[Dean Speir]

Tipped by our friend Chuck Karwan (who is taking the longest time to get to this Forum!), I found a most interesting piece on-line at http://www.tsrapac.org/Vol_36_3.pdf, the Journal of the Texas State Rifle Association (the webmaster for which site if our old SSBB pal, Jim Nicholson):

TSRA Rifle Team Teaches Army Squad
Designated Marksmen at Camp Bullis​

In early March this year, a group of Texans gathered at a hotel in San Antonio. They included a John Deere employee, a Dallas Motorcycle Policeman, a TXU chemist, a retired Chief Warrant Officer, a photographer, the owner of an insurance company, and others. At the request of the US Army, these men had taken two weeks of unpaid vacation away from their jobs and families to teach the first-ever class of what would become known as Squad Designated Marksmen (SDM) in the US Army.

Good piece, and Chuck's comment was:

The Army asked 'TSRA Rifle Team Members to train Squad Designated Marksmen (SDM) for the US Army's 1 Cav Division before they deploy overseas, as position shooting, the use of the shooting sling, reading environmental conditions, and shooting the M14 rifle are now lost arts in today's Army. While it's a little scary having target shooters teaching "sniping" this is exactly why we have a Civilian Marksmanship Program (CMP)!!

Sam, why haven't you reported on this?

BTW: read page 20 of that newsletter carefully and consider the possibilities.

 

[Guest]

Texicans instruct 1st Cav "Snipers"

All right Dean. Now you've hit one of my sore spots, and yes, I see the quotation marks. :soap:

TSRA is instructing 1st Cav's Dedicated Marksmen... not Snipers!!

There is a difference... a BIG difference between the two.... both in equipment, training and, most importantly employment. You are doing essentially what main stream media does... exchange words to sensationalize the story (though you've only done it in your heading)... kind of like calling a Semi Auto AR-15 a Machine Gun! (Though in that case at least they have some deniability in that an AR and a M16/M4 look exactly the same). You are calling a Club a Spade!

[/off soap box]

What a way to start my day! :roll:

 

[Dean Speir]

 

I didn't do it, I tell you, I didn't do it. And if I had it to do all over again, I still didn't do it!

There's a reason why it was in quotation marks within both the subject header, and within the quoted material by Chuck.

 

 

[csmkersh]

Sam, why haven't you reported on this?

We Texicans don't like to brag. :sm_angel:

There's a lot of good articles at http://www.tsra.comincluding just about every one of John Lott's articles.

note to Gunny: Even if the AR had full-auto capabilities, it wouldn't be a machine gun. :bolt:

Techincally, it would be since it's not chambered in a pistol caliber. I'd just prefer something like an M2.

 

[Guest]

Ok, so if I always put something in quotation marks, no matter who many times I do it, it is all right? And if that something is repeated through out the web/world it those repeating it don't put in the quotation marks they are the ones that are wrong (?!?) and I've got deniability cause I put them in quotes (?!?) even though I was the one that initiated the something?!?!?!?!?

OK, Now I think I understand!

So the next time some looney goes postal with a rifle and it's reported as a Sniper Rifle and him a Sniper it will be fine as long as they put it in quotes?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?(ad infidum)

Might that be how Clip and Magazine became cumulated?

B.S. !!!!

 

[Alarmed]

So the next time some looney goes postal with a rifle and it's reported as a Sniper Rifle and him a Sniper it will be fine as long as they put it in quotes?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?(ad infidum)

Isn't that what they are going to do anyway? Even an Air Force general reported Ronald Regan's body was being transported on Air Force One. The media I could have overlooked, but the general should have known better. You know the old saying, "crap flows from the top downward". Or something like that.

 

[Dean Speir]

Fernando, make Schmit's Next C*A*R*E package Decaf…

Here what Chuck Karwan had to say about that… I think he's befuddled by the mysteries of Forum registration, and so is handing it off to me.

Dean, Re: Your friend's comments, I too know that a "Dedicated marks­man" (DM) is not a "Sniper" just as the "Beltway Sniper" was not a sniper. However, in the case of a military Dedicated marksman the difference is largely the lower level of training and in SOME cases a less precise shooting rifle. Both a sniper and a DM have precisely the same mission - "To use precision rifle fire (normally from an optically-sighted rifle, at long range and from a concealed position) in support of his unit's tactical mission."

For all intents and purposes a DM is just a lower level sniper who needs and uses precisely the same skills of precision marksmanship, target ID, stalking, camouflage, etc. Anyone that thinks a tuned M14 with a good solidly mounted scope, firing match grade ammunition is not a sniper rifle, does not know very much about sniper rifles. They sure did the job in Vietnam.

Indeed it is a historical fact that the Army snipers, using scoped M14 variants in Vietnam had far more kills than the better publicized Marine snipers even though the Army program got a much later start. Indeed, as near as I can tell the sniper with the most confirmed kills in Vietnam was a 9th Division sniper hardly anybody has heard of named SGT Waldron that used an XM21 (M14) sniper rifle. Even more amazing, he got all his kills in something like only four months, and a reliable source reports that his actual kills were at least double his confirmed kills

Since historically 90+% of military anti-personnel sniping is actually done at 600 meters and in, it would be a mighty bad idea to let a decent DM take a shot at you at 600 meters using one of the M14 DM rifles. The USMC DMR, also an M14, will typically shoot sub-MOA. The Army and USMC Special Purpose rifles (SPR) typically shoot 3/4 MOA all day long with the 77-grain Black Hill Match ammo they are issued with, but don't you dare call them sniper rifles or their operators snipers. Is there a certain sniper snobbery out there?

All the best, Chuckles

 

[csmkersh]

Snipers & their kills

Francis Pegahmagabow W.W. I Canada 378
Billy Sing W.W. I AIF (Australia) 150
Henry Norwest W.W. I Canada 115
Herbert W. McBride W.W. I Canada/U.S.A. 100+
Neville Methven W.W. I So. Africa 100
Johnson Paudash W.W. I Canada 88


Simo Hayha W.W. II Finland 542
Ivan Sidorenko W.W. II U.S.S.R. 500
Nikolay Yakovlevich Ilyin W.W. II U.S.S.R. 496
Kulbertinov W.W. II U.S.S.R. 487
Mikhail Budenkov W.W. II U.S.S.R. 437
Fyodor Matveevich Okhlopkov W.W. II U.S.S.R. 429
Lyudmila M. Pavlichenko (F) W.W. II U.S.S.R. 309

Adelbert Waldron III Vietnam U.S. Army 109
Charles B. Mawhinney Vietnam U.S.M.C 103
Eric R. England Vietnam U.S.M.C 98
Carlos Hathcock Vietnam U.S.M.C 93
Thomas R. Leonard Vietnam U.S.M.C. 74
Steve Suttles Vietnam U.S.M.C 63
Joseph T. Ward Vietnam U.S.M.C 63

(F) denotes female

 

[Guest]

Dean, I'm sure you realize exactly why on your SSBB MemRep Award is mounted a Clip of .45 Long Colt Black Talons, yes? This one is mine.

Now, back to the task at hand (and I've just gotten up from a restful sleep and have yet to have my first cup of coffee).

Aaarrrrrrrggggg!

I am not debating that there is an overlap of skill sets, nor the capability of equipment type… what I am is that they do NOT have the same mission.

I can not speak for the Army's use of DMs, and my info on the USMC DM is somewhat dated but lets look at one or two things (from a simple Marine Mind).

USMC Scout-Sniper, 8541, is a Cat "B" MOS. There is no (as of yet) MOS for Dedicated Marksman.

Look closely at the 8541 Job Title… Scout-Sniper. There are reasons for this exact verbiage.

~ The majority of work done by this MOS is Scouting. They are a Company/Flag Grade asset (Bn, Regt, Div)… their eyes and ears beyond the FEBA. Normally working in two man teams (both 8541s) they snoop and poop behind enemy lines, and yes, they do engage targets of opportunity, and even more rarely - specific targets.

Look closely at the Dedicated Marksmen title. One thing the Military does well if Job Discriptions.

~ DMs are a Field Grade asset and operate within the battle area. They were design to give the Company/Platoon Commander an asset with greater capability then that of the iron sighted small bore rifle prolific at this level. They work in conjunction with squads for this purpose. Their primary function is longer range marksman engagement.

Both use a purpose designed firearm. One is classified as a Sniper Rifle, the other as a Special Purpose Rifle.

You, yourself, said it in your first paragraph…

However, in the case of a military Dedicated marksman the difference is largely the lower level of training and in SOME cases a less precise shooting rifle

Therein lies the rub! If a DM had the same level of training, utilized the same equipment, and was tasked the same he would be a…. are you ready?…. Scout-Sniper. But they are not.

By the type of reasoning your utilizing if I took a Precision Rifle Course at GTC or TR (or had TSRA train me) I myself would become a "Sniper" as I have a Precision Rifle that is used in some circles as a Sniper Rifle and I would now have only a lower level of training. KEWL!

The Military Powers that Be perceived a much needed requirement and conceived the Dedicated Marksman. However, the Bean Counters that Be crunched numbers and declared that it wasn't cost effective to change TO&Es to allow for Field Grade Scout-Sniper Assets…. what with the increased personnel requirement, training requirements, and equipment procurement/logistics. So, and I'm speculating somewhat here, a compromise was reached. Procure (read build) a Special Purpose Rifle in a medium bore with an optic sight. Issue these as a Field Grade asset (read Company/Platoon/Squad TE). Commanders can then select individuals that show proficiency in small arms employment for further training in the use of this rifle. Training would be (at that time, though this, as all things, could change) non-MOS producing, but, if you will, an additional duty that would be mentioned in dispatches (read performance evaluations). Doing so would not change the TO, training would be considerable less both in Man hours (and washout rate), time and $$, and the cost to increasing the TE would be minimal. As an auxiliary benefit Scout-Sniper teams could now utilize the SPR in their capacity giving both Team Members a like chambered rifle reducing ammo logistics while increasing they capability (read M14 v M16).

Two things I am sure of.

#1 - A Dedicated Marksman is not a Scout-Sniper.
#2 - Both are quite Proud of their given Title.

Just as a Magazine is not a Clip, an Armorer is not a Gun Smith, a Dedicated Marksman is not a Scout-Sniper.

Now, I'm going to get my first cup of coffee… a nice strong cup of dark breakfast brew… one teaspoon of sugar with half and half thank you.

 

[Dean Speir]

a nice strong cup of dark breakfast brew… one teaspoon of sugar with half and half thank you.

What a wussy way to start your day, even at 1051 hours!

 

[Guest]

Hey! I'm drinking it out of a Springfield Armory "Tactically Proven" cup complete with an image of a Kitted out 4 man SWAT Team!!!

[IMG=left]http://www.springfield-armory.com/shop/shop_image/product/full/springfield_coolstuff/GE5601-M.jpg[/IMG]

 

[Barry in IN]

One of our regular, and top competitors in NRA HighPower around here (central Indiana) has instructed members of the miltary on the M14 for several years that I know of. Last I knew, his students were Army and Navy.

Even before the recent re-discovery of the need for a strong military (or has it?), and the "unpleasantness" in the Mid East, there was usually a detachment of Navy personnel at Camp Atterbury, IN just for rifle training. Thankfully, at least a portion of the Navy was planning ahead.

Sad, but true: Thanks to base closures, Camp Atterbury (near Edinburgh, IN), is one of the few military ranges left in the U.S. with known distance (KD) capability to 1,000 yds plus.
Range time on any is at a premium now. Most of these ranges are Army or USMC, of course. Supposedly the Navy found that Atterbury was available to use without so much political hassle as some of the more active installations.

Atterbury is pretty small as military installations go. It was constructed as a WWII processing center, and the Army still maintains a small presence there. Enough that you don't break the speed limit!
Incidentally, while in High School, my Dad had a summer job there building the place as part of one of the gov't programs then. Naturally, the next year, he found himself going through there getting his physical, shots, uniforms, etc, and boarding a train for Ft. Belvoir, VA!

Back to the civilian-provided training-
I wonder how many American lives have been saved due to this training?

If this isn't a case of the Civilian Marksmanship Program (former DCM) serving it's purpose as intended, I don't know what is. It's not the exactly way it was originally planned to serve the military, but it seems to have served it nevertheless.

 

[Alarmed]

Sad, but true: Thanks to base closures, Camp Atterbury (near Edinburgh, IN), is one of the few military ranges left in the U.S. with known distance (KD) capability to 1,000 yds plus.
Range time on any is at a premium now.

Arnold Engineering Air Force base in Tullahoma, Tennessee now has a 1000 yard range of sorts. They extend the 600 yard range by closing off a road during certain times.

I have yet to shoot a 1000 yard range, & haven't shot a 600 since 1985. but I have been preaching for years to anybody that would listen for a couple of marksman with long range weapons per squad of infantry. I still say that every single man should be qualified to do the job & handle the weapon, even if he isn't designated to the job.

 

[csmkersh]

Half and half what, Schmit? Half coffee and half Gentleman Jack?

 

[LIProgun]

So what?

Hey! I'm drinking it out of a Springfield Armory "Tactically Proven" cup complete with an image of a Kitted out 4 man SWAT Team!!!

I saw Dean drinking day-old black coffee out of a rusty .50 cal ammo can.

 

[Barry in IN]

Alarmed,
I know that on at least one Atterbury range, they have to close down a road to get the full 1K also. So it's probably to their benefit that there isn't that much activity there.

And, of course, it wouldn't be a rifle range without the oibligatory cease fires due to idiots in the impact area. Part of the place is used by the Dept of Nat Resources as a wildlife area, so the idiots appear there. Build it (make it dangerous), and they will come.