Posted on Jun 25, 2019
Now that only one attempt is allowed for weapons qual, how do we get units to train to standard?
16.9K
67
62
25
25
0
Marksmanship
Rifle Marksmanship Instructor Course
Primary Marksmanship Instructor
Small Arms Marksmanship Instructor
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 19
1
1
0
It's only one and done if you meet the standard, even the absolute minimum. That's what that reg means. If you bolo, you fire again.
(1)
(0)
SFC(P) (Join to see)
Only one additional attempt is given though. Soldiers don't get to keep trying indefinitely until they finally qualify.
(0)
(0)
SFC Robert Walton
SSgt Joseph Baptist - The first part is yes. Your second part makes no sense. If you fail to Qualify with all the training and attempts then you are a BOLO and a no go at this station and are subject to a Chapter. Not any different that a Civilian job if you can't do the Job your fired. Pretty simple actually.
This Is not the Boy Scouts.
This Is not the Boy Scouts.
(0)
(0)
SFC Robert Walton
WoW your an forensic writing specialist as well I am so amazed, The senior enlisted in the Air Force should be humbled when they meet you.
(0)
(0)
SFC Robert Walton
correct and seeing how you have the witnesses and knowledge your part of the problem for letting it happen.
I was shocked when I left a "field focused" unit to a "desk focused" unit and saw that weapons qual "pencil whipping" was done wholesale and blatantly. every thing after this is what I responded to would appear it has be edited, but I can't show proof. However the records passed your desk and you saw the people firing and did not go to the Higher chain of command? ( that you remind us not once but twice that you spoke to) did you actually see the shooter and scorer and then see the result cross your desk or your reporting some thing told to you by others that barely qualified? Originally you said you could see they were pencil whipped. SOME THING SMELLS. MO
I was shocked when I left a "field focused" unit to a "desk focused" unit and saw that weapons qual "pencil whipping" was done wholesale and blatantly. every thing after this is what I responded to would appear it has be edited, but I can't show proof. However the records passed your desk and you saw the people firing and did not go to the Higher chain of command? ( that you remind us not once but twice that you spoke to) did you actually see the shooter and scorer and then see the result cross your desk or your reporting some thing told to you by others that barely qualified? Originally you said you could see they were pencil whipped. SOME THING SMELLS. MO
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
Place the additional duty status of "Marksmanship Coordinator" on one or more of your best shots and if you already have one, ask him or her just what in the hell are they doing to insure 100% participation and qualification.
Don't say that it can't be done either because that was my job from Sept. 1985 to June 2002. We attained 100% participation and qualification for that time period and it continues to this day. There are so many training aids available and some you can make.
I would schedule classes during the months leading up to weapons qual and would make it mandatory for each section to attend including the medics and payroll clerks, typists and other assorted non combat MOS's. Because when it comes right down to it we are all riflemen and women in any branch of the service.
Don't say that it can't be done either because that was my job from Sept. 1985 to June 2002. We attained 100% participation and qualification for that time period and it continues to this day. There are so many training aids available and some you can make.
I would schedule classes during the months leading up to weapons qual and would make it mandatory for each section to attend including the medics and payroll clerks, typists and other assorted non combat MOS's. Because when it comes right down to it we are all riflemen and women in any branch of the service.
(1)
(0)
SFC(P) (Join to see)
I totally agree. TC 3.22.9 has the information that soldiers need to know. I'm not sure always going to be the best shooter that is going to be the best person to understand how to coordinate quality training and act as an effective coach to less skilled shooters. Having an identified individual to help guide the rest of the unit gives it some teeth though.
(1)
(0)
MAJ (Join to see)
SFC(P) (Join to see) The problem still exists of having shooters where the normal techniques/guidelines fail and that can’t be identified during dry fire but rather by teaching and adapting while taking the time to correctly zero before even attempting to qualify.
(0)
(0)
SFC(P) (Join to see)
MAJ (Join to see) - I would refer you to TC 3-20.0 Integrated Weapons Training Strategy https://armypubs.army.mil/ProductMaps/PubForm/Details.aspx?PUB_ID=1007143&fbclid=IwAR1U_o9xsaMOkCiUntUH7xZyiL7K1ci-4WeqDEMJTy6A3RgeduBA3YV1lKo . Chapter 3 covers Individual Weapons Training. Many units are not training to standard. Many units also lack the leadership wherewithal required to effectively develop effective coaches and mentor soldiers (a community of effective observers and communicators), in addition to protecting time/ resources on the training schedule to plan for success. These are issues that can be addressed in several ways, but continuously firing until a soldier meets qualification standards is not acceptable - not by my standards, but by the Army's. The concept of deliberate practice (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-sjUoGO250) is imperative to making training effective.
Personal story: I used to be in the bottom 5% of the Army in terms of marksmanship ability. For years I struggled to qualify. Multiple attempts every time - just squeaked by. After getting decent instruction, building a team of mentors to talk through things, and spending countless hours in deliberate practice - I earned the President's Hundred tab and Distinguished Rifleman's Badge. I tried to take every opportunity to spread that knowledge and experience to the rest of the military. We cannot continue to send soldiers overseas with skills that don't allow them to protect themselves.
Personal story: I used to be in the bottom 5% of the Army in terms of marksmanship ability. For years I struggled to qualify. Multiple attempts every time - just squeaked by. After getting decent instruction, building a team of mentors to talk through things, and spending countless hours in deliberate practice - I earned the President's Hundred tab and Distinguished Rifleman's Badge. I tried to take every opportunity to spread that knowledge and experience to the rest of the military. We cannot continue to send soldiers overseas with skills that don't allow them to protect themselves.
Army DA administrative publications and forms by the Army Publishing Directorate APD. The latest technologies high quality electronic pubs and forms view U.S. Army Regulations and DA Forms.
(0)
(0)
SFC Robert Walton
SSgt Joseph Baptist - I disagree. Anyone that is tasked as a Marksmanship Coordinator uses the lesson plans, and guidance available, including 8 steady hold factors, Breathing techniques, Squeeze not pull or jerk. Just to name a few.
Not everyone is as perfect as you and teaches from the brain they use Military tried and proven guidance and training platforms to give the SM every opportunity to improve and move forward.
Not everyone is as perfect as you and teaches from the brain they use Military tried and proven guidance and training platforms to give the SM every opportunity to improve and move forward.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Units not trained to standard, can be flunked in training qualification. This will put units back on the firing ranges for at least 2 weeks. I was an evaluator for an ARTEP. They used to be called ARTEPs and before that ORTT. Have no idea what they are called now.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Ok that is not what the Regulation states. They can not "increase their qualification rating." A Non- qualifying score is NOT a qualification rating. You have no rating.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Don't confuse qualification with training. Qualification should be the culmination of weapons training, so multiple attempts should not (if everyone has done their part in training) be necessary.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Couple things:
- unit’s will need MACOM sourcing for training ammunition beyond zero and qualification tables to actually learn to shoot ahead of time. It has to be done frequently enough the skill doesn’t perish. Right now, qual is your training. We need to train, then qual.
- company and Battalions need to fence white space for squad and platoon led marksmanship. From an efficiency stand point Companies should run ranges for a Battalion. Problem is responsibility is diffused.
- need to come off the STRAC Byzantine annual same as last year forecast system.
- NCOs will need to lead the way with PMI. Actual PMI. Units need to work small arms master gunners. Use the hell out of the Engagement Skills Trainer at the Squad/Section level. It allows to adjust steady hold, sight picture, trigger squeeze, and breathing issues in real time on the screen where the firer can see what their doing or not doing. Unlimited ammo. Rinse lather repeat. Train platoon and squad NCOs to run it. Used the hell out of it in Germany.
- the Army needs more ranges and run them 24-7. As a former 3 and XO, range availability is second bottleneck after ammo. Google theory of constraints. Subordinate the system to the bottleneck to optimize it. Instead of what we do now and make units at Battalion fight amongst themselves like a underground homeless fight club for ranges. Ranges should be staffed and sourced to run soldiers through training until they leave trained.
- need supplemental funding for DPTMS to source range employees for OT and additional days.
- Need big Army to work environmental battles and permits for additional firing, land use, noise complaints (which should universally be answered with go F yourself), metal contamination, endangered species etc.
- unit’s will need MACOM sourcing for training ammunition beyond zero and qualification tables to actually learn to shoot ahead of time. It has to be done frequently enough the skill doesn’t perish. Right now, qual is your training. We need to train, then qual.
- company and Battalions need to fence white space for squad and platoon led marksmanship. From an efficiency stand point Companies should run ranges for a Battalion. Problem is responsibility is diffused.
- need to come off the STRAC Byzantine annual same as last year forecast system.
- NCOs will need to lead the way with PMI. Actual PMI. Units need to work small arms master gunners. Use the hell out of the Engagement Skills Trainer at the Squad/Section level. It allows to adjust steady hold, sight picture, trigger squeeze, and breathing issues in real time on the screen where the firer can see what their doing or not doing. Unlimited ammo. Rinse lather repeat. Train platoon and squad NCOs to run it. Used the hell out of it in Germany.
- the Army needs more ranges and run them 24-7. As a former 3 and XO, range availability is second bottleneck after ammo. Google theory of constraints. Subordinate the system to the bottleneck to optimize it. Instead of what we do now and make units at Battalion fight amongst themselves like a underground homeless fight club for ranges. Ranges should be staffed and sourced to run soldiers through training until they leave trained.
- need supplemental funding for DPTMS to source range employees for OT and additional days.
- Need big Army to work environmental battles and permits for additional firing, land use, noise complaints (which should universally be answered with go F yourself), metal contamination, endangered species etc.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
I've been going back and forth on this subject here and I just can't comprehend this because when I was active duty from 89-97 in an infantry unit as an 11m in a couple 1/5 cav 1st cav we were constantly going to ntc 2 sometimes three times a year and we would have to qualify gunnery mounted and dismounted before we went so we would qualify at least two times a year so when we went to the range those of us that we're expert would help the guys that weren't
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Do unit commanders have the authority to schedule live-fire exercises not connected to qualifications? That would be the fix. Or the possibility of personally being able to schedule range time during off-duty time.
(0)
(0)
SFC(P) (Join to see)
Yes, however that would be prohibitably expensive for most units. TC 3-20.0 outlines a coherent and effective training strategy. We just need people to read it rather than trying to reinvent a training strategy based on their own limited experiences.
(1)
(0)
0
0
0
The standard is qualification. The highlighted section states that multiple attempts are not authorized to "increase", but does allow for multiple attempts to qualify.
This just means that leaders will actually have to train their troops rather than just supply copious amounts of ammo if they want good scores.
This just means that leaders will actually have to train their troops rather than just supply copious amounts of ammo if they want good scores.
(0)
(0)
SFC Stephen P.
LTC (Join to see) My unit didn't own weapons. Our annual familiarization was through an online class.
(1)
(0)
MSG Robert Conrad
Money is rarely the problem, it's normally a poor planning. Ammo forecasting and botched range reservations have killed more weapons training than lack of ammo.
(2)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
MSG Robert Conrad - I beg to differ. I have been S4 at both BN and BDE level and, at least with my units, it's always about funding. Many times it comes down to a choice between do we fund ammo for CPT Snuffy to qualify or do we fund his CCC.
(0)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
SFC Stephen P. - up until very recently, my unit didn't own weapons. We always had to borrow weapons from another unit. Even now, we still don't have enough weapons for everyone in the unit.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google