# Rifle group sizes?



## kona_mtb (31 Aug 2010)

I am curious, mainly for the selfish reason to feel more confident in my abilities before going into the armed forces, about how the shooting abilities of soldiers improves from before acceptance, through basic training and beyond? I have been accepted and am awaiting my bmq date. Anyways, currently I can go out and shoot with a 9x scoped hunting rifle off a bipod and hit 3'' bullseyes at 100 yards, and 8x10 sheets of paper out to about 500 yards consistently. How does this compare to others? Should I expect this to greatly improve after training?


----------



## Jarnhamar (31 Aug 2010)

How accurate is your shooting after a 10 KM run or walking 10 KM with a 50 pound backpack carrying an 8 pound sledge hammer?


----------



## Rogo (31 Aug 2010)

Nice AD.

Not that I have any quotable information but wouldn't the type of shooting be totally different anyways?

You will be shooting C7s at potentially varying distances with different sights and without a bipod. 

It just seems like apples and oranges to me.  :2c:


----------



## SeanNewman (31 Aug 2010)

Kona,

It is impossible to compare what you are doing to what will be done with a C7 at the range.  Different rifle, different optics, different stress level, etc.

What I can guarantee you is that you will be given incredible instruction while at Saint Jean, but it won't be from the guys in uniform; it will be from the retired guys who run the Small Arms Trainer.

They will increase your marksmanship principles in real time assisted by a really high-speed program to show you exactly what you're doing wrong and they will coach you how to improve.

Best of luck.


----------



## kona_mtb (31 Aug 2010)

Doesn't all types of weapons use effectively the same tactics though. steady hand, accurate eye sight, good posture and balance. it might be hard to say how anyone shooting compares to others but if you can generally shoot decent, you are capable of shooting well with a majority of firearms.


----------



## vonGarvin (31 Aug 2010)

kona_mtb said:
			
		

> Doesn't all types of weapons use effectively the same tactics though. steady hand, accurate eye sight, good posture and balance. it might be hard to say how anyone shooting compares to others but if you can generally shoot decent, you are capable of shooting well with a majority of firearms.


There are what we call "principles of marksmanship".  My advice to you is this: go in with an open mind.  Your instructors may tell you stuff that may be new to you or even conflict with what you know.
Heck, way back in 1985 when I first shot the FN C1 A1 (a 7.62mm rifle), I was able to hit the target at 100 m with iron peep sights such that the rounds had a group size of about 2 or 3 inches or so.  That was the first time I had ever fired a rifle.  Most were able to do the same due to the methods, etc they taught us.


----------



## kona_mtb (31 Aug 2010)

Technoviking said:
			
		

> There are what we call "principles of marksmanship".  My advice to you is this: go in with an open mind.  Your instructors may tell you stuff that may be new to you or even conflict with what you know.
> Heck, way back in 1985 when I first shot the FN C1 A1 (a 7.62mm rifle), I was able to hit the target at 100 m with iron peep sights such that the rounds had a group size of about 2 or 3 inches or so.  That was the first time I had ever fired a rifle.  Most were able to do the same due to the methods, etc they taught us.



Ya that really answers my question. I am really hoping to gain some really good marksmanship skills so hopefully I can learn from the best.

Thanks


----------



## OldSolduer (31 Aug 2010)

Technoviking said:
			
		

> There are what we call "principles of marksmanship".  My advice to you is this: go in with an open mind.  Your instructors may tell you stuff that may be new to you or even conflict with what you know.
> Heck, way back in 1985 when I first shot the FN C1 A1 (a 7.62mm rifle), I was able to hit the target at 100 m with iron peep sights such that the rounds had a group size of about 2 or 3 inches or so.  That was the first time I had ever fired a rifle.  Most were able to do the same due to the methods, etc they taught us.



Bang on the money Techno!! When I was much younger I could nail a tgt at 375 yards, one shot, iron sights FNC1A1.


----------



## 57Chevy (31 Aug 2010)

First they will likely tell you to forget everything
you ever thought you knew about weapons,
weapons care and handling, weapons stripping and cleaning
and finally shooting them.


----------



## Illegio (1 Sep 2010)

Try to avoid going in with any preconceptions.

It sounds a bit silly saying it, but all marksmanship is, is the rigorous application of the principles of marksmanship. Keep a copy of them, consciously go through them one at a time, and you'll start to apply them instinctively. As long as you remember the principles, there is effectively no difference between a .50 MacMillan and a 5.56 C-7.


----------



## VIChris (1 Sep 2010)

Don't get too comfy on the bipod. You won't see one again until you're playing with the belt fed goodness of a C6 or C9. As mentioned, pay attention to your instructors above all else. Ask lots of questions. If you're uncomfortable when you shoot, ask your coach to help you adjust your position to suit you. There is  the 'by the book way', and then there is a little bit of leeway to allow for different body types, and your coaches will help you find it. 

When you come out the other side, you'll be blasting womprats with your T-16 without issue. >


----------



## SeanNewman (1 Sep 2010)

Kona,

As mentioned, it's what you think it is and more.  And as others have said, you may need to unlearn some bad habits.

For example, your stance and hold may be perfect but your breathing and follow through may be terrible.  Either way, the coaches and the Small Arms Trainer software will help you get better.

As the OIC of Small Arms I felt reasonably comfortable in my shooting ability, but when I went to visit Saint Jean a few months ago and cycled through the system I learned a ton.  Even guys like shooting champions and snipers can still benefit from the software because it shows you things a coach's human eye might not see.

For example, I knew how to manage my breathing and trigger control (which the software tracked), but what I never knew was that after I was firing each shot I was basically flailing the rifle all over the place because I wasn't holding a solid follow through position.  You see this on the replay because the laser tracks exactly where you're pointed at all times.  Great stuff.


----------



## OldSolduer (1 Sep 2010)

Petamocto said:
			
		

> Kona,
> 
> As mentioned, it's what you think it is and more.  And as others have said, you may need to unlearn some bad habits.
> 
> ...



Can you tell me more via PM about this system?

Thanks


----------



## HItorMiss (1 Sep 2010)

Pet

Send me more info via PM as well.....

Thank you.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (1 Sep 2010)

Petamocto said:
			
		

> . . . What I can guarantee you is that you will be given incredible instruction *while at Saint Jean*, but it won't be from the guys in uniform; it will be from the retired guys who run the Small Arms Trainer.



From looking at the OP's previous posts, it appears he will be a reservist with the Rocky Mountain Rangers and possibly not attending BMQ until next summer.   Perhaps someone can provide him with a bit of insight into what expectations he should have in that scenario with regards musketry on his basic and trades courses as well as typical shooting during the year at his unit.  I sense that he may be under impression that he will have (or would like to have) lots of bullets with which to improve his markmanship, which may not be the case unless things have improved greatlly since I retired.


----------



## SeanNewman (1 Sep 2010)

PMs sent to Jim and BM.


----------



## George Wallace (1 Sep 2010)

Blackadder1916 said:
			
		

> ........   Perhaps someone can provide him with a bit of insight into what expectations he should have in that scenario with regards musketry on his basic and trades courses as well as typical shooting during the year at his unit.



He may not have any chance to handle any weapon and ammo at the same time, let alone fire on a range, until he has qualified BMQ-Land.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (1 Sep 2010)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> He may not have any chance to handle any weapon and ammo at the same time, let alone fire on a range, until he has qualified BMQ-Land.


Been awhile since I was involved in one, but I _think_ you have to do your basic C7 qual in order to even _*pass*_ your BMQ.


----------



## Illegio (1 Sep 2010)

Blackadder1916 said:
			
		

> From looking at the OP's previous posts, it appears he will be a reservist with the Rocky Mountain Rangers and possibly not attending BMQ until next summer.   Perhaps someone can provide him with a bit of insight into what expectations he should have in that scenario with regards musketry on his basic and trades courses as well as typical shooting during the year at his unit.  I sense that he may be under impression that he will have (or would like to have) lots of bullets with which to improve his markmanship, which may not be the case unless things have improved greatlly since I retired.



Honestly, I wouldn't go in with any expectations. From what I understand, the PWTs are currently being overhauled, so anything I say about the current standards may not be in any way applicable when this guy goes through basic. Petamocto is actually OIC Small Arms, and leading this overhaul, so he can explain better than I. I've seen guys get burned going through BMQ thinking they already had a leg up on their peers because of some prior shooting "experience," only to get schooled by someone who's never even touched a gun before. All I would say is, keep an open mind, take the teaching points to heart, and practice practice practice the basic principles on your own time when you get the chance.


----------



## George Wallace (1 Sep 2010)

recceguy said:
			
		

> Been awhile since I was involved in one, but I _think_ you have to do your basic C7 qual in order to even _*pass*_ your BMQ.




I knew that question was going to arise from my statement.  LFCA came out with a rule that unless a member had done their BMQ - LAND (at that time SQ) they could not handle loaded wpns at the Unit.   They had to have been qualified on their BMQ - Land before they were permitted to partake in any Ranges run by the Unit.  We were not allowed to take members to the Pistol or Rifle Ranges and let them shoot, until after they sucessfully passed BMQ - Land even though Range Control considered them "safe" if the Unit was satisfied with their instruction and TOETs as taught by unit pers.   More bullets for me.   ;D


----------



## KevinB (1 Sep 2010)

My best group (paper target - not electronic wizbang wierdness, that I do not fully trust after seing some resuls) with a C7A1 and C79 using IVI ammo was .687" @ 100m.

 I think the god of war was smiling on me though as while I feel IVI is good ammo, I don't rate the system much under 1MOA.

I've seen rack grade C7A1's (okay Rifle Team rifles keep out of the field) shoot under 1MOA pretty consitently with a specific lot of IVI with good shooters.

As far as the PWT's go, its set up as crawl, walk, run, and Petamocto and others are working to make it even better.

Generally the CF marksmanship program is one of the best, if not the best in the world for conventional force soldiers.

Which honestly does not say much about the rest of the world  ;D

.


----------



## SeanNewman (1 Sep 2010)

RecceGuy,

Not sure about the SQ (now BMQ-L), but sadly there is no requirement to pass the PWT2 at the basic BMQ level.  They shoot the day applications and if they pass they are "rewarded" by getting to shoot the night supp.

When I did my visit there in the spring I just sat there stunned when I heard that, but after my stay I understood why: Too many trades are telling them "we need you to do this", so they have just decided that people who need to ever use the C7 will get that focus later.


----------



## vonGarvin (1 Sep 2010)

Petamocto said:
			
		

> RecceGuy,
> 
> Not sure about the SQ (now BMQ-L), but sadly there is no requirement to pass the PWT2 at the basic BMQ level.  They shoot the day applications and if they pass they are "rewarded" by getting to shoot the night supp.
> 
> When I did my visit there in the spring I just sat there stunned when I heard that, but after my stay I understood why: Too many trades are telling them "we need you to do this", so they have just decided that people who need to ever use the C7 will get that focus later.


Just a quick question: when did the SQ qualification change to BMQ-L?


----------



## SeanNewman (1 Sep 2010)

Technoviking said:
			
		

> Just a quick question: when did the SQ qualification change to BMQ-L?



Right around the same time CAP became BMOQ-L, Phase 3 became DP1.1 and Phase 4 became DP1.2.

Slightly after QL3 became BIQ and then DP1.

However, it was well after ISCC became JLC became JNCO became PLQ became NCM DP2, and 6B became 3B.

But before 3A became the Leadership and Tactical Command Course (LTCC [ISCC]).


----------



## Rogo (1 Sep 2010)

So it's no longer CAP it's BMOQ-LAND?


----------



## Fishbone Jones (1 Sep 2010)

Petamocto said:
			
		

> Right around the same time CAP became BMOQ-L, Phase 3 became DP1.1 and Phase 4 became DP1.2.
> 
> Slightly after QL3 became BIQ and then DP1.
> 
> ...




Ahhh yes.

"LEADING CHANGE BUBBLE FILLED!"

"CHECK!"

"ROGER. FULL SPEED AHEAD TO THE NEXT CAREER SPEEDBUMP. MOVING NOW, OUT!"

Oops forgot [sarcasm] [/sarcasm] ;D


----------



## SeanNewman (1 Sep 2010)

Rogo said:
			
		

> So it's no longer CAP it's BMOQ-LAND?



Afraid so.

Sadly, we hate the name so much because it's a PITA just to say instead of "CAP", we are now calling it "Bamacle" as in rhymes with debacle.

Context: When we walk around and see numpty-looking candidates in the J7 hallway, we always look for the Course O/WO and ask "Are you in charge of this Bamacle?" (BMOQ-L).


----------



## vonGarvin (1 Sep 2010)

Rogo said:
			
		

> So it's no longer CAP it's BMOQ-LAND?


[tangent] True story.  June 2009 I go onto our computer database looking for "CAP".  I can't find it.  One of my Warrant Officers tells me a few days later that he just found out that "CAP" had been renamed to "BMOQ-L".  No message, no nothing.


[/tangent]

OK, so as stated on this thread, marksmanship is taught to all CF members.  Some would offer that infantrymen need to be better at it, but in the end, you will be taught initially on BMQ/BMOQ, and from there, you will progress.  Some will learn to shoot better than others, and it comes down to the unit's ability/desire to teach and develop.  But considering that I hadn't fired anything prior to joining (other than an air rifle) and they were able to give me the skill to consistently hit man-sized targets at ranges up to 300m (or more?) with a 7.62mm FNC1, the methods, etc, do work.


----------



## KevinB (1 Sep 2010)

We used to shoot C1A1's to 600m Iron Sights.


----------



## Northalbertan (1 Sep 2010)

My best grouping with the C1A1 at 600m was 20 rounds into 12".   You can call it fluke but I was aiming for it.  Only ever did that once though so maybe it was a fluke.   ;D


----------



## SeanNewman (1 Sep 2010)

With the pitiful amount of shooting nowadays, lots of soldiers can't hit a 12" group from the 10m CQB firing line.


----------



## vonGarvin (1 Sep 2010)

KevinB said:
			
		

> We used to shoot C1A1's to 600m Iron Sights.


I _thought _ it was farther than the 300 I had said earlier.  I remember thinking "where is the target?"  But, it's been over 20 years for me!!!

Thanks!


----------



## KevinB (1 Sep 2010)

I recall a lot of low scores being indicated from the butts...

The sights on the C1A1 where pretty horrible, frankly can't say I miss that gun.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (2 Sep 2010)

I haven't been involved for awhile, but we used to (maybe still do) shoot the C7 at 500m, with a substantial number of hits during ORA military matches. Is the round _effective_ at that range? Probably not (I don't know), but I still wouldn't want to be hit with it. Just like any good varmint gun, it'll do it's part if you do, and know, yours.


As an aside, I love the C1 and curse the liebrals for prohibiting them.


----------



## Illegio (2 Sep 2010)

GD - OTS claims on their website that C77 ball will penetrate 3.5mm of 50/70 Rb steel at 570m, so it won't exactly bounce off if it hits you. They also claim 20cm max standard deviation at 550m, so theoretically, the round ought to be effective at that range.

GD - OTS C77 Ball Data

Edit: There is also a downloadable .pdf datasheet on that link with some additional information.


----------



## SeanNewman (2 Sep 2010)

RG,

As you mentioned, the problem isn't necessarily the range and accuracy part, and a lot of guys in my Cell were actually hitting consistently from 700m (and nobody could hit anything at 800m).  Conditions were perfect with no wind.

The problem I'm worried about isn't necessarily joules on impact, though.  If you take one in the head or chest you're incapacitated, so I'm okay with that.  I can all but guarantee that the round won't fragment at that range nor will rupture a large temporary wound cavity, so wherever it hits is going to make a small 5.56 tunnel and that's it.

My concern with 5.56 at 300+ is that it is so affected by drop and windage that in order to get those hits you basically have to be in a rested prone supported with no wind and the enemy has to be the stereotypical sentry standing at attention.  In other words, a soldier who is bounding around with a lot of weight on his back, with the action of combat putting his pulse around 180, shooting at an enemy who is also moving and shooting back at him, there is basically no chance to hit anything from 500m (some would even argue 100-200m but that's a different matter).

So yes you're right that it will do it's part if you do, it's not really fair to the C7 to push it past 300m in realistic conditions, because it would just require too much training to compensate for elements and distances.

Can a super soldier fight on the battlefield and make immediate corrections to his optics and adjust for windage on the fly?  Probably, but the training that it would take to get a soldier to that level would be a bajillion times more money than just giving *some* people a 7.62.


----------



## vonGarvin (2 Sep 2010)

Petamocto said:
			
		

> Can a super soldier fight on the battlefield and make immediate corrections to his optics and adjust for windage on the fly?  Probably, but the training that it would take to get a soldier to that level would be a bajillion  times more money than just giving *some* people a 7.62.


Are you the new "Old Spice" guy?






But I do like the point about ranges: they are all important.  Yes, clinical studies may show that 5.56mm does x at range y; however, just as you state, it means nothing when the practicable range may be much less than advertised.

The C9 LMG has a longer range, but only due to the fact that it's purpose is to hit area targets.  If it misses at those longer ranges, due to its external ballistics, it is still effective for other reasons.


----------



## KevinB (2 Sep 2010)

Technoviking said:
			
		

> The C9 LMG has a longer range, but only due to the fact that it's purpose is to hit area targets.  If it misses at those longer ranges, due to its external ballistics, it is still effective for other reasons.



Honestly I used to beleive in supression, but I have seen that near misses do shit to supress our current threats, at least with small arms.


----------



## SeanNewman (2 Sep 2010)

KevinB said:
			
		

> Honestly I used to beleive in supression, but I have seen that near misses do crap to supress our current threats, at least with small arms.



Maybe that's where the GMG / CASW / C16 / AGLS comes in?  I know that a near miss with a LAV is going to put some heads down (or off), but as mentioned in the other thread (beat to death) maybe that's why we have many overlapping capabilities.


----------



## vonGarvin (2 Sep 2010)

KevinB said:
			
		

> Honestly I used to beleive in supression, but I have seen that near misses do shit to supress our current threats, at least with small arms.



Quick question: for our current threat, are those near misses consistent?  (eg: not just the odd shot, but a continual stream).  And if they don't "put their heads down", then that's fine, no?  As in _some_ of the bullets will actually strike flesh?


----------



## Rogo (2 Sep 2010)

Petamocto said:
			
		

> Afraid so.
> 
> Sadly, we hate the name so much because it's a PITA just to say instead of "CAP", we are now calling it "Bamacle" as in rhymes with debacle.
> 
> Context: When we walk around and see numpty-looking candidates in the J7 hallway, we always look for the Course O/WO and ask "Are you in charge of this Bamacle?" (BMOQ-L).


  haha Very good choice of wording indeed.


----------



## KevinB (2 Sep 2010)

Technoviking said:
			
		

> Quick question: for our current threat, are those near misses consistent?  (eg: not just the odd shot, but a continual stream).  And if they don't "put their heads down", then that's fine, no?  As in _some_ of the bullets will actually strike flesh?



No because the enemy has learned to fire and maneuver thru ineffective fire to flank.


----------



## vonGarvin (2 Sep 2010)

KevinB said:
			
		

> No because the enemy has learned to fire and maneuver thru *ineffective* fire to flank.


Interesting point, thanks.  I guess it keeps coming back to training (eg: teach people how to shoot effectively)


----------



## GAP (2 Sep 2010)

Question:  as part of our initial weapons training we first did a week of snapping in.....does the CF do this? 


I found it made getting the sight picture instinctive using iron sights, plus a week of B.R.A.S.S. got the novices doing it in their sleep.....


----------



## SeanNewman (2 Sep 2010)

KevinB said:
			
		

> No because the enemy has learned to fire and maneuver thru ineffective fire to flank.



I would also counter with our tactics occasionally being adapted to making ourselves fixed in place to form a firebase and waiting for the fast air / UAV to do the killing for us.


----------



## 57Chevy (2 Sep 2010)

Question

Do they still teach the doubletap firing method  ?

My personal favorite  ;D


----------



## Sig_Des (2 Sep 2010)

LFWA recently ran a 2-week gun camp/ tryout for our CFSAC team.

Now, I've never considered myself a poor shot, but my marksmanship increased exponentially in that 2-week period. I learned so very much, and a lot of it was little things that never really get covered in the standard SA ranges/classes.

We spent whole classes learning how to _properly_ adjust the C79 scope, and then did a walkback, sighting in and adjusting at the 100m-500M. We spent an entire afternoon shooting only from the 500. I never thought I'd be able to hit that kind of grouping from that range with a C7. Because we just don't do it.

Snap shooting, shooting on the move, barricade shooting, etc.

Granted, a lot of what we did (about 1/3rd to half) was competition/olympic style matches, while the rest was standard ranges and firing positions, to CQB/gunfighter style shooting.

All in all, it was probably the best learning environment I've had when it came to SA.

Lot's of:  "We're going to show you small things, if it works for you great, if it doesn't, try something new." and very little "Don't rest your mag on the ground! Because that's how we were taught"

There were a lot of basic principles that were better explained, and it also helped that we had enough rounds to try different things to find what worked for individuals.


----------



## NavyShooter (21 Sep 2010)

I had the opportunity the other day to try out the SATS/FATS that was down in front of the Cartier square drill hall.

I was, honestly, very disappointed.

The weapons skills/drills are effectively the same, however, it is a simulation, and noteably so.

First problem.  Zeroing.  The staff were unable to properly zero the rifles to the targets.  I was able to shoot really pretty little groups, but we were unable to properly adjust the weapons to hit the targetry.

Second problem.  Recoil.  The recoil impulse started before the shot was actually released.  I've fired "a few" rounds through the C-7 FOW, and the recoil, while similar in magnitude, was wrong in timing.

I was not a positive experience for me.....but, on the plus side, I went back to the range the next day and placed 4th in stage II for the QM, so it didn't throw me off my game too badly.

YMMV, but I do not think the FATS is good value for our money.  Personal opinion is that we'd be better off using live ammo on a real range.

It is good to see Beadwindow's comments about the gun-camp above.  

NS


----------



## Sig_Des (21 Sep 2010)

NavyShooter said:
			
		

> It is good to see Beadwindow's comments about the gun-camp above.
> 
> NS



Hey NS, congrats on 4th in Match 2. I didn't make it that far, but as a tyro, I was happy with my end-result.

For our gun camp, we did have some excellent coaches and experience.

As far as SATS/FATS, I'm of the personal opinion that it's a good system for a new shooter to introduce into some basics, but feel that it is more detrimental to more advanced shootes.


----------



## SteveB (22 Sep 2010)

As an aside, who won the Queen's Medal?

Also agreed that CFSAC and the team training therefore is an excellent tool to improve marksmanship forces wide.  I only wish that the CF used the oportunity to develop more shooters and techniques.


----------



## Sig_Des (22 Sep 2010)

SteveB said:
			
		

> As an aside, who won the Queen's Medal?
> 
> Also agreed that CFSAC and the team training therefore is an excellent tool to improve marksmanship forces wide.  I only wish that the CF used the oportunity to develop more shooters and techniques.



Cpl Dave Ferguson from LFAA for the Res Side, and Pte Tim Hiscock, from 1 RCR.


----------



## NavyShooter (24 Sep 2010)

BW7,

Many thanks, 4th in stage 2 was a pleasing result, moving me up to 7th in Reg Force at the end of stage 2. 

This year, they scrapped the Elite 50, and went with the "Combined Fire Aggregate" award, recognizing excellence in Combat Pistol, plus Stage 1, and Stage 2.

I slipped into 3rd place in the Combined Fire Aggregate.    I was quite pleased with that finish.

Did you end up getting ahold of one of the little match aide-memoires that were distributed?  I'm looking for feedback on them.

I think some of the folks didn't understand the wind chart on the back, I'm wondering if I should find a simpler one.

NS


----------



## Sig_Des (24 Sep 2010)

NavyShooter said:
			
		

> Did you end up getting ahold of one of the little match aide-memoires that were distributed?  I'm looking for feedback on them.
> 
> I think some of the folks didn't understand the wind chart on the back, I'm wondering if I should find a simpler one.
> 
> NS



I did use one of the aid-memoires, gave me a quick ref to try to add up some of my scores, also a way to study my matches ahead of time.  Wind chart actually made sense to me once I thought about it, and I used it for some of my dope adjustments.

I was actually really happy with Match 3 and 4, liked that situational and barricade shooting was incorporated.


----------



## NavyShooter (24 Sep 2010)

Beadwindow 7 said:
			
		

> I did use one of the aid-memoires, gave me a quick ref to try to add up some of my scores, also a way to study my matches ahead of time.  Wind chart actually made sense to me once I thought about it, and I used it for some of my dope adjustments.
> 
> I was actually really happy with Match 3 and 4, liked that situational and barricade shooting was incorporated.



Then I'm pleased, and will call that little project a success.  

The barrier shoot cost me a bunch of points.  I was going to kneel against it, but decided to do a sitting behind cover (without having practiced the sitting much at all this year) and pooched my way into an 18 on that phase in M4.  I didn't do much better in Stage 2.  

I need to practice that some more...

NS


----------



## Sig_Des (24 Sep 2010)

NavyShooter said:
			
		

> The barrier shoot cost me a bunch of points.  I was going to kneel against it, but decided to do a sitting behind cover (without having practiced the sitting much at all this year) and pooched my way into an 18 on that phase in M4.  I didn't do much better in Stage 2.
> 
> I need to practice that some more...
> 
> NS



We were fortunate enough to practice this some at our gun camp, and I found something that I like, similar to this,






however I ring my index finger over the top of the handguard to control recoil. I also stand into an almost low crouch. Worked well enough for me.


----------



## NavyShooter (24 Sep 2010)

Hmmmmmmmmm   P-mag goodness........


----------



## Sig_Des (24 Sep 2010)

If I shoot again next year, I'm gonna try to use my H-Bar C8. Service Weapon and all


----------

