Do you have to wear a helmet on a qualification range?

I've always worn soft caps on the pistol range. At first I thought it was because it was run by our Warrants. Warrant Officers KNOW comfort.

Actually it is the commanders call, I ran a range for 2 years, unless the post has an over riding rule usually something range control put in, the uniform for qualification is the commanders call.

Our unit only requires hearing and eye protection for qualifying. If we did reflexive fire where we are moving then we wore more, but qualifying was done in PC and no other gear. This is for both M-16 and M-9.

Ft. Bragg Range Control is very strict on protective gear. I was once running concealed carry pistol range. Range control passed by and immediately turned into our range. Maybe it was the fact that we were not wearing helmets or maybe the fact that we were wearing civilian clothes. The range control man, yelled "alright who's in charge here?" I came up to him with a paper in hand because I knew he was about to freeze our range. I showed him a memo signed by both our Group commander and range control. He then said "carry on."
We were getting ready to go into a location to do low vis missions. Civilian clothes was our uniform and therefore wanted guys to get comfortable drawing from the concealed posture. Your training should mirror your mission, and SOPs of course.

I've done it with soft caps and ACH when I was a MP/Sig qualifying in garrison.I've shot all of my weapons with a Santa Claus stocking cap on that said Redskins on the front. fired my .50 from the truck with shorts, t shirt, and flip flops. Only in garrison have I had to wear full battle rattle to qualify. I will say shorts, t shirt and flip flops does make it a LOT more relaxing when shooting. There is a big wide gap between firing a weapon in garrison, and firing it deployed.

PS: why is she leaning backwards to shoot that M9?

Unit SOP.

My BN has reintroduced shooting without an ACH, since for our people, if they use their weapons, it is most likely that they will NOT have an ACH or RBAV handy . I think the Army, as a whole, may have become a little too risk averse, and may benefit from a re-emphasis on relevant training, which, necessarily, will be a dynamic entity.

I've seen this on several ranges here on post with trainees as of late. Before escalating EOF procedures I called DME and the SGM informed me that there are two phases of BRM now that the Soldiers are shooting in patrol caps as per the POI. Lots of changes to lots of training.

Based on FM 3-23.35 (June2003) - Combat Pistol Training there is nothing listed regarding the wearing of ACH or body armor. I have also reviewed TC 3-22.9 (May2016) Rifle and Carbine and it states the following:
"A common misconception is that wearing combat gear will cause the
zero to change. Adding combat gear to the Soldier's body does not cause the
sights or the reticle to move. The straight line between the center of the rear
sight aperture and the tip of the front sight post either intersects with the
trajectory at the desired point, or it does not. Soldiers should be aware of their
own performance, to include a tendency to pull their shots in a certain
direction, across various positions, and with or without combat gear. A shift
in point of impact in one shooting position may not correspond to a shift in
the point of impact from a different shooting position."
I remember that the regulation used to state that the wear of ACH and or body armor was optional. This left it open for the commanders and 1SG's to conduct the training in a way that would support the end task but also allow the flexibility in training. Too many commanders and 1SG's seem to use the regulation as the end all of the issue, if it doesn't say it in the regulation then they can't do it. Instead the regulations are being designed and written to give the commanders and NCO's the ability to think for themselves and develop training that meets the end standard but also engages the soldiers to learn and perform to their highest ability.

I've never understood the wearing of the ACH on the range. That is not something that we did in the Marine Corps or in Law Enforcement; however, we always have in the Guard. I believe that the Army is bad about overdoing safety. Just use common sense and go out their and qualify. If the Army focused as much on marksmenship as they do safety, the branch as a whole would be in better shape. I've seen too many Soldiers all geared up but can't put a red dot on a target and hit it if their life depended on it.