|
Post by montrose on May 14, 2018 20:55:08 GMT -6
The US Army is considering fielding a submachine gun. www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a20650291/the-us-army-is-looking-for-its-first-new-submachine-gun-in-75-years/Part of the justification is that an infantry/SOF soldier in a combat unit has far better training and ability with the current rifle than a soft skilled soldier in a support unit. One shoots thousands of rounds a year, the other 40. The idea is to have a weapon with a lower training requirement that still packs combat utility. Meaning, line up the weapons you use with he training the soldier will receive to find the best available weapon for that role. At LBH, the poor state of marksmanship training meant there should have been tight fire discipline, especially for any firing over 200 meters. We know this did not happen, with much firing at crazy ranges like 8-900 meters. This shows not just a lack of soldier skill, but very bad skill, knowledge and ability of the officers and noncommissioned officers. In sum: 1. Start with weapon capability. What are the performance data for that weapon? 2. Look at training. Are the individuals assigned that weapon fully trained to maximize weapon capability? You would be surprised to learn the answer is frequently no. 3. Adjust tactics, techniques and procedures to line up weapon ability with soldier ability.
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on May 16, 2018 12:03:36 GMT -6
Often, the reverse of logic (inscrutability) is the way to go - see ------ It moved, Sir! IBSooI! youtu.be/am76xV8Aubk
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Jun 20, 2018 7:40:20 GMT -6
A horse! A horse!! A Kingdom for a horse!!!
|
|
|
Post by herosrest on Jun 21, 2018 18:18:33 GMT -6
|
|