Should the Army be cutting costs by allowing soldiers to qualify on their weapon virtually?

Couldn't agree more. Nothing replaces the hands on training of getting to know your real weapon and what it takes to squeeze that real trigger.

SSG Warren Swan - Sarcasm will get you everywhere SSG Swan!

CPL José A CastroPacheco - ummmm yeah that "getting to know your real weapon" could be a rather touchy, messy, and sticky situation. I think I squeezed the trigger more than enough times. I had to get my eyes repaired by laser surgery to repair all the damage done by squeezing the trigger.

I read you. I used to switch stances so as not to grow a single callous on my fingers. Nothing better than MOUT training.

Usually about 9 ought to do it!

SFC (Join to see) - worst case scenario.

SFC (Join to see) - be rested and dont drink red bull or it will take more to zero. 12 shots for me to zero

Agreed completely Sir!

With optics, I can usually help a soldier zero at 100m in 3-5 rounds. Average is 5 rounds. After that point, rounds should just confirm zero.

The biggest mistake I usually see made during zeroing process is being too ginger with adjustments. After the 1st shot, I have them make a significant # of clicks.

A quick example: At 100m if the print is 2" low and dead center, with an optic that has 1/2 MOA adjustments, make a 10 click elevation adjustment. If you overshoot, at least you can calculate by how much.

Same concept with iron sights:)

Zach, stop trying to be so logical. It really makes the generals mad.

Good answer Zach!

Nothing like the smell of expended ammo in the air!

LTC Stephen Conway - In my opinion the Marine Corps pays little attention to pistol marksmanship (typically four training hours split between two day) in comparison to rifle marksmanship (about 60 hours over 10 days, if you remove time in the target butts), or at least that was the way 20+ years ago. A 1stSgt told me that he was personally aware of more combat deaths by the M1911A1 used as a club than used as a firearm. (I didn't ask for details).

Maj John Bell - I wish we still had it. It is the Beretta 92 SF 9mm since the early 90s because of the pistol conforming to NATO ammo and female hands are often too small. Also gone is the 45cal grease gun used in tanks for tankers as a backup survival weapon. I was in Civil Affairs or any other unit we qualified with the M4/M16 as well. the 38 pistil for female Mps is gone too.

LTC Stephen Conway - I liked the .45. The serial number on the last one I was issued indicated that at least that part of the weapon was older than me, by 14 years.

I spent some time training troops with the Weaponeer, a very useful marksmanship training device. One problem was that only those who were in trouble with their skill level got to use it. It would have been useful to have all hands train on it before firing.

I agree, CSM (Join to see) . And I use it whenever I can prior to qualification. This year I am using it concurrent to the zero range. I will use it for PMI on identified soldiers who have trouble with zero, and I will use it for some of the leadership scenarios they have..the patrol scenarios and what not. I even plan on doing some virtual scenarios in Pro Mask as an alternative to the CS chamber that I could not get reserved this year.

Keep up the great work CSM Baldwin. If our soldiers aren't qualified to fire and hit what they are aiming at they will eventually become a casualty that will need to be evacuated out of the AO and that takes more shooters away from the fight to move a wounded soldier to an aid station. I can't stress enough that each and everyone in an Army unit is a rifleman first and their trained MOS second. When the stuff hits the proverbial fan and the enemy is in the wire your job as unit clerk has just ended and you pick your rifle up and return coordinated fires on the enemy. It may seem old school or old fashion but being proficient with your personal weapon saves lives....yours for instance!