# Why TOETs are important



## daftandbarmy (1 Mar 2008)

Next time anyone wonders "why are we're doing TOETs & IAs and Stoppages AGAIN?", you can show them these

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oh1lyMyejpI&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBGwZHHq18o&feature=related


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QSRq36n0CB0&feature=related


----------



## chriscalow (3 Mar 2008)

They should show that at basic.  Good find.


----------



## Panzer Grenadier (3 Mar 2008)

Ive had a similar incident from the middle video happen to me.


----------



## DarkFire (3 Mar 2008)

Whoever was firing that M16 in the first video was almost asking for the thing to explode... repeatably banging on the magazine and unnecessary usage of the forward assist.


----------



## geo (3 Mar 2008)

IAs and stoppages of a 60mm mortar..... or is this counterbattery fire......


http://shock.military.com/Shock/videos.do?displayContent=162163&page=1


> Allah calls one home. Video made by the bad guys! His friends praising Allah as this guy is launching mortar shots at American troops. Mortar tracking technology can track the trajectory of a hostile round and fire a retaliatory shot to precisely the spot where the hostile shell was fired from. (20.35s)


----------



## mudgunner49 (3 Mar 2008)

DarkFire said:
			
		

> Whoever was firing that M16 in the first video was almost asking for the thing to explode... repeatably banging on the magazine and unnecessary usage of the forward assist.



Neither of which will cause a rifle to kaBoom - you're out of your lane...


blake


----------



## DarkFire (3 Mar 2008)

mudgunner49 said:
			
		

> Neither of which will cause a rifle to kaBoom - you're out of your lane...


True but hitting the magazine like that will increase the possibility of a jam. Honestly I have no idea why the weapon would explode like that, but he should have at least checked to see what was the cause of the jam...


----------



## Trinity (4 Mar 2008)

DarkFire said:
			
		

> True but hitting the magazine like that will increase the possibility of a jam. Honestly I have no idea why the weapon would explode like that, but he should have at least checked to see what was the cause of the* jam...*



Last I checked the video, I never saw a JAM.

Possibly primer struck, possibly no round was loaded as it was hard to see any ejection due to lighting in some instances.
But I did not see a Jam, i.e. obstruction of round / bolt partially forward occur.


----------



## DarkFire (4 Mar 2008)

I'm starting to regret my choice of words. I simply meant that he should have checked to see why the rifle wasn't firing, instead of simply banging on the magazine which would only cause more problems.


----------



## Command-Sense-Act 105 (4 Mar 2008)

DarkFire, you're still out of your lane.  Suggest you stop now and go on listening silence on this particular topic.

*The Army.ca staff*


----------



## Forgotten_Hero (26 Mar 2008)

Personally, I think you should quit your whining about him and correct him, teach him why he's wrong so that he learns something rather than just try to shut him up... That would be much more effective and productive.


----------



## NL_engineer (26 Mar 2008)

DarkFire said:
			
		

> True but hitting the magazine like that will increase the possibility of a jam. Honestly I have no idea why the weapon would explode like that, but he should have at least checked to see what was the cause of the jam...



Will it now? Does Tap, Rack, and Go ring a bell?


----------



## Command-Sense-Act 105 (26 Mar 2008)

Forgotten_Hero said:
			
		

> quit your whining about him and correct him, teach him why he's wrong so that he learns something



Here's your chance to do that.  Go.

Any more direction for the staff you'd like to pass on?  We're all ears.

*The Army.ca Staff*


----------



## Forgotten_Hero (26 Mar 2008)

Yeah, Ill pass on any more thoughts as I see fit. As for correcting him, I've already pmed him.


----------



## Command-Sense-Act 105 (26 Mar 2008)

Forgotten_Hero said:
			
		

> Yeah, Ill pass on any more thoughts as I see fit. As for correcting him, I've already pmed him.



But in so doing, you've denied all other board readers the benefit of your wisdom.

So which is it going to be - guide and develop all members or just some?


----------



## Forgotten_Hero (26 Mar 2008)

Good point. In that case I will post the contents of the pm. Afterall, I dont stick around the forums to just badger people.

Banging the foreward assist will not hurt the round at all. It simply pushes the bolt into the round and pushes the round into the chamber if it is not already fully foreward. Repeatedly banging it will not accomplish anything, for better or worse. As for banging the bottom of the mag, the reason its not "supposed" to be done is because you can bend the lips on the top of the mag, which can cause the mag to hold the rounds lower and they may not be "picked up" by the bolt.


----------



## Kat Stevens (26 Mar 2008)

NL_engineer said:
			
		

> Will it now? Does Tap, Rack, and Go ring a bell?



Not for me, it doesn't.


----------



## NL_engineer (26 Mar 2008)

Kat Stevens said:
			
		

> Not for me, it doesn't.



Its the new IA drill for everything but an empty mag (because its no longer a stoppage)


----------



## dan005e (26 Mar 2008)

I'm really curious as to what would cause a weapon to malfunction like that. 

Watching the video a few times it looks like the weapon fires one round, tries to fire another, takes the mag off and cocks it; at which point the guy in the red moves in front of the camera. Since he does you cant see whether or not a round is ejected. Then the mag is placed back on, readied, and he fires which leads to it going kaboom. The magazine is ejected, most likely because of whatever went wrong and something is left dangling out of the magazine housing. Too long to be a round and the mag is visible on the table. So what could that be? Piece of the magazine still in the housing?

What could cause this to happen, faulty ammo or a round impacting an obstruction?


----------



## vonGarvin (26 Mar 2008)

NL_engineer said:
			
		

> Will it now? Does Tap, Rack, and Go ring a bell?


By "Rack" you mean "Cock", right?  I mean, I understand the "new drills", and I use them, by why come up with "sexy" new names?

Anyway, back to the thread.  Just my little pet peeve alert.


----------



## NL_engineer (26 Mar 2008)

dan005e said:
			
		

> What could cause this to happen, faulty ammo or a round impacting an obstruction?



My guess would be ammo


----------



## NL_engineer (26 Mar 2008)

Mortarman Rockpainter said:
			
		

> By "Rack" you mean "****", right?  I mean, I understand the "new drills", and I use them, by why come up with "sexy" new names?
> 
> Anyway, back to the thread.  Just my little pet peeve alert.



Thats just how I was taught them  :


----------



## vonGarvin (26 Mar 2008)

NL_engineer said:
			
		

> Thats just how I was taught them  :


Ditto.  But I asked that very question of the instructor
"So, when you say 'rack', I cock the weapon, right?"
"Yes"
"Oh, ok. Then why don't you say 'tap, cock and fire'?"

Say what you mean, and mean what you say, otherwise, I was prepared to play pool or something  >


----------



## Fishbone Jones (26 Mar 2008)

dan005e said:
			
		

> I'm really curious as to what would cause a weapon to malfunction like that.
> 
> Watching the video a few times it looks like the weapon fires one round, tries to fire another, takes the mag off and cocks it; at which point the guy in the red moves in front of the camera. Since he does you cant see whether or not a round is ejected. Then the mag is placed back on, readied, and he fires which leads to it going kaboom. The magazine is ejected, most likely because of whatever went wrong and something is left dangling out of the magazine housing. Too long to be a round and the mag is visible on the table. So what could that be? Piece of the magazine still in the housing?
> 
> What could cause this to happen, faulty ammo or a round impacting an obstruction?


He could have possibly had a 'sqib' round. One where the primer fires but there's no powder. The primer will provide enough oomph to push the bullet into the barrel, but not out of it. Obstructed barrel and the next round will likely kaboom it. Happens to handloaders that are not paying attention when reloading their cases and when firing their guns afterwards, with said reloads.

Idle speculation on my part though. Don't want to be accused of anything :


----------



## dan005e (26 Mar 2008)

Ok so that explains the possible reason why it could have exploded like that, but then what is left in the magazing housing just after the explosion? It appears to be something solidly in there as it doesnt come out when the mag comes off, and as the shooter puts it on the table it is still in the mag housing.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (26 Mar 2008)

dan005e said:
			
		

> Ok so that explains the possible reason why it could have exploded like that, but then what is left in the magazing housing just after the explosion? It appears to be something solidly in there as it doesnt come out when the mag comes off, and as the shooter puts it on the table it is still in the mag housing.



The way it looks to me is the mag didn't come off. Just blew the guts out of it.


----------



## Dominus (30 Mar 2008)

That first video is why I'll never reload my ammo.  Sure, you'll probably save some money, but mess up once, and you can blow up your weapon and lose some fingers.  And if the guy has to slam on the forward assist at all to get the thing to go into battery, then something is wrong with the weapon.   Really his fault all the way (using crappy ammo, and not knowing and maintaining his weapon).


----------



## mudgunner49 (30 Mar 2008)

NL_engineer said:
			
		

> Its the new IA drill for everything but an empty mag (because its no longer a stoppage)



Just as an FYI, Tap, Rack Bang was "new" in the late 80's or possibly before - the CF is just (as usual) about 3-4 generations behind the private sector WRT small arms doctrine..

Dominus - you are making a ton of assumptions that the primary causational factor for the kB was a reloaded round.  Perhaps if you have that little faith in your own ability to pay attention to detail and handload, it is best that you d don't.  I am approaching the 250K mark WRT handloading (not reloading - if you want to know the difference, let me know) without a problem of any kind...


blake


----------



## NL_engineer (30 Mar 2008)

mudgunner49 said:
			
		

> Just as an FYI, Tap, Rack Bang was "new" in the late 80's or possibly before - the CF is just (as usual) about 3-4 generations behind the private sector WRT small arms doctrine..



No surprise to me  :  ya well, it only took 20 + years  :


----------



## vonGarvin (30 Mar 2008)

mudgunner49 said:
			
		

> Just as an FYI, Tap, Rack Bang was "new" in the late 80's or possibly before - *the CF is just (as usual) about 3-4 generations behind the private sector WRT small arms doctrine..*


So, we follow the private sector when it comes to small arms doctrine now? :


----------



## mudgunner49 (31 Mar 2008)

Mortarman Rockpainter said:
			
		

> So, we follow the private sector when it comes to small arms doctrine now? :



The private sector always leads - and they do it *better* and *cheaper*!!!

The advancement of anything is *always* driven by *enthusiasts* - you find better ways to do things when you love the work.  This is true of very few soldiers, it's usually just a part of the job for them. 

Jeff Gordon would not be a NASCAR driver if he didn't love the job and excel at it ...

Ever watch Robbie Leatham shoot??  His company motto is "Where shooting is a *way of life*..." --- that's a love of the sport.  And that's also why he is on a 240K per year retainer to teach shooting to the US mil Tier 1 units.  That's right - a guy with no mil service teaching SF/NSW/HSLD guys how to shoot folks in the face.  Imagine that - the military actually learning from the *private sector*...


----------



## vonGarvin (31 Mar 2008)

mudgunner49 said:
			
		

> The private sector always leads - and they do it *better* and *cheaper*!!!
> (remainder deleted)


Then send the private sector off to war.


----------



## daftandbarmy (31 Mar 2008)

Mortarman Rockpainter said:
			
		

> Then send the private sector off to war.



Well, they are, aren't they? Viz: Private Military Companies, plus a host of other similar private sector contributions to various conflicts bubbling around the globe. I'm pretty sure that it was Balckwater guys burned to a crisp and dangling from a bridge in Baghdad back a few years ago.


----------



## vonGarvin (31 Mar 2008)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> Well, they are, aren't they? Viz: Private Military Companies, plus a host of other similar private sector contributions to various conflicts bubbling around the globe. I'm pretty sure that it was Balckwater guys burned to a crisp and dangling from a bridge in Baghdad back a few years ago.


My point exactly.  I'm aware of blackwater guys doing there thing around the world; however, they are NOT fighting wars.  They may be fighting within wars, but then we get to fuzzy interpretations of international law (not the point of this thread).

I'm talking about armies of private military countries doing was militaries do around the world.


----------



## LordOsborne (31 Mar 2008)

Pardon my intrusion - 

But I do think that there are some lessons in the private sector we can learn and benefit from. I'm not suggesting that we look to them for all of our future training / doctrine, but I am saying it wouldn't hurt to look around. 

I think the private sector outstrips the military in other areas - look at the whole load bearing gear situation in Soviet Canuckistan. I know that's somewhat off topic, but I thought it deserved mention. 

Edited to fix grammar.


----------



## vonGarvin (31 Mar 2008)

PatrickO said:
			
		

> Pardon my intrusion -
> 
> But I do think that there are some lessons the private sector we can learn and benefit from. I'm not suggesting that we look to them for all of our future training / doctrine, but I am saying it wouldn't hurt to look around.
> 
> I think the private sector outstrips the military in other areas - look at the whole load bearing gear situation in Canada. I know that's somewhat off topic, but I thought it deserved mention.


I agree with you that the military can indeed learn lessons from the private sector.  And vice versa, I would suggest.  I took the previous poster's implication that the private sector always did things better than the military, that's all.
By the way, in the original video, wasn't it a civilian that had problems?  I guess they aren't immune (yes, I realise that some military personnel have also buggered up on the range: I'm not implying that the military is perfect, just that neither private sector nor military is perfect).


----------



## mudgunner49 (1 Apr 2008)

Mortarman Rockpainter said:
			
		

> I agree with you that the military can indeed learn lessons from the private sector.  And vice versa, I would suggest.  I took the previous poster's implication that the private sector *always did things better than the military*, that's all.
> By the way, in the original video, wasn't it a civilian that had problems?  I guess they aren't immune (yes, I realise that some military personnel have also buggered up on the range: I'm not implying that the military is perfect, just that neither private sector nor military is perfect).



I did not say nor (I believe) imply that this is the case in all areas, however WRT to SA training I firmly beieve it to be the case.  This is not something that you should take as personally as you obviously are, as the military is a large organization that is very resistant to change and in fact cannot change quickly even when change is adopted.

The fact of the matter is still that *enthusiasts* drive development and this has always been the case as regards the development of new training techniques, advanced loads and calibers, and doctrine.  Witness as one "for instance" the development of the Mk262 Mod0 and subsequent versions of the 77gr (and other heavy for caliber) 5.56 ammunition.  It was completely the purview of the competion shooters (newsflash - these are primarily *civilians*) and the round was adopted by the SF world originally for it's accuracy at extended range, and the enhanced terminal effects were just a happy coincidence.  One example of many.

Not trying to be adversarial here, but attempting to deny that the mil is several generations behind the civ world (in this regard at least) does not make it less so...


be safe,

blake


----------



## TheSnake (5 Oct 2019)

Sorry for bumping an old thread but I heard the TOETs/C7 Standard haves changed and would love a video on that meets the new C7 drill standards


----------



## brihard (5 Oct 2019)

TheSnake said:
			
		

> Sorry for bumping an old thread but I heard the TOETs/C7 Standard haves changed and would love a video on that meets the new C7 drill standards



Yup, our handling drills have been significantly modernized.

Check the end of this thread for the ACIMS link.

https://army.ca/forums/threads/128334.0


----------



## TheSnake (5 Oct 2019)

Brihard said:
			
		

> Yup, our handling drills have been significantly modernized.
> 
> Check the end of this thread for the ACIMS link.
> 
> https://army.ca/forums/threads/128334.0



I check the link at the end, the link doesn't work


----------



## brihard (5 Oct 2019)

TheSnake said:
			
		

> I check the link at the end, the link doesn't work



DWAN only. It’s a link on ACIMS.

Best bet would be ask your chain or someone in your appropriate training cell to be provided a copy, and get someone who’s versed in the drills to run through them with you.


----------

