? You're not going to leave it in a barrack box are you?
- What if it's stolen?
- What are the legal ramifications of carrying a non issued weapon? I'm talking about soldiers in the CF specifically.
- We don't have .45 cal in the system IIRC. Who would supply the ammo in the FOBs?

Just to throw a few thoughts out there.

Regards


----------



## KevinB (21 Mar 2008)

Gun ia a 1943 Ithaca US 1911A1 -- rebuilt with a STI frame, Novak Night sights, Wilson barrel and some other things.


----------



## zipperhead_cop (21 Mar 2008)

Any way to get those jammy Novak sights on a BHP, short of taking a grinding wheel and removing the lame factory sights?


----------



## Big Red (21 Mar 2008)

Put front site post in a vice, hit slide with hammer. Front site gone, stake in new front sight (need special tool). Drift out rear sight with brass hammer, slide in new rear.  You could do the same to put factory sights back on later but you'd ruin the tritium front when you remove it.


----------



## medaid (21 Mar 2008)

Pooey... I guess the question then becomes zip do you wanna give the CF a free set of tritiums?


----------



## TCBF (21 Mar 2008)

Flawed Design said:
			
		

> ...  but considering we have a A) a pistol shortage ...



- We do NOT have a pistol shortage.  We have a shortage of pistols being released from our war stocks of 10,000 plus Inglis Brownings.

- If we keep warehousing them forever, some anti-gun 'crat will discover 'rust' on one (especially now that our gun-plummers are taught that cosmoline is a carcinogen) and cut them up and smelter them, like we did to 78,000 FN C1s, 14,000 FN C2s, hundreds of thousands of Long Branch Lee Enfields (we are buying EALs for the Rangers), thousands of C1 SMGs, etc.

- Over 100 years ago, Canada - a nation of 6,000,000 souls - had about 58,000 first line military rifles.  Now, a nation of 33,000,000, we have.....

 ;D


----------



## 421 EME (21 Mar 2008)

Big Red said:
			
		

> Put front site post in a vice, hit slide with hammer. Front site gone, stake in new front sight (need special tool). Drift out rear sight with brass hammer, slide in new rear.  You could do the same to put factory sights back on later but you'd ruin the tritium front when you remove it.



Just to let you know, the rear sight on the issued BHP is not removeable unless you plan to grind it off.


----------



## AirCanuck (21 Mar 2008)

Flawed Design said:
			
		

> Indifel-6 Is that a para ordance coyote brown night tac?
> 
> THis may sound crazy but considering we have a A) a pistol shortage and B) mags that border on criminal negligence for their performance, how crazy is the idea of troops bringing their own pistols overseas?
> 
> Obviously nothing out of control but if troops brought their own 9mms or .45s?



the idea of bringing over troops own pistols sounds unreasonable don't you think?   Biggest thing I can think of though is the need for standardization - your pistol becomes inoperable for whatever reason, you can use buddies because it's the same. (simplified, but you get it) plus need for different ammo too, non-interchangeable mags etc

BUT commenting on the original issue I am definitely in favor of having our troops carry pistols outside the walls.


----------



## KevinB (21 Mar 2008)

All you really need is putting a Tritium front post in and opening up the rear front sight.

It is pretty easy and I may know a few people who did the front trit install...  No special tool needed other than a punch to restake the front sight.


----------



## zipperhead_cop (21 Mar 2008)

Infidel-6 said:
			
		

> All you really need is putting a Tritium front post in and opening up the rear front sight.
> It is pretty easy and I may know a few people who did the front trit install...  No special tool needed other than a punch to restake the front sight.



Would that be a completely illegal mod, or would a gun tech sign off on it?



			
				MedTech said:
			
		

> Pooey... I guess the question then becomes zip do you wanna give the CF a free set of tritiums?



Yeah, it won't hurt my feelings if it means I can be that much more effective with my pistol.  
(Plus, I think I can get a free set)


----------



## medaid (21 Mar 2008)

zipperhead_cop said:
			
		

> Yeah, it won't hurt my feelings if it means I can be that much more effective with my pistol.
> (Plus, I think I can get a free set)



True enough. If it's for free, then you sir are a lucky, lucky man


----------



## KevinB (21 Mar 2008)

I happen to have a front sight insert - Novak Tritium for MkIII BHP - which IIRC will fit the Ingis, sitting here in Ottawa (imagine that) -- I'd ask a Wpn tech -- but I've had them do installs like this before, depends on the guy I would guess.


----------



## medaid (21 Mar 2008)

LOL I-6 you've got everything just sitting there eh? ;D


----------



## KevinB (21 Mar 2008)

Dude, about the only thing I dont lose in divorces and breakups is gun parts...

  I need to support about 6 different handgun platforms, and I can't leave an armourers class without raiding the teachers part boxes...


----------



## DiverMedic (21 Mar 2008)

I think heading out with a sidearm is a good idea.  Sort of a last ditch weapon and I'm sorry, but the 7 just isn't suited in all scenarios.

The only problem I have is the lack of training for those already carrying them.  I'm expected to carry one overseas and can't see myself getting much time on it.  As of now we are leaving in Sept and I still haven't even had a famil on it yet.  In Texas I was issued one and had to ask how to clear / clean it as I haven't even seen one before.

IF the training and weapons are there, issue them.  BUT make sure that the ppl carrying them are trained and comfortable with their use.

DM


----------



## KevinB (21 Mar 2008)

Sadly there is about ZERO pistol knowledge outside CANSOFCOM in the CF.


----------



## DiverMedic (21 Mar 2008)

Which is why I don't think troops should be carrying them.  Hell if I had my way, the one I'm issued would be locked in my barrack box for the length of the tour as of right now.  I just know one of the medics in Texas almost got charged cause he didn't wear his.

DM


----------



## medaid (22 Mar 2008)

I-6 true enough . Still wondering where I can go to do an armourer's course though ;D. 

DM, all the pistol knowledge I had I got from out side of the CF. The fact that there are many who can't hit the broad side of the barn with a BHP isn't surprising at all. Especially when members only get 1 famil/qual shoots a year, and that's it. I'd love to get more pistol time, but atm I'd be more comfortable with my C7/C8.


----------



## DiverMedic (22 Mar 2008)

Definitely true MT.  Even the annual shoot on the 7 isn't enough.  But at least then you have a number of mags to blow off.  Supposedly on the 9mm range you get 30 rounds?

DM


----------



## axeman (22 Mar 2008)

i hate to hear where  the pistol  knowledge went. when i was with the Patricias we had a good base of knowledge for use of a pistol. there was a lot of practice for those issued after one ND byone person  who wasnt  qualified... as to taking them away from troops why ? they are used as a back up piece or when the long barrel isnt availible or useable. .the pistol is one of many tools issued to a soldier, its  great that you want to  lock up a tool but why strip them away from those that can actully use them? .


----------



## DiverMedic (22 Mar 2008)

axeman said:
			
		

> the pistol is one of many tools issued to a soldier, its  great that you want to  lock up a tool but why strip them away from those that can actully use them? .



I think you misunderstood.  I`m all for giving them to ppl that are qualified.  I`m just saying that at the moment, if I`m giving one with my current lack of training, I`m locking it up unless given proper training.  I don`t want to be that person that has an ND and kills someone.

DM


----------



## OldSolduer (22 Mar 2008)

I agree with axeman, but.....the chain of command has the responsibility to ensure that those issued pistols are competent AND trained.
The lack of pistol training in the CF is abysmal....

When I was in Croatia I was tasked to run a 9mm pistol shoot for the CO and Sector Comd and various staff officers. I wanted to give my troops a few mags for practice, but was told...there is a lack of 9mm ammo Sgt, sorry....and the CO and Sector Comd had a pistol shoot for fun.....makes you wonder.


----------



## medaid (22 Mar 2008)

Axeman my friend I'm guessing the pistoleros either went to the land of tan coloured hats, went on to bigger better things a la I-6 or went to develope their athletic skills with the ski/swim/dance team ;D I don't think I'm that far off!


----------



## TCBF (22 Mar 2008)

- A few things about pistol training:

1.  ALL CF Reg F Officers shot the Inglis Browning during BOTC.  To do this, they had to pass 'Handling Tests' (still colloquially called TsOET) before firing.  Therefore, for this population, lack of basic proficiency is a matter of skill fade, nothing more.

2.  For ALL others: to 'permanent issue' a weapon to an individual without a proper program for training in their foreseeable future is an act of criminal negligence! 

3.  Previously, pistol training for ORs (Other Ranks - now NCMs) in most units was pretty much the purview of SA Instrs, SA Coaches and the various unit pistol teams.  Was this 'Combat Shooting'? No.  But it was basic skills and drills - safety being the first one.  

4.  Most Officers and ORs who wanted to get good with a pistol joined the unit pistol team or bought a pistol and practised. 

5.  Before we give every one with two legs a pistol, we figure out why.  Is it for convenience or combat?  Once we have the answer, we develop the training program.

6.  David Marshall "Carbine" Williams, while in prison for manslaughter (a Deputy Sheriff was shot dead raiding Williams' still) developed the short-stroke gas system and later, working for Winchester, used it in the design of the M1 carbine.  Why a carbine? Cheaper than a 1911A1 and EASIER AND FASTER to qualify on.  Probably safer, too. So.... since the C8 is used more as a shorter "Johnny Seven" than as an actual carbine, why not just give people Mini 14s?


----------



## KevinB (22 Mar 2008)

I've always thought cbt arms should get a pistol and a C8SFW -- and non cbt arms folk should get the C8CQB's

Pistol training -- and with the exception of gunfighter -- small arms skills in the regular army have plummeted 
1) CANSOFCOM took a lot of the focused people
2) Other say that is CANSOFCOM's role and they dont need to learn - or are too proud to ask
3) Others beleive the individual does not matter - and they are just there to look pretty while LAV cannons, Arty and CAS kill people.

It is a fricken embarrasment that an Army that used to pride itself its skill at arms is currently in the hurt locker.


----------



## medaid (22 Mar 2008)

Infidel-6 said:
			
		

> 1) CANSOFCOM took a lot of the focused people



That I can see



			
				Infidel-6 said:
			
		

> 2) Other say that is CANSOFCOM's role and they dont need to learn - or are too proud to ask



That I think is complete BS, and it's true at least in the PRes it is...


----------



## AirCanuck (22 Mar 2008)

All I can say is that I can't wait to get some pistol training in.  I loved learning to use the c-7, even enjoyed maintaining it, I find it satisfying.
I plan on joining the local shooting team, no question. (tried here but to my knowledge one doesn't exist in london)


----------



## TCBF (22 Mar 2008)

- Get your Firearms Licence.  Join a club in London.  Take your 'Restricteds' exam.  Buy pistols: a .22 and a type identical to what the CF will issue you.  Learn to shoot them.


----------



## medaid (22 Mar 2008)

AirCanuck said:
			
		

> All I can say is that I can't wait to get some pistol training in.



If you haven't read the past pages and pages, you'll see that your training will be inadequate and limited. Do what TCBF has suggested.


----------



## zipperhead_cop (22 Mar 2008)

Before I got into pre-deployment mode I tried to run a pistol course at my unit.  I incorporated as much police practical combat skill as I could, and also went over weapon retention and hand-to-hand drills if someone grabs your pistol.  We also covered body indexing and proper drawing techniques ("take that idiotic flap off of that POS holster and follow this").   It was all well and good up until it was range time.   Then the _Cult of *No*_ kicked in, and it got all shot to hell.  Apparently getting pistol ammunition outside of IBTS is like asking to get issued Bangalore torpedoes for a mess dinner.  Just crazy talkin'.  
I think it is pretty god damned sad that one of the finest military institutions in the world has to resort to "join a gun club on your own time and dime" to get proficient on a weapon that they will be expected to protect theirs and other lives in a war zone.  Couple that with how much "filler" training we are going to be doing from now until September, there is no excuse for this.
Pathetic.
(and that isn't directed at whomever made the suggestion, but the reality of the necessity)


----------



## TCBF (22 Mar 2008)

- Back when every Crewman and His Dog was issued the Sub-Machine Gun, 9mm, C1, we had no problem getting pistol ammunition because we had stacks of SMGs we had to qual on, and 9mm was 9mm.

- Bit diff'rent nowadays.


----------



## Jarnhamar (22 Mar 2008)

TCBF said:
			
		

> why not just give people Mini 14s?



Too loud! Have you ever shot one? It's like a cannon going off beside your head


----------



## TCBF (22 Mar 2008)

Flawed Design said:
			
		

> Too loud! Have you ever shot one? It's like a cannon going off beside your head



- I've owned one since about 1983.  Loud? Who cares?


----------



## JesseWZ (22 Mar 2008)

TCBF said:
			
		

> - A few things about pistol training:
> 
> 1.  ALL CF Reg F Officers shot the Inglis Browning during BOTC.  To do this, they had to pass 'Handling Tests' (still colloquially called TsOET) before firing.  Therefore, for this population, lack of basic proficiency is a matter of skill fade, nothing more.


I am assuming you are speaking past tense, as the Browning is no longer a part of the BOTC (phase 1). I'm fairly certain on that point as I didn't see one while on course.   From what I understand (and I could be wrong, as I have yet to complete it) it is now a part of CAP or Phase 2.


----------



## AirCanuck (22 Mar 2008)

MedTech said:
			
		

> If you haven't read the past pages and pages, you'll see that your training will be inadequate and limited. Do what TCBF has suggested.



I have read them, but as a university ROTP student, it isn't practical for me to join a local range.  I meant for the future, which is why I mentioned joining the local shooting team.


----------



## TCBF (22 Mar 2008)

AirCanuck said:
			
		

> I have read them, but as a university ROTP student, it isn't practical for me to join a local range.  I meant for the future, which is why I mentioned joining the local shooting team.



- University students are on swim teams, ski teams, skating clubs, hockey clubs, why not a shooting club?  The U of T had their own indoor range on campus up to a few months ago.


----------



## TCBF (22 Mar 2008)

JesseWZ said:
			
		

> I am assuming you are speaking past tense, as the Browning is no longer a part of the BOTC (phase 1). I'm fairly certain on that point as I didn't see one while on course.   From what I understand (and I could be wrong, as I have yet to complete it) it is now a part of CAP or Phase 2.



- Righto.  I taught BOTC I/II in 1998.


----------



## JesseWZ (22 Mar 2008)

Understandable. I think it should be on phase 1, that way all trades and branches would be at least slightly familiar with it...


----------



## medaid (22 Mar 2008)

AirCanuck said:
			
		

> I have read them, but as a university ROTP student, it isn't practical for me to join a local range.



Irrelevant. Why would it be impractical? I've shot with a few who are ROTP students... why are you so different?


----------



## AirCanuck (22 Mar 2008)

TCBF said:
			
		

> - University students are on swim teams, ski teams, skating clubs, hockey clubs, why not a shooting club?  The U of T had their own indoor range on campus up to a few months ago.



I think you answered your question right there - because we already have an ass load going on.

not the mention, UWO does NOT have it's own shooting range  -  if it did, I'd be there.

Mod edit : comment removed for PERSEC issues


----------



## 1feral1 (24 Mar 2008)

DiverMedic said:
			
		

> Definitely true MT.  Even the annual shoot on the 7 isn't enough.  But at least then you have a number of mags to blow off.  Supposedly on the 9mm range you get 30 rounds?
> 
> DM



I don't know how things go in the CF, its been since 1994 that I was on a CF range prac.

However, I will say here in the Australian Army, to become qualified on the pistol for example, you must do a course which covers theory, and practical use, then qualifiy. Once thats done you get written up to be qualified on that pistol. 

Prior to my deployment, we shot often, and once overseas, we shot every Wednesday (as much as you wanted) when we could, and every Thursday, did T'OET's under the supervision of a NCO or higher, yes all documented in writing, and kept on file.

We wore our pistols all the time, and outside the wire, had our F88 carbines also.

There was not one person in the entire Combat Team who was not a hazard, or was weak, for we were training to a high standard.

After 7 months in Iraq, we had two UDs, one with a Minimi, and one with a MAG 58. We also used the buddy system at the unload bays, and no one cleaned their pistols or carbines in their rooms.

The key to familiarisation of pistols (or any weapon)  is continious training (T'sOET) and actual firing the weapon at a range.  

My 2 cents.

Wes


----------



## AirCanuck (24 Mar 2008)

Wes, I think you're right on the money with that one - I doubt anyone here will disagree with the fact that the best way to keep current on a weapon is continuous training and use.  Makes you wonder why there isn't more of both of these...


----------



## benny88 (24 Mar 2008)

AirCanuck said:
			
		

> Makes you wonder why there isn't more of both of these...



  $$$$$$$$


----------



## 1feral1 (24 Mar 2008)

Sorry Ben, I disagree. You cannot comprimise on safety, and operational trg regardless of $$$. Troops going into theatre must be confident on the weapons they use.

I can't see the CF comprimising on operational trg, and operations itself.


----------



## benny88 (24 Mar 2008)

Wesley  Down Under said:
			
		

> Sorry Ben, I disagree. You cannot comprimise on safety, and operational trg regardless of $$$. Troops going into theatre must be confident on the weapons they use.
> 
> I can't see the CF comprimising on operational trg, and operations itself.



  
   Definitely on the same page here Wes. I didn't mean that was the way it *should * be, but I'm sure we can both agree that what should be isn't always so. Just saying that the costs associated with training and practicing with pistols could be a reason why pistols aren't more readily available. And rightly so, because if the money/time isn't there to train people in the proper use of handguns then they shouldn't be using them. 



			
				Wesley  Down Under said:
			
		

> *Troops going into theatre must be confident on the weapons they use.*



  You're right, that's paramount.


----------



## Jarnhamar (24 Mar 2008)

Considering CF members will be issued pistols and their lives and the lives of other soldiers may depend n them- we should make time for this training period.

I don't think we can justify talking about costs when we pay $200 for toilet seats and $800 for chairs.


----------



## geo (24 Mar 2008)

Hem... Considering all the expenses we are running up with exercises in Ft Bliss and Wainwright AND the lead up training we are running all our troops through prior to deployment, money is no object.  They will spend the $$$ that has to be spent... if there is any shortage of anything.... it's a matter of time


----------



## Panzer Grenadier (24 Mar 2008)

geo said:
			
		

> if there is any shortage of anything.... it's a matter of time



geo could you clarify this part for my own paranoid nagging mind?


----------



## DiverMedic (24 Mar 2008)

There is always time and it doesn't have to be when we start our work-up training.  The CoC knows that specific ranks and trades will be carrying pistols.  Make is part of the courses essential to them then.  
In BRT we trained with the C7 because we will be expected to use it.  Snr NCOs and Officers carry them so make it part of ILQ and BOTC (believe that it is already part of BOTC from earlier in the conversation).  Medics are expected to carry so make it part of our QL3 and the same with other trades.
At least then it isn't left till work-up training where you spend a day and a limited number of rounds to become comfortable with it, and I'm not even going to suggest that you are proficient with it.  As well, when the unit does it's annual range day with the C7 (and other weapons depending on the unit/trades) pistols are shot as well.

just my 0.02

DM


----------



## riggermade (24 Mar 2008)

DiverMedic said:
			
		

> Snr NCOs and Officers carry them so make it part of ILQ and BOTC (believe that it is already part of BOTC from earlier in the conversation).
> DM



Just a point as from your profile I don't know your experience but ILQ in house portion is 3 weeks long and there is no weapons trg on it


----------



## zipperhead_cop (24 Mar 2008)

geo said:
			
		

> Hem... Considering all the expenses we are running up with exercises in Ft Bliss and Wainwright AND the lead up training we are running all our troops through prior to deployment, money is no object.  They will spend the $$$ that has to be spent... if there is any shortage of anything.... it's a matter of time



As a generality, money is always and object.  But I agree, they did dump a god aweful lot of money down in Texas.
But how do you figure we don't have enought time?  Half of Wainwright is written off with what we got done on Southern Bear, and that is only May in any case.  That leaves all of April, June and most of August.  I have to imagine we could fit a few range days in around the cultural awareness and media relations training.


----------



## DiverMedic (24 Mar 2008)

riggermade said:
			
		

> Just a point as from your profile I don't know your experience but ILQ in house portion is 3 weeks long and there is no weapons trg on it



Haven't done ILQ, was just using it as an example.  But that is my point.  As far as I know, BOTC (and I'm leaving the infantry out of this as they get everything I believe) is the only trade course that has any pistol training on it.


----------



## JesseWZ (24 Mar 2008)

If by BOTC you are referring to Basic Officer Training Course, that is incorrect. When I was on course this past summer we did not fire, handle nor even get a look at a BHP. The courses have been slightly remodeled since then (as they continually seem to be) and it could now be part of the curriculem but I couldn't say. Perhaps an instructor from St Jean would be willing to lend a hand...


----------



## DiverMedic (24 Mar 2008)

JesseWZ said:
			
		

> If by BOTC you are referring to Basic Officer Training Course, that is incorrect. When I was on course this past summer we did not fire, handle nor even get a look at a BHP. The courses have been slightly remodeled since then (as they continually seem to be) and it could now be part of the curriculem but I couldn't say. Perhaps an instructor from St Jean would be willing to lend a hand...



My mistake, I was basing that off of a previous post from a previous instructor.

Still don't understand why it can't be part of these courses tho.

DM


----------



## JesseWZ (24 Mar 2008)

From an unexperienced point of view, I feel that not only should this be part of BOTC, but perhaps this should be included on BMQ as well. If we are expecting all trades all ranks to be familiar with it...


----------



## Redeye (24 Mar 2008)

DiverMedic said:
			
		

> My mistake, I was basing that off of a previous post from a previous instructor.
> 
> Still don't understand why it can't be part of these courses tho.
> 
> DM



At least for the Army and purple trades on the Officer side of the house, it's part of Common Army Phase - everyone gets at least a familiarization shoot with it.  Based on the training I've gotten (which is just that) I'd only want to carry one on the basis of the civilian pistol experience I have because I've learned a lot more from IDPA/IPSC-type shooters than I have from the Army.


----------



## AirCanuck (24 Mar 2008)

Redeye said:
			
		

> At least for the Army and purple trades on the Officer side of the house, it's part of Common Army Phase - everyone gets at least a familiarization shoot with it.  Based on the training I've gotten (which is just that) I'd only want to carry one on the basis of the civilian pistol experience I have because I've learned a lot more from IDPA/IPSC-type shooters than I have from the Army.



it seems to me that at least for BOTC it would be a valuable piece of training to add - as far as I know, all officer trades are required to learn it, no?


----------



## KevinB (24 Mar 2008)

When I went thru we did it on basic -- of course that is the only weapon system we did that is still in the system  

  The problem many in all ranks from Pte to Gen make is that doing TOET's and Shooting will make you competant, which is simply not true - unless the TOET's are done in a useful way (i.e. not out of the book) and the ranges are designed to develope shooters instead of checking the box (quite frankly if you cant get HPS in the Pistol PWT your probably deaf, dumb or blind).


----------



## Jarnhamar (24 Mar 2008)

I don't think time is a factor in this case.

We should take a couple of weeks or a month and write it off as a range month. Put everyone through the PWT's with the Pistol, C7 and C9. Once that's done put everyone through the gunfighter training.  Tie it in with the yearly MLOC stuff or something.

All trades and all ranks leave the wire, many of them spending time at the FOBs. Everyone should go through the gunfighter training and everyone should be trained on and fire all the commonly used weapoins in an alive manner.


----------



## Dissident (24 Mar 2008)

Infidel-6 said:
			
		

> quite frankly if you cant get HPS in the Pistol PWT your probably deaf, dumb or blind).



I've only done the Branch Qual. What is the PWT on the pistol?


----------



## TCBF (24 Mar 2008)

- Time is always a factor.  Administration trumps training.  Always has - always will.


----------



## Jarnhamar (24 Mar 2008)

TCBF said:
			
		

> - Time is always a factor.  Administration trumps training.  Always has - always will.



Fair enough. We need to look at how we allocate our time and improve on it.



			
				WanabNWtech said:
			
		

> I've never been in the field (heck, I'm not even in the CF yet) so I wouldn't know, but does a soldier ever get separated from his/her rifle while in battle? I would say that the question of wether or not soldiers should carry a pistol would be another question of practicality. With the way that today's wars are being fought from distances (aside from close combat ambushes that may occur) I don't really see a use for a pistol seeing as how I don't think we're allowed to pistol whip captives these days.
> 
> Of course, on second thought, it is always nice to have a backup and would be very reassuring since it could, one day, save a life of someone on our side.
> 
> I could be way off though given my lack of experience.



I think you're a little off 
Soldiers DO get seperated from their weapons. Weapons also get busted and jammed.
I'm not sure what you mean by wars being fought from a distance. THere are some very close quarters situations in Iraq and Afghanistan.   Even in the past I think we had better uses for pistols than beating someone with it  :


----------



## benny88 (24 Mar 2008)

Flawed Design said:
			
		

> Even in the past I think we had better uses for pistols than beating someone with it  :



     I thought before I joined the CF just used clubs!


----------



## Franko (24 Mar 2008)

benny88 said:
			
		

> I thought before I joined the CF just used clubs!



Naa.....pick axe handles, torque wrenches, pry bars, shovels work just fine.       ;D

Regards


----------



## Nfld Sapper (24 Mar 2008)

RBD don't forget Bailey Panel Carrying Handles


----------



## blacktriangle (24 Mar 2008)

For the record, the BHP is still bad ass. Gonna hopefully be putting a few hundred rds through one this weekend  ;D


But I guess those in the know reccomend going private sector for training?


----------



## AirCanuck (24 Mar 2008)

> With the way that today's wars are being fought from distances (aside from close combat ambushes that may occur) I don't really see a use for a pistol seeing as how I don't think we're allowed to pistol whip captives these days.



I think you are WAY off on this one brother.
Plenty of close-combat happens these days.  Battles can only be fought from a distance for so long before you must close with and destroy the enemy, right?

I'm sure soldiers get separated from their weapons, especially when exhausted and under extreme circumstances (or they can be destroyed by IED's etc).  I don't think an argument can be made just yet that the pistol is an outdated weapon.


----------



## OldSolduer (24 Mar 2008)

I like the quote "admin time trumps training time". How bloody true!
If I may I would like to give you some examples:

Parade Night for the PRes folks: How many times have you had your parade night training canned because someone who thought he/she was important needed to brief you? I've only been back in the PRes for about 5 years now, and I can't count how many times this has happened. Same with reports and returns...all seem to be highly important and MUST be actioned yesterday, if not sooner.

Now for the Reg Force folks: In my old unit, 90% of the bn strength had to under go the PWT. A 10% leeway was given because of courses, leave, medical etc. Now I think that's pretty important stuff....marksmanship in the infantry is.
When the SHARP and Diversity training were instituted, 100% was the acceptable numbers that had to get this training....NO exceptions......OK enough of this ramble.

Back to the point....IF all the administrative nausea that we inflict upon ourselves can be cleared away by the implementation of my old friend COMMON SENSE...(I'm sure everyone has met him at one time or another) then maybe we could get range time and ammo to train the troops on things like pistol shooting....or am I making too much sense again?


----------



## AirCanuck (24 Mar 2008)

Common sense... I think I used to know him... I haven't really seen him much in the last little while though - ever since I joined the Forces, we've parted ways!  ;D


----------



## 1feral1 (25 Mar 2008)

WanabNWtech said:
			
		

> 1. I've never been in the field (heck, I'm not even in the CF yet) so I wouldn't know
> 
> 2. With the way that today's wars are being fought from distances (aside from close combat ambushes that may occur) I don't really see a use for a pistol seeing as how I don't think we're allowed to pistol whip captives these days.
> 
> 3. I could be way off though given my lack of experience.



I will bite instead of bark tonight.

1. Exactly!

2. Are you the expert are you?? What do you know about enemy engagment etc?  You can't even grasp reality, and your IGNORNACE shines thru it all. To sum it up, people who post shyte like this frustrate me to no end, and shyte me to tears. Thats YOU BTW! You Don't see the use for a pistol??? OMFG!!!! Oh, and the comment on pistol whipping is SIMPLY crap! Grow up! You want to be a member?  : YOU got a bloody long row to hoe. Infact your whole post I would not use as toilet paper, ya, even in the field!

3. Exactly yet again. If you don't know the subject matter, speculation makes you look like an ass (dictionary definition), not a personal attack.

Sort your self out or move on!


----------



## Jarnhamar (25 Mar 2008)

I'd hate to see you're bite, Wes


----------



## NL_engineer (25 Mar 2008)

Flawed Design said:
			
		

> I'd hate to see you're bite, Wes



Read his top line again



			
				Wesley  Down Under said:
			
		

> I will bite instead of bark tonight.


----------



## Jarnhamar (25 Mar 2008)

Maybe I just meant I was glad he was biting someone else  ;D


----------



## medicineman (25 Mar 2008)

OldSolduer said:
			
		

> Back to the point....IF all the administrative nausea that we inflict upon ourselves can be cleared away by the implementation of my old friend COMMON SENSE...(I'm sure everyone has met him at one time or another) then maybe we could get range time and ammo to train the troops on things like pistol shooting....or am I making too much sense again?



Common sense has been gradually bred out of the gene pool - I think it started as a user trial sometime in the late 70's and started full scale implementation by the mid 80's or so.  In answer to your question, I refer you to the (unofficial) Canadian Civil Service motto: " If it makes sense, we must do the opposite ".  

MM


----------



## Greymatters (25 Mar 2008)

Wesley  Down Under said:
			
		

> I will bite instead of bark tonight... Sort your self out or move on!



Cmon Wes say what you really mean, dont sugar-coat it...  ;D

Not to pile on, but Wanab if you've never been out there you really shouldnt make comments on how useful a pistol is or how a pistol should be used...  

Back to weapons proficiency, it seems like training for use of pistol (at least up until 2005) was arranged along the lines of 'if you arent deploying you dont need to get it every year', but getting a PWT one time before you go outside the country hardly gives one the level of skill needed for proper use of a weapon... 

Hmmm, the rest I think tends to mirror what Infidel6 already said... 



			
				Infidel-6 said:
			
		

> ...unless the TOET's are done in a useful way (i.e. not out of the book) and the ranges are designed to develope shooters instead of checking the box (quite frankly if you cant get HPS in the Pistol PWT your probably deaf, dumb or blind).


----------



## geo (25 Mar 2008)

The pistol is just one of our tools and we should always keep our tool skills SHARP.

If you have not seen or handled the pistol for any time beyond a year - your tool skills are BLUNT and you might as well equip yourself with a pickaxe handle for all the good the BHP will provide you.... IMHO


----------



## AirCanuck (25 Mar 2008)

So.

It seems we all agree on a few facts...

pistol training is woefully inadequate nowadays..

'trained' or 'current' on a weapon means that you use it on a fairly regular basis, something more than just getting a PWT just before deploying..

What can be done?  Is there anything in the works to remedy this or are we just dreaming of things that may one day be?


----------



## ReconWO (26 Mar 2008)

Currently being designed in Kingston,  there is a new program in the works called the Canadian Operational Shooting Program. It will replace the current program and is designed for the progressive training all CF weapons.

Pistol Trg is slowly starting to come back on line and with this new program it will be greatly increased the proficiency of the firer if applied correctly (in other words we don't just complete the parts we like).  However, while deployed a pistol is defiantly a last resort/last chance weapon.  It only makes sense to have one on your person if you have efficiently trained in transition drills from a long gun to the pistol under stressful conditions.  The sad reality is that 60 percent of personnel that carry pistols in TFA never leave the wire and "need" to carry a weapon around camp.   Of those 60 percent maybe 3 percent are truly proficient at utilizing the weapon and probably 20 percent are completely oblivious to to weapons capabilities and limitations let alone proper weapons handling and maintenance.

If we are to continue to give personnel pistols, then we must be willing to take the time, money and effort to train our personnel properly. Not just give them one so they can hang out at Tim's and look cool while sipping an Ice Cap.


----------



## Good2Golf (26 Mar 2008)

ReconWO, any chance of getting a mandatory PO added to disassemble and reassemble the BHP blind-folded?  If people can at least do that, they'll be a lot more familiar/confindent with their weapon!

G2G


----------



## AirCanuck (26 Mar 2008)

ReconWO said:
			
		

> Not just give them one so they can hang out at Tim's and look cool while sipping an Ice Cap.



Quite well put.  The program you mentioned sounds interesting - would that apply to ALL personnel req'd to carry weapons or just combat arms or what?  I am hoping to get a decent amount of small arms training when I eventually get to griffons - speaking of which, what do those blokes carry around anyhow?

As far as a last chance weapon, I am curious - are there situations in close quarters where it is more prudent to carry a pistol than say a C-7?  (Asking out [obvious] of lack of experience)


----------



## BLUE GRUNT (26 Mar 2008)

> I am hoping to get a decent amount of small arms training when I eventually get to griffons - speaking of which, what do those blokes carry around anyhow?



Well Aircanuck...I can say from experience that you will get a pistol...you might get some C7 training and even fire the occasional C6...this is dependent on unit I suppose ...I can only speak of Edmonton...and you do not receive anywhere near the needed training to consideryourself proficient, unless you have had lots of previous exposure to weapons.

my 2 cents


----------



## LordOsborne (26 Mar 2008)

AirCanuck said:
			
		

> So.
> 
> It seems we all agree on a few facts...
> 
> ...



The program ReconWO mentioned sounds very promising, and I hope to benefit from the fruits of that labour sometime soon. 

I think that CFSAC might offer a domestic / peacetime opportunity to hone and develop pistol shooting skills. I went last year and was very much out of my league. My experience with the BHP was limited to the actual qualification i did on CAP as well as the annual qual shoot. CFSAC has changed from being an elitist gathering to its new attitude of 'come one, come all'. The emphasis was to generate individual skill to be brought back to the local units in order to regenerate the CF's marksmanship expertise. 

Pistol shooting was designed around IDPA matches, involving transitions, using cover, shooting through doors/windows, weak / one handed shooting, el presidente drills and so on. It was dynamic and challenging and i loved every second of it. there were some very friendly civillian defensive pistol coaches on hand who were more than happy to answer questions. Every pistol competitor had to complete the safety course, which taught streamlined, modern pistol technique (think along the lines of 'tap-rack' but for a pistol). I fired more rounds in 30 minutes of the pistol safety course than i had done before. Great training, and I came away with an appreciation for marksmanship and modern training.


----------



## westie47 (26 Mar 2008)

I've been a bit lucky, on two separate occasions I have been allwoed to run tactical pistol training, unrestricted. The first was at my home unit a couple of years ago. This is before Gunfighter really took off. We were asked for ideas for an upcoming range ex, I put together a plan and presented it.  I took a bunch of drills I had learned through civilian courses and adapted them for army use. We had lots of ammo and the troops loved it, the officers were a little skeptical at first but got right into the training with open minds. I basically ran a version of Fighting Rifle with some pistol stuff thrown in, like transitions, etc.

Then during work-up training last summer with 1VP, I took the whole company's allotment of 9mm for my platoon (the other pl's didn't want it!) We did a whole day of pistol drills, I saw some major improvement but many more days were needed to get proficient. Of course that never happened, but at least every soldier in the platoon had a chance to learn and practise with the pistol.


----------



## AirCanuck (26 Mar 2008)

well, i guess those are two hope stories!  Patrick, do you think that the program mentioned be Recon will be anything like what you were running?


----------



## Jarnhamar (26 Mar 2008)

Looking at his experience ReconWO is the type of person I'd like to see putting together this pistol/shooting package.  
That said I don't know how many times I've heard the argument "but the tacvest team had an infantry NCO on it!"  I've heard a lot of accounts where the "infantry  input" was just ignored.  I hope the combat arms input isn't overlooked and this package is designed around fighting in Afghanistan and not shooting on a range.


----------



## LordOsborne (27 Mar 2008)

AirCanuck said:
			
		

> well, i guess those are two hope stories!  Patrick, do you think that the program mentioned be Recon will be anything like what you were running?



I hope so, if not better. Keep in mind that the course was run by civillian pistol instructors, and I believe it was geared more towards preparing for an IDPA or IPSC match (not that i find fault with this - i believe the training was top-notch and i certainly gained much from it). I think the fundamentals that were taught were good, but i believe it could have benefitted from a greater focus on the BHP, primary-to-secondary weapon transitions, and running matches without a beeper to re-enforce good training (a beeper and shot clock were used for scoring).

I believe one of the coaches is on the forum now and again, and it'd be nice to hear his opinion.


----------



## KevinB (27 Mar 2008)

Shot Clocks/Timers are useful for some training -- especially to test the individual on a given standard.  However intial training with them is not usually a good idea - since the idea is to get good technique first, and then work on speeding it up -- and going on speed first can cause shooters to try to push past their skill level and can eventually cause training scars and bad muscle memory (like most CF book drills or ranges do already).


----------



## Old Ranger (27 Mar 2008)

I foresee a skilled gunslinger traveling the land holding seminars and skills classes for those with scars and bad muscle memory...

Could that help get the CF back up to par?

(Had to add a new tag line on the bottom... ;D, that made my day)


----------



## Redeye (27 Mar 2008)

Like the guy who taught me on my holster/defensive shooting course - "Slow is smooth, and smooth is fast."



			
				Infidel-6 said:
			
		

> Shot Clocks/Timers are useful for some training -- especially to test the individual on a given standard.  However intial training with them is not usually a good idea - since the idea is to get good technique first, and then work on speeding it up -- and going on speed first can cause shooters to try to push past their skill level and can eventually cause training scars and bad muscle memory (like most CF book drills or ranges do already).


----------



## LordOsborne (27 Mar 2008)

We were told of a US State Trooper who was very involved with IPSC matches in his spare time. As I understand it, IPSC matches have the shooters stand with their hands over their head, and begin when shooters hear a beep tone from the shot clock. 

This trooper was in a convenience store, when a robber came in with a shotgun and held the place up. The trooper apparently immediately put his hands over his head and waited for a beep, since that is what he had practised for so long. The robber wasn't too kind to the trooper, apparently. 

Now, whether or not that's a true story, i don't know. but it does jive with what i read about re: the cops who stopped to pick up their brass in the middle of a gunfight.


----------



## benny88 (27 Mar 2008)

PatrickO said:
			
		

> what i read about re: the cops who stopped to pick up their brass in the middle of a gunfight.



   Link, please!


----------



## KevinB (27 Mar 2008)

Several books on the issue - some with Loren Christiansen (Lethal Encounters - I think) talk about several of these issues.  In police shootings - which are much more well documented that military shootings, one policeman was found dead after a shooting - empty revolver yet brass was in his pocket -- he had ben trained to dump his brass in his pocket and them reload.  As well as one policeman that shot a suspect after a whistle blast, and one that shot twice and reholsterd and was shot fataly after -- it founf their department qualification has the troopers shoot on the whistle blast - fire two rounds and reholster.

  This is part of the problem when you have (insert more polite word for idiots) running a weapons training program, they dont know what they dont know, and that will get people killed.   

Military shooting is an art - and unfortunate the system of systems people dont view it as useful, so it has not had the same support it used to - and given the current Op tempo and the fact of how much we have learned about fighting with small arms since 911 -- the current setup is criminal


----------



## Colin Parkinson (27 Mar 2008)

I mange to shoot pistols despite my army training, doing IPSC or IDPA is still better than no training, but as I-6 says it's not a cure for idiots.


----------



## LordOsborne (27 Mar 2008)

Colin P said:
			
		

> I mange to shoot pistols despite my army training, doing IPSC or IDPA is still better than no training, but as I-6 says it's not a cure for idiots.



I agree with you on that, Colin. I think (and i know) that the training i got at CFSAC was light years ahead of some of the prior training i had received. On more than one (CF) range, we set our second magazine on the grass by our feet, and did our mag changes by _placing_ our empty one next to the loaded mag, picking the loaded one up, standing up before releasing the slide lock and continuing to fire... 

Edited to clarify a point.


----------



## zipperhead_cop (27 Mar 2008)

PatrickO said:
			
		

> Now, whether or not that's a true story, i don't know. but it does jive with what i read about re: the cops who stopped to pick up their brass in the middle of a gunfight.



There are some unfortunate stories with regards to police shooting, but that sounds like just about the stupidest thing I have heard before.  There is nothing about identifying a threat that would cause a officer to put his hands up.  If it had happened, we would have heard about it.



			
				Redeye said:
			
		

> Like the guy who taught me on my holster/defensive shooting course - "Slow is smooth, and smooth is fast."



My own favorite is "Speed is fine, but accuracy is final"


----------



## KevinB (27 Mar 2008)

ZC a fan of Larry Vickers?


----------



## OldSolduer (27 Mar 2008)

you fight the way you're trained,,,,am I correct?


----------



## dangerboy (27 Mar 2008)

A bit off topic but it reminds me of a time on the 84 range when instead of counting to 60 they went 1,2, 58, 59, 60 like they did during there classes the safety staff was not amused.


----------



## OldSolduer (27 Mar 2008)

HA Dangerboy!!!!


----------



## AirCanuck (28 Mar 2008)

Reminds me of a book I read by a guy who's ex-SAS, still shouts out his drills when he gets a stoppage (CHECK! etc) even in a firefight.  Obviously less than a deadly habit, but seems along the same lines.


----------



## NL_engineer (28 Mar 2008)

dangerboy said:
			
		

> A bit off topic but it reminds me of a time on the 84 range when instead of counting to 60 they went 1,2, 58, 59, 60 like they did during there classes the safety staff was not amused.



If that was one of my troops, I make them count the whole thing during training.  

But it just goes to show, some people haven't been issued common sense  : and there is none left in the system :


----------



## Fishbone Jones (28 Mar 2008)

Common sense is that one valuable commodity that everyone thinks they have too much of, and no one else has enough of.

It also seems to be spoken of only when there is a distinct lack of it's supposed qualities, and presence. No one is ever praised for having it, only besmirched for not having it.

Ergo, if it isn't tangible and proven, it doesn't exist  ;D


OK, too many beers and time for bed :blotto:


----------



## AirCanuck (28 Mar 2008)

wow are we really getting into an existentialist discussion about common sense in the military?

It's true though.  We do certainly seem to be out of stock.


----------



## OldSolduer (28 Mar 2008)

"It's true though.  We do certainly seem to be out of stock."
No we are not out of stock of common sense,,,,we just have to stop giving authority to people who don't have any.
What were we talking about anyhow.....oh pistols, wpns drills etc...bit of a tangent here. Sorry.
The pistol is another weapon of war,,,,and the troops,,,,all should master it.


----------



## MG34 (28 Mar 2008)

IPSC and IDPA are poor training devices unless you are wearing full deployment kit (armor,vest/chest rig,etc) and moving in a tactical manner,both teach too many bad habits .IPSC in particular is terrible for forming poor tactics, and the scenarios are unrealistic . IDPA is better but both are just games not training.


----------



## LordOsborne (28 Mar 2008)

MG34, 
I agree with what you said. I know IPSC has become more of a race than anything else, since shooters are allowed to fire ammunition that is loaded to reduce recoil, not to mention use their "raceguns" like 5000$ uber-modified 1911s with a holosight on top. IDPA as I understand it is a stock-only competition.

CFSAC rules insisted that all shooters wore full kit, except for casual events like the walkback. I even wore my gasmask carrier (something I haven't done since CAP) on my right hand side, facing backwards, just so I could wear my dump pouch in the right place. 

I should add that having a dump pouch was one of the best things to have at CFSAC. Pistol matches could run through all 5 magazines, and any magazines left on the ground when the time was over counted as a penalty, so it gave me a great chance to practise my reloading drills


----------



## medaid (28 Mar 2008)

I found loading while not using cover or concealment to be counter productive in IPSC. Ever since then, I haven't done it again. We need tactical shooting courses that are accessible up here in Canada instead of having to go down to the States or bring US instructors up here all the time. I know MG teaches, but you're so damn far away from me. Not to mention the transportation of the firearms are a pain, and seriously for us to be training with 5 rnd or 10 rnd mags are just ridiculous...


----------



## MG34 (28 Mar 2008)

PatrickO said:
			
		

> MG34,
> I agree with what you said. I know IPSC has become more of a race than anything else, since shooters are allowed to fire ammunition that is loaded to reduce recoil, not to mention use their "raceguns" like 5000$ uber-modified 1911s with a holosight on top. IDPA as I understand it is a stock-only competition.
> 
> CFSAC rules insisted that all shooters wore full kit, except for casual events like the walkback. I even wore my gasmask carrier (something I haven't done since CAP) on my right hand side, facing backwards, just so I could wear my dump pouch in the right place.
> ...



CFSAC unless there has been major changes recently as some idiotic safety rules that negate any training benefits, for example no long rifle is carried, no transitions are done with a live rifle,and so on. Simply put the CF has never taken the pistol seriously as a weapon, it is pretty much an ornament (status symbol) or a conveniant means of being somewhat armed when a rifle is "too inconveniant".


----------



## OldSolduer (28 Mar 2008)

Hi MG34...like when clerks say I got a pistol so I could lock up my C7? Ain't it the truth


----------



## westie47 (28 Mar 2008)

They should NOT use IDPA/IPSC as a guide. These are games like MG has said.  The military needs to conduct training on how to FIGHT with a pistol. Full stop. Same as the rifle. 
If they can't come up with a course/instructors within the military, then contract out.  We already do that with certain units going south to conduct part of their courses/training as well as the CP course is done down south.

It is not uncommon within the US Army/Marines to find civilian contractors teaching pistol/rifle courses. In fact some companies only teach to LE/mil. John Farnam, Larry Vickers, Jeff Gonzalez are a few that come to mind. They are a travelling roadshow, can design custom training and ensure it's taught the same across the board. Ouside of CANSOFCOM, like Kevin said, we are waaaay behind the curve for tactical shooting, rifle is coming along but pistol is brutal. They have already taken gunfighter and 'dumbed' it down into the PWT4. It went from a 5 day package including sims to 1 or 2 days at the range.


----------



## medaid (28 Mar 2008)

I just had the pleasure of leaning a few shooting techniques with a rifle instructor/ trainer for LE/MIL here in Lynden, WA. It was VERY educational.


----------



## LordOsborne (28 Mar 2008)

MG34 said:
			
		

> CFSAC unless there has been major changes recently as some idiotic safety rules that negate any training benefits, for example no long rifle is carried, no transitions are done with a live rifle,and so on. Simply put the CF has never taken the pistol seriously as a weapon, it is pretty much an ornament (status symbol) or a conveniant means of being somewhat armed when a rifle is "too inconveniant".



Not all of the CFSAC pistol matches were shot 'pistol-only'. There were about 5 (out of ~30) matches with long rifles. I completely agree with you that transitions should be a major focus of pistol training. 

Edited to add the following:

The link I'm providing goes to a video of me doing one of the rifle-to-pistol matches at CFSAC. The match format went like this:

ammunition:  1x 2rd C7 magazine, 5x 9mm magazines

The shooter engages the Fig 12 target with his C7 and two round magazine, encounters a "stoppage", and has to transition to his pistol.
Shooter draws pistol, advances to the low wall, and using cover, engages 3 targets from one side using 2rds per target, and one target from the other side. 
Shooter advances to the low window, and using cover (slicing the pie), engages all targets visible through the window. 
Shooter then moves to the next window (the targets I engaged earlier are considered 'dead'), engages the rest, and stands up when finished.

Scoring was done using the IPSC brown cardboard targets (ABCD scoring areas), divided by the time to complete the match. Safety infractions, not using cover, and leaving magazines on the ground were time penalties.

I want to mention ahead of time that I know I didn't do all that great   a proper sling would have been nice. I had the issue sling around the delta ring, but it got caught on my tac vest as i tried to push it to my back. 


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wrIj-KBUkqs


----------



## AirCanuck (29 Mar 2008)

> I want to mention ahead of time that I know I didn't do all that great Tongue  a proper sling would have been nice. I had the issue sling around the delta ring, but it got caught on my tac vest as i tried to push it to my back.



still, very interesting to see speaking as someone who hasn't seen one of these before.  Thanks for the link!


----------



## LordOsborne (31 Mar 2008)

AC, my pleasure. Last year, attendance was down partly because the word didn't get out; partly because those that did hear about it put it as a low priority; and partly because a lot of troops were away on TF (LWFA sent only 5 shooters, for example, all of them PRes). It's a great two weeks, and I hope there are more people in attendance this year.


----------



## fletchsd (1 Apr 2008)

Well, I can let you know that several PRes teams from LFCA will be going to the competition.  Our team is actually looking forward to putting our "gunfighter" drills into good use at the competition.  For the guys who have been in for awhile, its not instinctive to transition to the pistol for when encountering a C-7 stoppage.  We keep having to force ourselves to use the new drills.
I also agree with MG 34 that most of the competitions encourage poor drills.  We have kitted out our team in full deployment kit in order to "train like you fight".  
Although they may just be games, competition encourages the troops to take an interest in marksmanship and therefore we see an overall increase in our retention numbers and the moral of the regiment. 
Instead of using civilian instructors teaching the very latest in combat pistol shooting, several members of our local police tac teams who are also in the regiment are a great source of information.  Its important to note that although we are no longer following the pam, we haven't run into any resistance to changing to this leading edge training because the results are so exceptional.


----------



## LordOsborne (1 Apr 2008)

fletchsd said:
			
		

> Well, I can let you know that several PRes teams from LFCA will be going to the competition.  Our team is actually looking forward to putting our "gunfighter" drills into good use at the competition.  For the guys who have been in for awhile, its not instinctive to transition to the pistol for when encountering a C-7 stoppage.  We keep having to force ourselves to use the new drills.
> I also agree with MG 34 that most of the competitions encourage poor drills.  We have kitted out our team in full deployment kit in suggestion to "train like you fight".
> Although they may just be games, competition encourages the troops to take an interest in marksmanship and therefore we see an overall increase in our retention numbers and the moral of the regiment.
> Instead of using civilian instructors teaching the very latest in combat pistol shooting, several members of our local police tac teams who are also in the regiment are a great source of information.  Its important to note that although we are no longer following the pam, we haven't run into any resistance to changing to this leading edge training because the results are so exceptional.



That's very encouraging. LFCA had a great turnout from its PRes units. I understand that most of those units had fair warning and actually got range time before showing up at CFSAC. I hope the word gets passed out a little better this year, but so far I haven't seen anything official. 

I had disagreements with some of the rules in the rulebook, things like "you will have your C7 magazines in their appropriate pockets.", "all shooters must carry a canteen + gasmask" etc. I successfully argued that my non-issue camelbak was an appropriate stand-in for a canteen. I was also carrying four of my 9mm magazines in my two left C7 mag pockets. The judges were less than pleased when they found this out, but i told them i had nowhere else to put them, since i wasn't issued any pistol magazine pouches. I also had to do a few matches with magazines in my cargo pockets. :

I tried to haggle with the officials about getting to use my vertical foregrip. I argued that even though yes, i had purchased it myself, it was practically identical to the issued vertical grip. I suggested that if they had any doubts, they could look at any number of photos from Afghanistan to see soldiers using the issued grip. I further pointed out that the RCMP's C8s had vertical grips, so where's the harm?
Their response was that "if it wasn't given to you with your rifle, you can't use it."

Will i still go back? you bet.


----------



## Greymatters (1 Apr 2008)

PatrickO said:
			
		

> I had disagreements with some of tha rules in tha rulebook, things like "you will have your C7 magazines in their appropriate pockets.", "all shooters must carry a canteen + gasmask" etc. I successfully argued that my non-issue camelbak was an appropriate stand-in for a canteen. I was also carrying four of my 9mm magazines in my two left C7 mag pockets. tha judges were less than pleased when they found this out, but i told them i had nowhere else to put them, since i wasn't issued any hand shooty thing magazine pouches. I also had to do a few matches with magazines in my cargo pockets. :



The rules are there for a reason.  Its not to keep new shooters from showing off flashy kit, its to make sure all participants have the same advantages and disadvantages in kit and portability.  That way the true skill being tested is the shooting ability, not the quality of equipment... 

A point you might also want to consider is that the judges at these competitions hate a smart-ass.  If you piss them off with too many challenges, and succeed in finding too many loopholes in the rules to exploit, they will find a way to rule against you in future decisions...


----------



## geo (1 Apr 2008)

Ayup.... I was at Connaught one year.... watched as one of my friends was disqualified on a snap-shoot (kneeling) and missed winning the Queen's medal by 1 point.

I also knew the judge that did the disqualification.... he was a bit of a dink but applied the rules .... to the letter of the law - and not common sense...


----------



## TCBF (1 Apr 2008)

- Match rules are previously published.  Requests for a change in rules can be made prior to the matches.  Participants who choose to compete do so knowing the rules.  If they disagree with those rules, the most sincere form of protest is to NOT shoot, and inform the competition organisers as to why.

- To protest a rule in effect at the start of a match one volunteered for is inane.

- Protesting an unsound application of a rule is another matter.

- Conclusion: If you don't like the rules - DON'T GO.


----------



## OldSolduer (1 Apr 2008)

I was employed at a 1CMBG SAC a number of years ago. In the rule book it stated that only issue kit for certain matches could be used. Some captain thought he was going to get away with wearing a Bianchi holster (black at that). We sought a clarification and the rule was enforced. 
But that's besides the point. Let's at least attempt to train our troops to shoot the blasted thing rather than argue over what holster they should be issued with.


----------



## medaid (1 Apr 2008)

Well I guess I can never go to the SAC then... I'd be crazy since almost none of my shooting kit is issued. Having a POS holster doesn't show off or test your shooting skills, it tests your ability to strugle witha POS equipment and not only to draw it but to point it on target in time to pop off rounds. No pistol mag pouches, so where do they expect us to keep out pistol mags? In our hands? In our pockets? It's another silly thing that rears its ugly head with regards to kit and backwards thinking. In the US their in house comps have their members showing up with a variety of things. But the few things that remain the same are, rifle in either regular or carbine length so two seperate div. They have a variety of optics but are all pretty much the same and a side arm that's the issued M9. None of the shooters are wearing the exact same equipment or even has the same accesories, but the winner is a winner, whether he/she is using a vert grip or not it doesn't matter. It's how the individual shoots and how good at shooting that person is. What someone's wearing doesn't really effect how they shoot now does it?  It only facilitates either good skills or none existent ones.


----------



## Greymatters (1 Apr 2008)

MedTech said:
			
		

> Well I guess I can never go to the SAC then... I'd be crazy since almost none of my shooting kit is issued. Having a POS holster doesn't show off or test your shooting skills, it tests your ability to strugle witha POS equipment and not only to draw it but to point it on target in time to pop off rounds. No pistol mag pouches, so where do they expect us to keep out pistol mags? In our hands? In our pockets? It's another silly thing that rears its ugly head with regards to kit and backwards thinking. In the US their in house comps have their members showing up with a variety of things. But the few things that remain the same are, rifle in either regular or carbine length so two seperate div. They have a variety of optics but are all pretty much the same and a side arm that's the issued M9. None of the shooters are wearing the exact same equipment or even has the same accesories, but the winner is a winner, whether he/she is using a vert grip or not it doesn't matter. It's how the individual shoots and how good at shooting that person is. What someone's wearing doesn't really effect how they shoot now does it?  It only facilitates either good skills or none existent ones.



Again, the purpose of standardized kit is to demonstrate superior skill, not superior equipment, but yes, what you posted are all good examples that reinforce what I-6 said earlier - you cant compare shooting at the range with doing it for real in the field or under fire.


----------



## LordOsborne (1 Apr 2008)

TCBF: I know I might have come off as a smart-@$$ when I asked the judges for some leeway, but I figured there wasn't any harm in asking. Thankfully the judges at large were not going around insisting on 'all issue kit, no matter what'. The Comox team wasn't issued the Cadpat soft cap yet so they were wearing something else, and understandably nobody balked at that. I did actually read the rulebook ahead of time, and I did have my canteen with me just in case. 

I can certainly understand the desire to level the playing field, and using kit lists as a vehicle to do so.


----------



## medaid (1 Apr 2008)

Patrick, can you send me a copy of the SAC rules?


----------



## LordOsborne (1 Apr 2008)

PM inbound.


----------



## medaid (1 Apr 2008)

PatrickO said:
			
		

> PM inbound.


Got it cheers!


----------

