Draft Revision of C7/C8 PWT System (2-3-4).

[TCBF]

...  You have a list of PWT(s) with core skill testing requirement, where the Commander can pick which apply to a given situation. ...
That way they can also be tailored for theatre specific or training situations.

- Bingo.

- As for C7 effectiveness at ranges over 300m, I think many civ 'service rifle' hobbyists would wonder why their
third-world built AR15 clone can wax woodchucks at 400 plus (yes, with 55 grain bullets), but we can't (or more to the point, are not expected to) hit
a Figure 11 at that range with 62 grains.  Heck, I fired a worn-out FN C1A1 in competitions where we ran down from 600 and started shooting from 500, and they weren't as 'tight' as our C7s.

 

[vonGarvin]

...  You have a list of PWT(s) with core skill testing requirement, where the Commander can pick which apply to a given situation. ...
That way they can also be tailored for theatre specific or training situations.

- Bingo.

Disagree.  Let us not forget that the C7 family (C7, C7A1, C7A2) is used by the Canadian Forces, not just the infantry.  The tests are"general" enough to apply to the Bos'un on HMCS (insert city name or tribe name here) as well as the private in (insert regiment name here).  They have known scores, are universally applicable, and let us not forget that they are just the gateway to level four shooting: individual field firing.  It is a gallery range shoot "to confirm that the firer is an effective daylight battle shot."  In other words, to confirm, with live ammunition in a controlled, standard setting, CF wide, that the soldier, sailor or airman can apply all that he or she has been taught.  Once he or she passes PWT 3, then he or she can then progress into individual and then collective field firing.  This should be done annually by all in the CF.  Now, I know it isn't, but that's another argument.  As for TMST, I'm fairly certain that individual shooting in Afghanistan applies the same principles, positions, etc as it would in the high arctic and in the deepest jungles.  Yes, rifle maintenance will vary, but that's not the point, and this is where the argument should be heading into collective training.  Remember, the PWT is just an individual training confirmation.

- As for C7 effectiveness at ranges over 300m, I think many civ 'service rifle' hobbyists would wonder why their
third-world built AR15 clone can wax woodchucks at 400 plus (yes, with 55 grain bullets), but we can't (or more to the point, are not expected to) hit
a Figure 11 at that range with 62 grains.  Heck, I fired a worn-out FN C1A1 in competitions where we ran down from 600 and started shooting from 500, and they weren't as 'tight' as our C7s.

It has nothing to do with the rifle hobbyist who can shoot stuff that isn't firing back.  It is about the Canadian Forces' standard to hit stuff at various ranges, and it has everything to do with grouping standards.  Remembering that the CF standard for grouping is 150mm at 100 m, and remembering the theory of a group, and also assuming that the width of an average sized man is 450mm, then a person who can hit 150mm at 100 m consistently will hit 450mm at 300 m.  That's where it came from.  And that's prone position.  In the standing, the grouping standard is 450mm.  Therefore, we expect all Canadian Forces members to consistently hit a man sized target out to 300m when that firer is prone, and out to 100m when that firer is standing. 

 

[TCBF]

- Bingo.

Disagree.  Let us not forget that the C7 family (C7, C7A1, C7A2) is used by the Canadian Forces, not just the infantry.  The tests are"general" enough to apply to the Bos'un on HMCS (insert city name or tribe name here) as well as the private in (insert regiment name here).  They have known scores, are universally applicable, and let us not forget that they are just the gateway to level four shooting: individual field firing.  It is a gallery range shoot "to confirm that the firer is an effective daylight battle shot."  In other words, to confirm, with live ammunition in a controlled, standard setting, CF wide, that the soldier, sailor or airman can apply all that he or she has been taught.  Once he or she passes PWT 3, then he or she can then progress into individual and then collective field firing.  This should be done annually by all in the CF.  Now, I know it isn't, but that's another argument.  As for TMST, I'm fairly certain that individual shooting in Afghanistan applies the same principles, positions, etc as it would in the high arctic and in the deepest jungles.  Yes, rifle maintenance will vary, but that's not the point, and this is where the argument should be heading into collective training.  Remember, the PWT is just an individual training confirmation.It has nothing to do with the rifle hobbyist who can shoot stuff that isn't firing back.  It is about the Canadian Forces' standard to hit stuff at various ranges, and it has everything to do with grouping standards.  Remembering that the CF standard for grouping is 150mm at 100 m, and remembering the theory of a group, and also assuming that the width of an average sized man is 450mm, then a person who can hit 150mm at 100 m consistently will hit 450mm at 300 m.  That's where it came from.  And that's prone position.  In the standing, the grouping standard is 450mm.  Therefore, we expect all Canadian Forces members to consistently hit a man sized target out to 300m when that firer is prone, and out to 100m when that firer is standing.

- For the 'menu' approach, then, I would specify to what level PWT (by trade or position) the soldier should qualify, then to what Serials in the Program he would be firing next. They may differ from sub-unit to sub-unit. Perhaps those whose grouping ability 'gets more from the rifle' would be allowed/expected to fire from longer ranges.

- I do think the present system is fairly reasonable - the chokepoint is more range time and ammunition than doctrine.  Something else we once did... uhhh... Coaching, yeah, thats it: Coaching.

- When we traded our SMG 9mm C1s for Carbine C8s in 1988, the new shoots dictated we would only fire to  PWT 2, but automatic fire was only tested at PWT3.  Ironically, we were tested firing auto with the SMG, but not with the weapon that replaced it.  That is when I began to think about the way we assign ammunition. Even though we may only fire to PWT2, a comd should have the ability to add "Unit x will also fire Serials 203, 204 and 207."  Natch, that would be an authority for the allotment of ammunition as well.

 

[vonGarvin]

- For the 'menu' approach, then, I would specify to what level PWT (by trade or position) the soldier should qualify, then to what Serials in the Program he would be firing next. They may differ from sub-unit to sub-unit. Perhaps those whose grouping ability 'gets more from the rifle' would be allowed/expected to fire from longer ranges.

That is entirely reasonable.

- I do think the present system is fairly reasonable - the chokepoint is more range time and ammunition than doctrine.  Something else we once did... uhhh... Coaching, yeah, thats it: Coaching.

I couldn't agree with you more on this.

- When we traded our SMG 9mm C1s for Carbine C8s in 1988, the new shoots dictated we would only fire to  PWT 2, but automatic fire was only tested at PWT3.  Ironically, we were tested firing auto with the SMG, but not with the weapon that replaced it.  That is when I began to think about the way we assign ammunition. Even though we may only fire to PWT2, a comd should have the ability to add "Unit x will also fire Serials 203, 204 and 207."  Natch, that would be an authority for the allotment of ammunition as well.

I'll have to re-dig the reference for C8 PWTs for what they do.  Having said that, rememember the SMG was pretty well spray-and-pray, so autofire was about it. LOL.  At least with the carbine (1988 model even) you could hit out further.  And we infantry didn't get it: all got rifles.

 

[TCBF]

- My reply is slow, as my search for historical documents necessitated me donning a bike helmet and safety line and descending into my man-cave in the basement.  Anyway..

CFP 317(1) WEAPONS VOLUME 1 SUB-MACHINE GUN, 9MM, C1
30 Apr 76, Ch 3 - 1983-03-09

Range Courses:8 (Introductory Course, Grouping Practice, Zeroing, Preliminary Course, Intermediate Course, 9mm SMG All Arms PWT, Daylight Prep for Night Firing, Night Firing)
Total rounds 9mm ball:  446
Rounds fired auto: 82
Grouping Standard: 4" at 30m.
Ranges fired at: 15m to 100m.

CFP 317(18) WEAPONS VOLUME 18 THE RIFLE 5.56mm C7 AND CARBINE 5.56mm C8
21 Feb 86, Ch 1 - 30 Jun 86

This is where my memory failed me:  Turns out in 1986, they wrote only ONE PWT, it was for the C7 and C8 both, but C8 did NOT shoot at the 300.
C7 and C8 had ten range practices before the PWT.  Practice 7 was bursts (60 rounds).  Needless to say, we probably grouped, zeroed, then straight to the PWT.  The separate PWTs with the auto fire only on PWT3 must have been introduced at a later date. 

 

[SeanNewman]

I agree that coaching is incredibly important and not given to troops as much as it should be.

However, the PWTs themselves are still very ineffective in their current order and the way they are presented (which will all get fixed).

 

[vonGarvin]

To amplify on Petamocto's remark:
PWT 1-3 tests the battle shot at varying ranges and complexities in shooting.  PWT 4 then starts at the basics and then progresses, in one shoot.  The aim is to take elements of PWT 4 and "seed them" from 1-3 as required in order to make the system truly progressive at all ranges.  Then PWT 4 will indeed be a truly advanced application shoot at all ranges from xxx metres to "in your face" ranges.

 

[Fusaki]

A related idea...

I'm starting to think that if I was King of The Army, the PWT3 would be conducted immediately after the Battle Fitness Test:  A 13km march to the range, then drop your rucks and head to the firing point, then after the shoot you do your casualty drag.

I think it can be done fairly easily.  Just divide the sub-unit into relays back at base, and then release the relays at intervals to take a 13km route to the range.  The intervals should be far enough apart that the previous relay will have finished shooting by the time the next one arrives.

I think there are a lot of guys who would be able to do the ruck but not the shoot.  Likewise, there are guys who would be able to do the shoot, but not after a ruck.  The reality of the situation, though, is that one skill without the other is sort of pointless.  We need to weed out those who can make it through the BFT on intestinal fortitude but are pretty much useless afterword, and those who can shoot well when fresh, but not under combat conditions.

Thoughts?

 

[Haggis]

A related idea...

I'm starting to think that if I was King of The Army, the PWT3 would be conducted immediately after the Battle Fitness Test:  A 13km march to the range, then drop your rucks and head to the firing point, then after the shoot you do your casualty drag.

I think it can be done fairly easily.  Just divide the sub-unit into relays back at base, and then release the relays at intervals to take a 13km route to the range.  The intervals should be far enough apart that the previous relay will have finished shooting by the time the next one arrives.

I think there are a lot of guys who would be able to do the ruck but not the shoot.  Likewise, there are guys who would be able to do the shoot, but not after a ruck.  The reality of the situation, though, is that one skill without the other is sort of pointless.  We need to weed out those who can make it through the BFT on intestinal fortitude but are pretty much useless afterword, and those who can shoot well when fresh, but not under combat conditions.

Thoughts?

This sounds an awful lot like the old "March & Shoot" competitions of yore.

 

[vonGarvin]

Thoughts?

Very good idea in theory.  Application may suck; however, with some tweaking, it could very well be achievable.  Remembering that the BFT is just to get you to the line of departure, doing "something" at the end could reinforce that though you pass or fail as an individual, those who wish to "rock that time" in 90 minutes, fail to realise that at such a pace, they may not be capable of performing to peak standard.  So, for leaders, start as a platoon, finish as a platoon, fire as a platoon.  Of course, the big headache would be conducting the BFT for reserve units away from bases.  The shoot (PWT) may not be realistic.  But "something else" may be.

 

[dapaterson]

And then we can get Gold, Silver and Bronze badges, depending on the level we achieve!  And wear them on our Garrison Dress jackets that look suspicously like rejected Canadian Tire hunting clothes, that we wear with our thigh-high spit-shone boots.


And wear an onion on our belts, which was the style at the time.

 

[SeanNewman]

And then we can get Gold, Silver and Bronze badges...

Ha!  What a crazy idea.  Something like that would never happen.    What kind of warriors do you think we are?

I agree that having the march and shoot portions separate is kind of silly, and in fact that brigades still can have those sorts of competitions occasionally but obviously it's not standardized.

I am certainly not King of the Army, either, but for the 2 mils (out of 6,400) that I do have control over, I do have King-like powers for those paper-thin arcs (changing the PWTs, changing the drills, etc).  Technically LFDTS is the owner of the books, but that's what SME Cells are for.  For example, what Navy dude in LFDTS is going to tell OIC Sniper that he's wrong on sniper matters and needs to amend his doctrine suggestion?  Likewise, I am surrounded by people who know everything there is to know about shooting (certainly a hell of a lot more than I do) so any of these changes go though the filter of all of their expertise before it leaves the office.

Anything I change has to go through TechnoViking's office (he's not my direct CoC boss but he is my quasi SME boss for doctrine), so if you can convince him to add his signature block to my suggested changes maybe I can slip in "The BFT is mandatory immediately preceding the conduct of the PWT3" in 3 point typeface.

 

[PanaEng]

And then we can get Gold, Silver and Bronze badges, depending on the level we achieve!  And wear them on our Garrison Dress jackets that look suspicously like rejected Canadian Tire hunting clothes, that we wear with our thigh-high spit-shone boots.

And wear an onion on our belts, which was the style at the time.

I want my jump smock back...

[on topic] coupling them is a great idea in principle but hard to implement and more so with the reserves. [/on topic]