Why don't all members of the Air Force have to be fully qualified to be a rifleman in case of hostile events?

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 28 May 2015 12:17:38 -0400

I have noticed through the years of being in the Air Force (Security Forces member here) that most people in the Air Force are clueless when it comes to M-4/M-16/M-9. This is outrageous! What are they supposed to do if the enemy comes knocking on our door step and everyone needs to fight. I have taught classes on the M-4 with communication airmen and have seen them completely mess up clearing out the weapon, loading it (magazine upside down or rounds the wrong way), and just completely incapable of achieving a zero on target after four rounds of firing. I am a big fan of how the Army and Marines teach that your are always a rifleman first. It almost seems like some of the Airmen don't expect to carry a weapon (ummmm why did you join the military in the first place)? I wish the Air Force would pick up on this to make us a more combat ready force. But, enough of me what are your thoughts?

Response by MSG Morgan Fiszel, CPCM, CFCM made May 28 at 2015 12:20 PM

MSG Morgan Fiszel, CPCM, CFCM — Thu, 28 May 2015 12:20:09 -0400

because that would be wasteful.

Response by 1LT Nick Kidwell made May 28 at 2015 12:22 PM

1LT Nick Kidwell — Thu, 28 May 2015 12:22:04 -0400

I think that all members of the uniformed services should be qualified on the M4/M16 platform as well as the M9.

Response by CPT Ahmed Faried made May 28 at 2015 12:22 PM

CPT Ahmed Faried — Thu, 28 May 2015 12:22:17 -0400

It this for real?

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made May 28 at 2015 12:25 PM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 28 May 2015 12:25:45 -0400

I'm not worried about it. It seems likely that an airman really could spend their entire career CONUS or in the rear. Seems wasteful to qualify them every year.

Response by SGT James Elphick made May 28 at 2015 12:29 PM

SGT James Elphick — Thu, 28 May 2015 12:29:44 -0400

It's for the same reasons the Navy no longer trains sailors on the M4/M16 (just M9 and shotgun) because for most AF personnel it doesn't make sense and it is a wasteful expenditure. Keeping up weapons proficiency for that many people takes up alot of money that the AF would rather, and should, spend elsewhere. That is why your position exists, to secure forward locations so that the AF personnel inside are safe.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made May 28 at 2015 12:40 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 28 May 2015 12:40:02 -0400

I believe the biggest issue SF has when dealing with weapons is the AF Safety program. Does the AF have a zero mishap policy, and if so would it be stated in the Safety AFI? Also, it seems, by observation, we are limited on how often, and when, we can be armed which limits our chances of being a proficient rifleman, unlike our sister services who teach them to be a Soldier or Marine first. Our sole purpose as the USAF is to have our weapons on target... Our aircraft. With that being said our sole purpose as SF is to protect our "birds" on the ground as well as our people.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made May 28 at 2015 12:42 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 28 May 2015 12:42:32 -0400

All should be, however the AF doesn't focus on being proficient with a weapon. If you look at the AF ranges in the past most folks don't even know how to preform immediate action. They are taught in tech school that if the rifle malfunctions to just raise their hand and a instructor will come by to fix the issue. I may have went from Green to Blue but not one day passes that I don't regret my decision.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made May 28 at 2015 1:00 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 28 May 2015 13:00:05 -0400

The purpose behind this turn in our training can be explained in two ways.
1st. The Air Force is reactive in Nature. Our Higher Ups prefer to spend money on a worthless Uniform or its improved uniform (but not provide it to all of those in the Service) and placing us in front of computers to train instead of getting our Airmen outside and in real classrooms.
2nd. Budget. The budget drives everything. It costs more to train, retrain, and throw out failures vs allowing them to perform their jobs on a regular basis.

As a Combat Arms Instructor (CATM Troop, SAMTU Descendant), I think not making every Airman a rifleman is a huge disservice and it degrades our true readiness. Readiness should be measured by our ability to perform our primary jobs, secondary duties, and our ability to function on the battlefield. Functioning on the battlefield would include getting off our Asses and getting out in the “Field” for training. The “Field” is not a 4 Star Hotel. It is sleeping in whatever piece of sh!t tent your unit has provided for you.

I am glad I was in Security Forces and I have knowledge in weapons systems. I am glad I was able to instill some of my knowledge onto my Airmen prior to retiring.

Response by Col Joseph Lenertz made May 28 at 2015 1:11 PM

Col Joseph Lenertz — Thu, 28 May 2015 13:11:10 -0400

Everyone sees things through their own experiences. If I were an AF Security Forces officer, I might share your opinion. As a pilot, I was required to qualify annually on my assigned personal weapon, the M-9, because aircrew members deploy more than other AF personnel. So far that makes sense. So why not go to the much bigger effort and expense of making us like the Army or Marine Corps and force every Airman to qualify annually? To put it as simply as possible, because there is a fixed amount of time and money, and there isn't an Air Force base in Afghanistan or Iraq or anywhere else we fight. When deployed, we generally either to deploy to large Airbases in-country with our Army, Navy, and Marine brethren (who are responsible to protect the base) or out-of-country where the threat is much lower (SA, Qatar, Bahrain, etc). I know there are exceptions, especially for our Special Forces community...but then they are qualified on their personal weapons, aren't they? In order to be the best at Our Job as Airmen, we spend our time and money on training aircrew, mechanics, and all the other support functions necessary to keep airpower supporting the Joint Force Commander. If we spent lots of time and money to be like the Army and the Marines, we would be better infantrymen but worse airmen.

Response by Capt Mark Strobl made May 28 at 2015 1:21 PM

Capt Mark Strobl — Thu, 28 May 2015 13:21:26 -0400

The Air Force already spent it's allowance on the F-35.

Development - $59.2B
Procurement - $261B
Operations & Sustainment- $590B
Unit Cost - $98M

Now if you can get that platform to work properly, the Army & Marines will gladly spring for the bullets --about $0.10 each.

Response by SFC Michael Jackson, MBA made May 28 at 2015 1:31 PM

SFC Michael Jackson, MBA — Thu, 28 May 2015 13:31:21 -0400

The AF perform a different mission with other requirements. The military provides the tools and training to do the job required.

Response by SSgt Charles Edwards made May 28 at 2015 1:35 PM

SSgt Charles Edwards — Thu, 28 May 2015 13:35:13 -0400

You have to realize that not every AFSC is required to shoot every six months like the cop field. I think the general base populous only has to be certified once a year, unless they are deploying in which case the head out to the range. I know how you feel when it comes to the lack of familiarity of everybody else involving weapons. As a Senior Airman in Germany, I had to walk a Tech Sergeant through basic clearing procedures after a base exercise.

Response by SFC Mark Bailey made May 28 at 2015 1:36 PM

SFC Mark Bailey — Thu, 28 May 2015 13:36:52 -0400

This is the basic firearm of the US Military when deployed.
In an Assymetrical Warfare battle (meaning you can be attacked at anytime by anybody anywhere in the Battle Area)...everyone needs to be trained on this very simple firearm.

For a service to systematically believe that they dont need to do this is actually beyond imagination...but I can testify to this fact with over six deployed years of watching USAF members tell me this...

When the only person guarding the gates is a USAF person doing something he was not trained for....one has to really wonder about the safety and security of everyone else behind the wire.

Response by MSgt Roger Younce made May 28 at 2015 1:43 PM

MSgt Roger Younce — Thu, 28 May 2015 13:43:48 -0400

I was in the security forces for 16 years and what I know is many people have no need to be anywhere near a weapon. Not even a fork.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made May 28 at 2015 1:48 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 28 May 2015 13:48:33 -0400

At least the rounds are pointed in the right direction.

Response by MSgt Keith Hebert made May 28 at 2015 1:49 PM

MSgt Keith Hebert — Thu, 28 May 2015 13:49:44 -0400

That was the hardest thing to get used to when I transferred over to the air guard from army guard.
Because if afsc I only qualifies every three years unless I was deployed

Response by LTC Paul Labrador made May 28 at 2015 1:51 PM

LTC Paul Labrador — Thu, 28 May 2015 13:51:07 -0400

IMHO the issue is the word "all". If you are in billet that has the potential to deploy downrange, then you need to be qualfied on a weapon (at least M16 or M9). However, not everyone in the USAF is goint to deploy. Heck, with global reach of aircraft, most USAF Airmen can do their wartime job from bases in the US or in allied countries. Most will never go downrange into a combat zone. It is a waste of money to qualify airmen with live ammo who will never be put into a position to pull the trigger. The same can be said for many Navy and even some Army billets (like the one I currently am slotted to). Now I DO believe, with modern simulation tech, that those in non-deploying slots should do regular weapons familiarization on simulators (ie weaponeer) so that they at least are familiar with the weapon.

Response by SPC Fred Krauer made May 28 at 2015 1:58 PM

SPC Fred Krauer — Thu, 28 May 2015 13:58:40 -0400

In case an airman is being fired on, best bet is to call in the Army 11BangBangs or find the nearest Marine.

All joking aside, it's disgusting. Even the support MOS's in the army have to qualify with a rifle once a year. Riflemen (infantry/ marines) can't be everywhere. No one is expecting an air force cargo specialist to go out kicking doors and clearing floors, but at the very least, you should be able to return fire to save your own ass.

BTW, it's not just air force. I know navy personnel that couldn't hit the broad side of a barn at 10 meters

Response by SSG Paul Setterholm made May 28 at 2015 2:01 PM

SSG Paul Setterholm — Thu, 28 May 2015 14:01:10 -0400

I was on the initial response team (formally known as "alert reactionary force" but governor janklow thought that was too militant) the irt was comprised of 80 members (40 from army/40 from Air Force) we were activated to guard Mount Rushmore from suspected terror attack during the 4th of July week. Airmen did not know what battle site zero is. They could not properly load a magazine.(I personally show an e-9 how to load a magazine!) and they whined constantly about the barracks! Army guys had 1 squad to a room. All 40 guys shared 1 latrine. Eventually airman got 2 guys to a room and 1squad to a latrine.

Response by Cpl Jeff N. made May 28 at 2015 2:01 PM

Cpl Jeff N. — Thu, 28 May 2015 14:01:40 -0400

It's all fun and games until an airfield gets overun. No one can find a weapon , load one, shoot one or hit anything if they did.

Point of order though. Shooting a rifle or qualifying with it does not make you a rifleman. Knowing fire team and squad tactics, close combat, bayonet, manuever etc etc etc are some of the other skills of a rifleman. Being physically fit enough to carry on through a firefight would be nice too.

The air force is pretty far gone on this skill. My Dad, who was career air force (retired in late 70'). Was proficient with a rifle. Not to the standards of the Marine Corps but he could shoot, load, clear etc a weapon.

Response by SMSgt Thor Merich made May 28 at 2015 2:02 PM

SMSgt Thor Merich — Thu, 28 May 2015 14:02:00 -0400

The Air Force was never intended to be a ground fighting unit. Back in the day, AF bases were protected by Army units for that very same reason. The ground fighting component of the AF is SF. Among our many duties, being the infantry of the AF is one of them. I started my military career in the Army and I will tell you that the AF as a whole was never designed to operate like the Army or Marines. The culture is completely different, and for good reason. The AF could not operate under the same culture as the Army or Marines. In SF, weapons are a tool for us. For the majority of the AF, a weapon is not a tool that they use in their day to day duties. ANd frankly, it should not be. I used to be CATM, and I can tell you that keeping an M-4 away from most AF members is a good thing.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made May 28 at 2015 2:06 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 28 May 2015 14:06:19 -0400

One last thing. In the picture above, that is not an AF Weapon. Wrong handguards, the sling swivle is in the wrong place, and it is the wrong sling for the M4.

Also, The rounds are civilian.

Response by LCDR Private RallyPoint Member made May 28 at 2015 2:06 PM

LCDR Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 28 May 2015 14:06:39 -0400

It always cracks me up when people refer to the Mark 4 like it is not an M-16. But in any case the navy qualifies everyone on the Beretta 9mil (M9) and the M-16. Some are further qualified on the M-60 and 50 Cal, to a lessor extent the M-40 Grenade Launcher and various other assundries. My personal favorite is the GAU-19 it makes a distinctive sound when fired at you. I put one of those on everything I could find, there are two of them mounted on the SWIFT HSVX-2. Not sure they made it to the production ships though.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made May 28 at 2015 2:13 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 28 May 2015 14:13:39 -0400

This goes back to another discussion here. The AF are not shooters, generally. They do have some shooters in them nothing on the scale of the Army and MC. It would just be a waste. In most cases there are Army and MC at the bases where AF are. A lot of their deployments aren't even to combat areas. I would recommend that all deploying Airmen going to an active war zone should be trained with an M4/M16. But if they are going Kuwait or UAE I wouldn't waste the resources.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made May 28 at 2015 2:36 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 28 May 2015 14:36:25 -0400

Actually, my superintendent (prior Soldier and prior Marine) and I were discussing this recently. If they need an "all hands on deck" (especially with the branches cutting everything/one), the USAF is in trouble. The Marines and Army go through combat training, formations, firing squads, etc. The Air Force? Unless we are Special Operations or Security Forces, we get one day to learn how to shoot, actually shoot and then qualify. I have only touched an M16 twice in my 5 years of being in. Once in basic training, and once when a rifle was needed for JRTC.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made May 28 at 2015 2:37 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 28 May 2015 14:37:31 -0400

I agree, I haven't had to zero a weapon in sometime but when I did with my personal weapon it wasn't too bad. If you think some of the comm guys were bad you should have seen some of the Intel guys I was in augmentee training. It was like they were completely scared to handle the M9 and the M4/M16. It was kind of scary to think that one day these troops might be in a position where they could have to return fire to save themselves or have our backs....

Response by LTC Bink Romanick made May 28 at 2015 3:21 PM

LTC Bink Romanick — Thu, 28 May 2015 15:21:44 -0400

A militarization course will train the troops how to get out a swarm of bumblebees. You don't want expert middlemen, you want suppressive fire.. until the Cavalry gets there.

If they were serious about defended you'd have machine guns.

Response by SFC Rollie Hubbard made May 28 at 2015 3:31 PM

SFC Rollie Hubbard — Thu, 28 May 2015 15:31:00 -0400

Altho I do know what the basic tng for the Air Force is like I would say that this should have been taught in basic tng.

Response by CPT Bruce Beattie made May 28 at 2015 3:35 PM

CPT Bruce Beattie — Thu, 28 May 2015 15:35:42 -0400

When I was in Vietnam, I belonged to a six man team assigned to a Vietnamese District. We were in 4 Corps and no American units operated in our Province. We did have some Navy helicopter gunships for air support. The closest Americans were another small group like ours that was about 20 kilometers away. We were sent an Air Force medic to help the Vietnamese run clinics for the people. That medic wanted to be a full part of our team. He eventually came out on combat patrols with us. A typical patrol was two Americans and 12 to 20 Vietnamese. We came under unfriendly fire on a routine basis. He met the requirements for a Combat Infantryman's Badge except for the fact that he was a medic. Since he fortunately had not had to treat any of us for wounds we put him in for that CIB. A few weeks later, we received a letter from HQ MACV denying that request and suggesting that we put him in for the Combat Medic Badge. We borrowed a typewriter from the Vietnamese again and made that request. A few weeks later we received a response from HQ 7th Air Force. Not only did they deny the award but made an only slightly veiled threat that if we placed him in a role where a firefight was likely, they would consider contacting my chain of command and requesting that I be brought up on charges. I'm sure he is very proud of the CIB given to him by that little team even though he couldn't wear it on his uniform! He wasn't very proficient with his M16 when he first arrived but certainly was before he left. Every member of the military should be capable of using a standard battle rifle and a pistol to defend themselves.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made May 28 at 2015 3:42 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 28 May 2015 15:42:13 -0400

I've seen infantrymen in rifle companies and other combat MOSes struggle to qualify and make embarrassing blunders as well. It happens. The only real cure is range time and off-range drills, but for most organizations at a unit level that means drawing weapons out of the armsroom and taking time off from whatever else they'd be doing.

Depending on the purpose and mission of the unit, that's simply not going to happen in a lot of cases. That's why in a perfect world there will always be force protection or an escort element staffed by people who remember how to insert their magazine.

Response by SSG Mark Ives made May 28 at 2015 4:03 PM

SSG Mark Ives — Thu, 28 May 2015 16:03:20 -0400

I'll venture a guess, and I'm getting out on a limb here, it stems from when the Air Force became a separate branch from the Army. The Air Force tended to distance themselves from their roots. I've known some AF FAC's and SP's who have been very proficient with weapons. Personally I feel, if you wear a uniform, I think you should know how to handle a weapon, regardless of branch.

Response by WO1 Private RallyPoint Member made May 28 at 2015 4:13 PM

WO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 28 May 2015 16:13:51 -0400

This is why you have have Army aviation to protect the Air Force guys on the flight lines in war zones ;)

Response by 1LT William Clardy made May 28 at 2015 4:28 PM

1LT William Clardy — Thu, 28 May 2015 16:28:08 -0400

Does anybody remember the Khobar Towers?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khobar_Towers_bombing

Khobar Towers bombing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Khobar Towers bombing was a terrorist attack on part of a housing complex in the city of Khobar, Saudi Arabia, located near the national oil company (Saudi Aramco) headquarters of Dhahran on June 25, 1996. At that time Khobar Towers was being used as quarters for foreign military personnel.

Response by MSgt Brian Welch made May 28 at 2015 4:43 PM

MSgt Brian Welch — Thu, 28 May 2015 16:43:45 -0400

SSgt Christ, I was in CE for twenty years thru 2007. We had to qualify once a year. I understand, at least at that time all other units had to at least qualify every two years. CE mission included being able to secure a perimeter in a first in situation, although it would be augmenting SF to do so. But honestly, in all my deployments, I never fired my weapon once. I was however an expert at building airfield pavements, communications towers, and facilities. I understand your point and it would be great if it was practical to make everyone a true warfighter but you just can't be an expert in a highly technical trade, there happens to be lots of schools to attend and daily duties to hone that skill.

Response by TSgt Joshua Copeland made May 28 at 2015 5:26 PM

TSgt Joshua Copeland — Thu, 28 May 2015 17:26:13 -0400

You must be at a low deployment base. My guys qualify pretty much every year between the two deployment band we have folks going out and folks coming back with no lull. If you are assigned to a band and aren't broke, your deploying.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made May 28 at 2015 5:35 PM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 28 May 2015 17:35:39 -0400

The Army doesn't always teach that you are a rifleman first. Yes, we qual every year (as long as ammo is avail), but not everyone in the Army knows how to handle a weapon. Your picture reminds me of a time when I once witnessed (and I still don't know how she did it) a LTC Dietician somehow managed to put a magazine in an M-16 backwards. Not upside down, but backwards. After about 30 mins of tugging and shimmying, I finally got it out. She had it in there real snug.

Response by PO2 Christopher Taggart made May 28 at 2015 5:55 PM

PO2 Christopher Taggart — Thu, 28 May 2015 17:55:27 -0400

Nobody is this dumb; come on?

Response by MSgt Steven Holt, NRP, CCEMT-P made May 28 at 2015 6:01 PM

MSgt Steven Holt, NRP, CCEMT-P — Thu, 28 May 2015 18:01:25 -0400

As an Intel Guy, I was told I would never have the need to be armed. Intel traditionally stays so far behind the lines, you'd never know we even existed.

And that lasted for about the first three years of my career.

Operation Restore Hope saw my first need to be armed and know how to use it effectively. Then the AF got the bright idea of getting rid of 60% of the Security Forces billets and I found myself being trained as a READY and standing on a gate for 12 hours at a time. Then came the multiple OEF/OIF deployments. Let's not get into the times I actually had to USE that weapon to defend myself and fellow service members close by.

"You'll never need that training...." is the worst form of bad planning. With Today's smaller, more mobile force, I think the days of staying all comfy and warm on a heavily defended base somewhere in the Dallas Back 40 are going to become the exception rather than the norm.

The Army and Marines are drawing down forces as well. Relying on troops who may not be there in the future does no one any good when the time comes.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made May 28 at 2015 7:28 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 28 May 2015 19:28:27 -0400

We get that training before deployment...regardless of the weather...Torrential rain for instance.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made May 28 at 2015 8:28 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 28 May 2015 20:28:09 -0400

Since I was in both the USMC and in the USAF, I believe I have picked up some insight into this issue through the years I was in.
Yes, in the USMC – everyone is primarily a ‘rifleman’ and then then they have their MOS. So when Sh*t hits the fan – everyone is capable of being part of the defensive and/or offensive situation that is occurring.
In the USAF, the Security Forces (as labeled currently) are the army for the Air Force. Their primary mission is protection of Aircraft, Equipment and Personnel. There are other AFSC’s that need to provide armed protection (One example: CE); but for the most part CONUS units do not require personnel to ‘qualify’ unless they are deploying OCONUS – they might ‘FAM’ fire every three years possibly if their lucky.
My unit had a FAT’s system (Computerized video projection system where you could fire on range targets, or you could create ‘tactical’ field scenarios, or utilize ‘shoot don’t shoot’ scenarios). This system utilized wireless weapons (M9, M4, M16, M60, M240, M249, M870, etc.), they created the sounds and kick back like a normal weapon and even the weight was really close – magazines were utilized as well for reloading situations. This eliminated the need to fire ‘live’ ammo for the rest of the base unless they were deploying (then they would ‘qualify’ with real ammo) but at least they were getting proper instruction via our CATM instructors and ‘trigger’ time.
Not sure why this is not a widespread utilization among the branches – saves a lot of time and resources, while providing proper training situations and environments that you can’t normally take advantage of. We even had civilian law enforcement agencies come to the base to use it.
Unless you learn from history you will, keep repeating bad situations.
Vietnam showed the need why everyone should be properly trained with a weapon. Back then airbases were protected by the US Army, and the USAF only had air Police with .38’s roaming around inside the base. When the army would get called off – the bases would be overrun easily since the AP’s were not trained (at the time) and the base populous wasn’t either.
Flash forward to another situation with the US Army and convoys – personnel weren’t properly trained on weapon jamming fixes and people died or were captured.
Even up to today, in the military unless you are in a field that takes you to the ‘hostile’ environment you don’t get the proper weapons training that could save your life or the lives of others if the situation arose. It has happened at various CONUS bases in the recent past where some individual or individuals have opened fire in occupied buildings wounding and/or killing people.

Response by SFC Wesley Arnold, Jr made May 28 at 2015 8:43 PM

SFC Wesley Arnold, Jr — Thu, 28 May 2015 20:43:26 -0400

(*excuse me please*) WTF !!!!!!
Have most of you lost your minds? OIF / OEF refined where and how Battle Lines are drawn. Look at how much fighting occurred between COBs before all of Victory was closed into one complete entity.

How many Sailors and Airmen work other jobs during OIF / OEF with or assigned to Army and Marines that worked out side of there MOS (Military Occupational Specialty) ?

I know that my unit CoC went to a Marine Major General, and when I wasn't working as one of his Battle NCOs I worked under a Navy Captain. What do you think the odds are of working for a Navy Captain who was a Submariner? Wonder when we got stealth submarines ... because I don't remember see any in Baghdad?

Bottom line is every service member should in fact train with the US Military whether it's an M16 - xyz or an M4 - xyz; just because you are not issued this weapon in garrison does not mean that you might not have to pick one up in a convoy ambush. When I say "in fact train with"; I mean all working components and proper nomenclature for those components.

Does it matter if the first round in the magazine is on the left or the right? Too late you and maybe your buddy might have been shot; because it does not matter if they are loaded with top round one the left only that bullet facing away from you !!!

At a minimum everyone in uniform needs to know how the weapon works and live fire with required qualification

I've got to get off my soapbox now before my head pops

Response by SrA Matthew Knight made May 29 at 2015 12:39 AM

SrA Matthew Knight — Fri, 29 May 2015 00:39:31 -0400

I think we should all be required to hit the range at least once a year, maybe even twice. This opinion is also coming from someone who is bitter about not making marksman at basic and not getting the chance to go again plus go for the star if shooting marksman with both the M4 and M9. I feel like we should all know how to operate and properly hit a target in the event it is ever needed.

I have also seen the arguments against us all shooting and can't say I disagree totally. I have known people in the military that should never come near a firearm let alone use it. My opinion on that though is that they probably shouldn't have been allowed into the service in the first place. This is the military after all if you can't fire a weapon or refuse to then maybe you should have gone down a different path.

Response by PO1 John Miller made May 29 at 2015 3:12 AM

PO1 John Miller — Fri, 29 May 2015 03:12:21 -0400

Completely in jest. I have seen people in all branches who should be permanently downloaded (having their weapons privileges revoked).

Response by Sgt Private RallyPoint Member made May 29 at 2015 4:07 AM

Sgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 29 May 2015 04:07:03 -0400

It's not necessary for airmen to know any of that. Even if an air field were to get over run, if your in country there is the army and marines on that same base. Even then I only carried security rounds and was told if something ever did happen to hold up in a bunker and let QRF deal with the problem. The AF doesn't assault hills you bomb them.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made May 29 at 2015 6:14 AM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 29 May 2015 06:14:28 -0400

When I was stationed at MacDill AFB, we had to have a civilian safety guy from our unit "approve" the standard of our training and act as the range safety officer. The guy was knowledgeable and definitely taught us something but it was still a pain and a little demoralizing from an Army perspective.

The macro reason is that the Air Force seems to place a much higher value on technical expertise in an Airman's skill set than overall combat skills. It makes sense, that's why the Air Force pads all its overseas bases with Army guys around the flight line, right?

Response by SrA Daniel Hunter made May 29 at 2015 9:33 AM

SrA Daniel Hunter — Fri, 29 May 2015 09:33:53 -0400

Completely agree. Once a year refresher "qualification" is of no help at all.

Response by Capt Private RallyPoint Member made May 29 at 2015 10:29 AM

Capt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 29 May 2015 10:29:50 -0400

I completely agree!!! That being said, I was an infantry Marine first.

Response by SSgt Donnavon Smith made May 29 at 2015 10:48 AM

SSgt Donnavon Smith — Fri, 29 May 2015 10:48:53 -0400

When the time came, my job would be to get the planes off the base (or break them badly), nothing more. I fired my 80 rounds a year in "training" but I can tell you. if the baddies get past the Army/Marines and the SFs, there is not much that a few additional M-16s is going to fix.

Response by SPC David S. made May 29 at 2015 11:09 AM

SPC David S. — Fri, 29 May 2015 11:09:42 -0400

Simple terms 'Air Support' vs 'Ground Support' thus the Air Force relies on the other branches to secure its bases in a combat environment. Just imagine all the tax dollars saved in not training folks a skill that they will more than likely never need. I think we would need to lose an Air Base before this will ever be addressed.

Response by CMSgt Mike Esser made May 29 at 2015 12:26 PM

CMSgt Mike Esser — Fri, 29 May 2015 12:26:45 -0400

Budgets. Where do you spend money, what has priority. USAF priorities differ from Army and Marines.

Response by PVT Private RallyPoint Member made May 29 at 2015 12:27 PM

PVT Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 29 May 2015 12:27:49 -0400

I would have no clue about that, but I will say that every branch of the military should be qualified with the M4. It's probably the easiest weapons system to assemble and disassemble as well. Even though the Air Force and navy don't have any 11bravos or anything close to that, it would be nice to know that they would be able to protect themselves in some kind of situation that requires them to use some rifle marksman skills.

Response by SFC Joseph James made May 29 at 2015 4:12 PM

SFC Joseph James — Fri, 29 May 2015 16:12:43 -0400

Well war is scary and we can't have our Airmen/Airwomen getting nervous! We need them to fly us to the war zones so we can get medals and awesome stories to lie to women/men about! lol Just kidding Air-buddies! I WUV YOU DIS MUCH!!! <-----------------<3-------------->

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made May 29 at 2015 10:16 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 29 May 2015 22:16:33 -0400

Story time:
In 2013 I was on JBMDL getting ready to go to Africa. We received training over on the McGuire side of the base on anti-terrorism. We were living large, seeing how the other half lives, with their Cadillac Chow Hall and snazzy gym facility. On the way back from chow, I saw one of the funniest things I have ever seen in the military:

There were some airmen walking around with brightly colored plastic fake M-4s. They were getting ready to deploy also, and they were getting "acclimated" to carrying a weapon around - or so I was informed when I asked.
Now this in and of itself wasn't all that funny; I understand the idea behind it and the USAF doesn't just have weapons laying around for training purposes. What WAS HILARIOUS was that they had attached Surefire flashlights and in one case a PEC-2 (not sure if that was a real one or not) to their fake weapons with electrical tape.
LMAO.

I get that we're trying to be all "Joint" and stuff, but let's keep to what we are good at. The Air Force owns the sky, and the men and women on the ground service those aircraft or the facilities for them. That's what you do. If you're in the USAF and are told to pick up a rifle and pull a post, expect that if you run into me I will train you and make damn sure you know what the hell you are doing with that rifle if it comes to that.

Response by TSgt David Holman made May 30 at 2015 11:31 AM

TSgt David Holman — Sat, 30 May 2015 11:31:34 -0400

If you are deploying, you need to know how to handle a weapon. I had this conversation with one of my docs once. Neither of us were averse to handling a weapon, nor were we afraid of it, but agreed that if it got to the point either of us had to use it there were much bigger problems at hand.

Response by SGT Lawrence Corser made May 30 at 2015 1:11 PM

SGT Lawrence Corser — Sat, 30 May 2015 13:11:20 -0400

because of potato? honestly if your in a combat zone or close enough to one everyone should be qualified for a weapon. and requal every 3 months.

Response by SrA Jeff Campbell made May 30 at 2015 6:12 PM

SrA Jeff Campbell — Sat, 30 May 2015 18:12:56 -0400

I would be amiss if I didn't say that not all USAF personnel are as incapable of handling the weapons you are spouting off about. I was selected to be a Security Police Augmentee and we were able to handle everything from shotguns to 203 grenade launchers. WHAT A BLAST! (granted I was raised by a Special Forces Dad who allowed me the freedom to learn about guns early on in life) Not all USAF personnel are as scared of weapons or handling them as you are portraying. I know personally some excellent sharp shooters who were active duty USAF! Thank You for your continuous service!

Response by MSgt Rob Miller made May 30 at 2015 10:47 PM

MSgt Rob Miller — Sat, 30 May 2015 22:47:24 -0400

I can out shoot most everyone I know Marine, Navy, Army or Air Force in M4 M16 M9 or any other damn thing. But I grew up shooting so... Not bragging, just stating a fact.

Response by SPC Nathan Freeman made Jun 4 at 2015 8:43 PM

SPC Nathan Freeman — Thu, 04 Jun 2015 20:43:45 -0400

Air Force personnel in general are pampered. They aren't allowed to live in Army quarters because they're "substandard". if they must, they get paid extra for the inconvenience. I'm thinking I should have joined the Air Force lol

Response by SSgt Brad Ball made Jun 5 at 2015 4:02 PM

SSgt Brad Ball — Fri, 05 Jun 2015 16:02:27 -0400

As a weapons tech 462 we were expected to to be very proficient with the Remington 870s with double 00 buck, As we escorted our munitions (NUKEs) from place to place. We had to qualify every 90 day. Trust me I could hold anyone off within 25 yards..

Response by TSgt Chip Dollason made Jun 7 at 2015 11:10 AM

TSgt Chip Dollason — Sun, 07 Jun 2015 11:10:24 -0400

OK Garrett, Heres the deal. First I agree with you 100%. I always have and I always will when it comes to qualifications. I was core CATM from the moment I joined the AF in 1988 until they made me become a 3PO in 1998. I still worked CATM until 2001 when I had to deploy as a flight chief in support of "Operation Southern Watch". The #1 reason why AF personnel aren't trained is money. 70% of the AF personnel would never in their lives have to handle a weapon for their jobs unless they were going down range. There are people in the AF that retire having not fired since they were in boot camp. So how much does it cost to train these 70% of AF personnel that will never handle a weapon? It would probably take a big chunk out of the national debt. It is more cost effective to train them prior to them going down range, not to mention they are more apt to listen if their life depends on it. Figure out how busy your range is and how busy the CATM folks are then triple their training load with people who will never handle a weapon.
Now consider the fact that many CATM instructors now deploy on a constant basis and have to be back filled with cops who most of the time think they know everything because they can personally shoot but can't figure out why you can't shoot. So you have more failures, more refires more people who for whatever reason cannot qualify and gets them put out because they can't qualify and how much did the AF spend to train that person for the past 10 years and now all of a sudden they are put out because of weapons qualifications. Do you see the $$$$$ adding up? Watered down training of people who already can't shoot spells disaster. People will tell you whatever their opinion is but the God's honest truth is, its about $$$$$. Wrong as that may be, it is what it is and the truth will set you free!

Response by TSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 9 at 2015 2:29 AM

TSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 09 Jun 2015 02:29:52 -0400

Most assume it would never happen...being that i'm a comm troop if our base were attacked and overrun usually we'd be the last to die, but i'm not an idiot...I trained hard with what little time I got with my M-16 and I never shot marksman, but on the live fire range I never missed. I even trained some NATO allies in Afghanistan on Short Range Marksmanship and Vehicle Egress...Its always best to be prepared...but to the USAF...I think it just comes down to money.

Response by CMSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 12 at 2015 7:52 AM

CMSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 12 Jun 2015 07:52:33 -0400

The Air Force and its raison d'être is "Air Superiority". I am sure I have heard that somewhere... Lol...Aside from AFSC exception, we are not ground troops by historical design.

Now having said that, I am COMPLETELY on board to be fully qualified and capable to handle weaponry. It used to be annual requirement and has somehow fallen to the wayside. When needed, troops still get the "proper" training, but I think it is a skill set that needs to be kept current.

Coming from the Army, I know first-hand that there are fewer things in the world more fun than range time.... Cleaning weapons afterward, not so much. :)

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 12 at 2015 9:16 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 12 Jun 2015 09:16:56 -0400

I think it is critical that everyone in the armed forces be ready to bear arms. It is quintessential that every service member to be proficient with a rifle especially with today's high OPSTEMPO.

Back around 2004/2005...when I was in still in . The Air Force and the Navy they had the Individual Augmentee Program which took Airmen and Sailors and attached them to Army units. These personnel were trained as soldiers and expected to bear arms if needed. Many of these Airmen or Sailors drove convoys, provided medical support or worked to defend FOB's (etc)

It is best to be prepared for a fight if needed.. than to be completely unprepared in the middle of a combat zone. Deploying to Iraq to drive convoys and having limited soldier skills or training gets people killed.

A prime example of this was seen in 2003 when Jessica Lynch's unit was ambushed in Iraq. Those soldiers in her unit were completely unprepared to deal with hostile forces. They didn't have the proper training to even deal with such hostilities. I realize every member of the armed forces isn't an infantryman but they do need to be able to fire an M16 and render medical aid to their buddies if needed.

Another example would include the Tet Offensive during the Vietnam War. Essentially every military base/camp was attacked by the enemy. American forces were initially caught off guard by the attack. I'm sure at the time many of soldiers during the attack were too busy trying to defend themselves to worry about the Air Force.

Today the armed forces is shrinking to post WWII levels with expanding missions worldwide. With that said... everyone in serving in uniform today needs the right skills to be able to survive in a combat zone.

Response by SSG Thomas Brousseau made Jun 12 at 2015 1:00 PM

SSG Thomas Brousseau — Fri, 12 Jun 2015 13:00:52 -0400

Great question, great comments.

Response by SSgt Fabian Martinez made Jun 14 at 2015 8:14 AM

SSgt Fabian Martinez — Sun, 14 Jun 2015 08:14:12 -0400

Fully agree. Especially with the more broad scope of things Airmen are getting involved in. No such thing as too much knowledge!

Response by SrA Ryan White made Jun 18 at 2015 10:22 AM

SrA Ryan White — Thu, 18 Jun 2015 10:22:31 -0400

I believe that all AFSC's should be required to qualify every 6 months at a minimum. Why not have as many guns in the fight as possible. The more familiar with the weapon, the less likely to experience friendly fire.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 19 at 2015 8:50 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 19 Jun 2015 20:50:06 -0400

Sorry, to many CBTs no time for shooting...

Response by CMSgt Lloyd French made Jun 24 at 2015 4:36 PM

CMSgt Lloyd French — Wed, 24 Jun 2015 16:36:24 -0400

All airmen are trained at BMTS to fire the M16. They have to hit the target 20 times (after practice and zeroing) to pass. Then they scamper off to their tech schools and first jobs. If their job doesn't routinely require them to carry a weapon, then that's it. Hopefully in their long-term memory they retain some of that when you Security Forces folks need a second (or more) line of defense!

Response by SSgt Alex Robinson made Jul 25 at 2015 12:31 PM

SSgt Alex Robinson — Sat, 25 Jul 2015 12:31:03 -0400

Garrett, some like medics are expressly prohibited by the Geneva Convention from having a firearm in a combat zone.

Response by CMSgt James Nolan made Jul 27 at 2015 12:02 AM

CMSgt James Nolan — Mon, 27 Jul 2015 00:02:22 -0400

Mission Requirements and the LIMFACs known as time and funds.....It is hard enough for our CATM to get our own personnel fully qualified with all of all of our weapons, along with all of the personnel who require quals that our personnel must do. If they had to constantly qual all personnel, the staffing would go up exponentially, as would the budget. Never going to happen, and the bulk of our personnel don't have the "true need". Would it be great? Absolutely. Would I personally like to see it? Absolutely. Never going to happen.

Response by SrA Donald Bacha made Aug 11 at 2015 10:47 AM

SrA Donald Bacha — Tue, 11 Aug 2015 10:47:16 -0400

the Air Force is Slowly going to to having everyone "battlefield Ready" firing most career fields at least every two years for what most put on the AF710 is "mobility" reasons

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 6 at 2015 9:32 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 06 Oct 2015 21:32:29 -0400

Coming from the active Army I thought it was really strange that the only time you went to the range was when getting ready to deploy.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 7 at 2015 12:25 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 07 Oct 2015 00:25:30 -0400

I have always had to qualify once a year on a m4/m16. That said is there really a point no. They don't give maintenance personnel weapons anyways and if they do they give you a weapon a 5 rounds not even worth it haha

Response by MSgt John Taylor made Oct 19 at 2015 1:39 AM

MSgt John Taylor — Mon, 19 Oct 2015 01:39:51 -0400

In the AF if your in a deployable position, you will qualify with your primary weapon. This, at a minimum, is a logical standard. If the Army and the Marine Corps want to spend time, effort and ammo training folks that won't be in harms way, then so be it. We don't train all airmen to fly so why would we train all airmen to shoot?

Response by SGT William Howell made Oct 20 at 2015 8:44 AM

SGT William Howell — Tue, 20 Oct 2015 08:44:04 -0400

I would think if you were to give out another medal for qualifying with a weapon everybody would want to do it. The shooting positions would be the "Standing at the PX, Sitting reclined in your office chair, and the prone in the cot."

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Oct 22 at 2015 8:33 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Thu, 22 Oct 2015 20:33:58 -0400

They work on high tech jets and will always be safe.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Oct 24 at 2015 6:31 AM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Sat, 24 Oct 2015 06:31:14 -0400

The M-4 is an area targeting weapon too!

Response by Capt Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 3 at 2016 11:16 AM

Capt Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 03 Jan 2016 11:16:13 -0500

Went through conus replacement center, crc out of ft bliss in 2013. As an AF guy, I was appalled at the number of Army troops that didn't have a clue!

Response by MSgt Billy McDonough made Jan 3 at 2016 11:28 AM

MSgt Billy McDonough — Sun, 03 Jan 2016 11:28:06 -0500

First off, perhaps you should have joined the Infantry i.e. the Army or MC? Second, while I agree that more money should be spent on weapons training (I was in the Infantry before switching to the AF) I think that perhaps you need to look at the larger mission and how it's conducted. Ever been down range? It's a much different world there and the Airmen are trained before they go. Further, when was the last time an airfield was even close to being overrun? Vietnam? Just saying there is more to the picture than I think you see at your level. Enjoy your career, I know I did :)

Response by A1C Allen Forbes made Jan 3 at 2016 11:35 AM

A1C Allen Forbes — Sun, 03 Jan 2016 11:35:05 -0500

In 92 all of us were required to qualify with a M-16. But your correct because after basic I never had to qualify again.Guess it's because of how far away from the front line we were. Pilots had side arms but that was it.

Response by CSM Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 3 at 2016 11:40 AM

CSM Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 03 Jan 2016 11:40:55 -0500

Well, because nobody in the USAF is a rifleman. Only a rifleman is a rifleman.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 3 at 2016 11:57 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 03 Jan 2016 11:57:16 -0500

I fully agree with your point SSGT

Response by CMSgt Frank Dailey made Jan 3 at 2016 12:12 PM

CMSgt Frank Dailey — Sun, 03 Jan 2016 12:12:13 -0500

Garrett, I am not sure where you are teaching and to what command you are working within, but this is not the norm for the command I belong to, we have not had the M-16 A1 for approx 17 yrs. Additionally we have transitioned to the Glock 19. We fire both the AFQT but them also engage in Small Unit Tactics. This is done before deployment and during operational train-up normally we engage in weapons training every quarter and or Full Mission Profiles. This includes the combat teams and the service support team and yes we wear Blue. Before you make the assumption that the entire AF is a mess look beyond your experience as a SSgt. There are commands who are focused on the survival of their people because they are not apart of the AEF cycle and part of a dedicated combat force. Regards Chief D.

Response by COL Jon Thompson made Jan 3 at 2016 12:30 PM

COL Jon Thompson — Sun, 03 Jan 2016 12:30:25 -0500

Goes to show why a DD214 should not be the qualification to get a weapons permit in several states. Being in the Armed Forces does not equal weapons proficiency. We can say the same thing about numerous units in the Army as well.

Response by SrA Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 3 at 2016 12:30 PM

SrA Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 03 Jan 2016 12:30:33 -0500

I was actually really disappointed when we were told we would not be training with the M9. Still always qualified for M16 and M4. I have run across people that had to return to catm because they failed the M16 qualification for the 3rd time in a row.

Response by SN Trevor Sanchez made Jan 3 at 2016 12:33 PM

SN Trevor Sanchez — Sun, 03 Jan 2016 12:33:59 -0500

I agree totally. When I was in the Navy Bootcamp Sept 72, we trained with one "one" hour shoot with single shot .22 rifles like we had in the Boy Scouts. I had always wondered why a military branch did not train with weapons. Pearl Harbor showed that all branches need to be realistically trained in Combat scenarios because attacks can and have happened. At Pearl Harbor, a "Cook" was awarded the MOH because he took over an AA machine gun and defended his ship with it. In my opinion (which isn't worth much) all branches need to be trained to handle weapons.

Response by Lt Col Paul Maxwell made Jan 3 at 2016 1:08 PM

Lt Col Paul Maxwell — Sun, 03 Jan 2016 13:08:50 -0500

All the aircrew and aircrew support personnel I know, to include aeromedical, have been required to be qualified on personal weapon in order to be on mobility/deployment status, and carry weapon full time in theater/AOR.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 3 at 2016 1:18 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 03 Jan 2016 13:18:58 -0500

I had a female medic at Bagram damn near take my head off at a clearing barrel outside the defac... She sent the BCG forward dropped the mag and the. Pulled it out off safe and attempted to pull the trigger pointed right at my face... Quick snack to the bottom of the barrel and a loud bang and she pissed herself with the craziest look ever.

Response by MSgt John Taylor made Jan 3 at 2016 1:37 PM

MSgt John Taylor — Sun, 03 Jan 2016 13:37:14 -0500

The last small arms class that I had, there was someone in it that hadn't fired a weapon in 10 years. As astonishing as it sounds, there are folks out there that will never be put in harms way to carry out their mission (Global reach). Don't try to put them in your shoes, put yourself in theirs.

Also, there were 9 guys in my flight in basic that didn't qualify on the range, all of them going to become SPs. If it was your job to teach those Comm troops how to operate an M-4, did you look at yourself first for fault?

Response by SFC Pete Kain made Jan 3 at 2016 2:48 PM

SFC Pete Kain — Sun, 03 Jan 2016 14:48:42 -0500

Sometimes stuff happens. The Air Force would be better served by training all to be proficient in small arms. See Tet in Viet Nam for an example. No I was not there, just a bit before my time.

Response by SrA Morgan Larche made Jan 3 at 2016 3:01 PM

SrA Morgan Larche — Sun, 03 Jan 2016 15:01:19 -0500

Just as an aircrew would not want an infantryman loading munitions or working on their Avionics. .... The infantry sure are glad those duties are completed by trained AF personell! I was essential to my warthog pilots, as their egress mechanic. But, being a country boy I also qualified expert with my M-16....

Response by TSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 3 at 2016 3:10 PM

TSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 03 Jan 2016 15:10:27 -0500

Granted we are not the Army or the Marines but we are now evolving more than ever and becoming more reliant on ourselves. This being said we have come along way from 1947. We need to empower more of our Airmen to handle weapons with confidence and superior knowledge to fight the enemy!

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 3 at 2016 3:12 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 03 Jan 2016 15:12:51 -0500

In the words of an acquaintance "the base had guys right outside, they told all Airforce personnel to load their weapons and prepare to destroy equipment, an airman looked at me and said how do I do that?"

Training, Training, Training. I think that it is imperative that all service members be prepared to defend themselves tactically. We are in an era where the enemy can get on our bases, even the big ones. I don't know much about the Air Force but I am assuming their boot camp has some kind of weapons familiarization?

Response by SGT Robert Riley made Jan 3 at 2016 3:43 PM

SGT Robert Riley — Sun, 03 Jan 2016 15:43:37 -0500

I think the Airmen have this rationale that they are in corporate environment ergo, we don't carry weapons because our Security Force, the Army or Marines will defend us. As pointed out by SSG Christ, there is going come a moment, when a terrorist cell or if the base is overseas, enemy troops will breach the wire and wreak havoc, while some Airman is fumbling around with his/her weapon. It's a great way to utilize those metal caskets, kept in storage at the mortuary affairs unit. They should emphasize more weapons training at USAF basic training because, ready or not, the frontline is everywhere in this never-ending war on terrorism.

Response by PO3 David Davis made Jan 3 at 2016 3:51 PM

PO3 David Davis — Sun, 03 Jan 2016 15:51:18 -0500

They may want to think about at least some training. As a Navy Corpsman. I made sure I was trained.

Response by CPO David Sharp made Jan 3 at 2016 3:55 PM

CPO David Sharp — Sun, 03 Jan 2016 15:55:00 -0500

I agree that all Military personnel should be capable of handling basic organic weapon systems and some crew served weapons. I think the Air Force may see training money spent in a different fashion. Just my impression. Every Seabee is trained on weapons, defense tactics and some offensive tactics. Our Military Training is overseen, directed and instructed by the USMC.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 3 at 2016 3:58 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 03 Jan 2016 15:58:53 -0500

I work in a hole in the ground. My SOPs are to turtle up, continue working, and wait to either be rescued or buried alive.

Response by Lt Col Stephen Petzold made Jan 3 at 2016 4:06 PM

Lt Col Stephen Petzold — Sun, 03 Jan 2016 16:06:05 -0500

This same question was being asked within the Air Force 25 years ago when I first started. The base I started out at had a lot of folks who had recently transferred off of the Ground Launched Cruise Missile units in Europe and had a lot more ground combat training than the average USAF member had. They always had an issue with the basic USAF doctrine of relying solely on SF and having everyone else hide under something.

Although there are exceptions, I think a majority of USAF members would like more weapons training, but I think several of the factors others here have mentioned have come into play.

We are not a ground combat force. So thus much of our time and funding is directed elsewhere. Even our deployment CAST training is not detailed ground combat training. It is just a brief overview so when the Army Sgt yells "stack on me" we at least have some idea of what he wants us to do. Even when we do deploy most of our bases have Army or Marine units stationed there.

I do not think that we will ever get to the point where every airman is a rifleman, but in today's asymmetric terrorist world we cannot guarantee that an attack might not be just as likely at a stateside base as one in Afghanistan. It would be nice to see training and exercises that teach more than just hiding under a desk.

Response by TSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 3 at 2016 5:32 PM

TSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 03 Jan 2016 17:32:43 -0500

I agree with your sentiment, and I wish the Air Force would provide more frequent weapons training

Response by TSgt Marco McDowell made Jan 3 at 2016 6:35 PM

TSgt Marco McDowell — Sun, 03 Jan 2016 18:35:27 -0500

Since I've been a Jarhead and a Flyboy, I can tell you that there are Marines who lack basic weapon handling skills as well. I had a secondary MOS as a marksmanship instructor and eventually moved to the range full time. Basic rifleman is something used as a propaganda tool. Sure, non-grunts, POGs, whatever you want to call us do receive training as all Marines do in bootcamp and MCT and we glorified it as Marine Corps history, but times have changed for all services. When you get to the FMF, depending on what your "POG" job is, you may play games a few times, just so you don't forget the basics. Some folks only fire their assigned weapon during quals and a lot of them suck or go UNQ(but hey now everyone uses optics and not iron sights so it's becoming moot). If your MOS ties you into a GCE, you'll get to have fun with the groundpounders or in support of them and so will get more in depth training and trigger time. Heck, you may even specialize in something (woohoo demo calc!). Now what I saw weapons handling wise from airmen was no different. There were guys who could not shoot at 25m inside the fancy setups most bases have and some who were locked in. A SSgt tried to insert his magazine into his ejection port (yes, I switched firing positions after seeing it). I also witnessed a Marine try to load into the barrel of a M-9. I've seen men and women from both services baffled by a speed loader and some who knew it like their own forehead. I'm pretty sure the 03's don't want the guy in the potshack covering his flank anymore than you would want that comm guy covering yours, but that's what that training is for. Hopefully you corrected him/her and gave them the basics to at least load, point and shoot, enough so to give support in the event zombies attack. Fortunately todays battle sphere entails joint operations and layers of defenses provided to massive airfields. If a human wave attack has breached the perimeter and made it to the flightline, I'm pretty sure the guys turning wrenches won't be situationally aware as to what is going on unless you have personnel posted around the ramp just for that...and I'm certain that's why SFs, MPs and MOAs are cruising around the airfield. Besides, have you tried climbing into an overwing fairing with a M-4 slung? it's all about manpower, time, mission and money, if you can devise a program that would allow training, maybe during your wing ORE, your commander may be keen to follow through on it.

Response by LT Steve Wilson made Jan 3 at 2016 7:19 PM

LT Steve Wilson — Sun, 03 Jan 2016 19:19:37 -0500

You make a good point; however, their expertise is required to keep those air superiority and ground support aircraft operating to further the Commander's Objective.
During my time in the USAF, I was a Missile Electronics Technician (special weapons) and if the enemy forces got far enough in to threaten my crew then everyone was totally boned. This did not mean I wasn’t a good shot or could not handle the weapon, it just wasn’t my job. When I accepted a commission with the USN and became a Surface Warfare Officer my mission changed to indirect support, yet at the same time as Ship’s Security Forces Officer, it was important I could effectively handle firearms to protect my ship. Even later, when I was assigned shore duty as a Naval Gunfire Liaison Officer who deployed with Marines my proficiency became even more critical since I could be expected to operate as a Forward Observer. Although I qualified as an expert with both pistol and rifle, I felt the most comfortable during the short time assigned to the Marines. I also fired more rounds in qualification in those two short years than the combined range time over my 22 yrs career.

Response by TSgt Jennifer Disch made Jan 3 at 2016 7:22 PM

TSgt Jennifer Disch — Sun, 03 Jan 2016 19:22:05 -0500

It doesn't interest them. They think "it's not my job" and that's a fail. I always taught the Airmen and NCOs to look beyond and think outside of the box. When I was EET, that was the biggest write-up.

Response by A1C Justin Bates made Jan 3 at 2016 7:56 PM

A1C Justin Bates — Sun, 03 Jan 2016 19:56:47 -0500

Isn't that why we're taught about M16s during BEAST Week?

Response by SrA David Steyer made Jan 3 at 2016 8:02 PM

SrA David Steyer — Sun, 03 Jan 2016 20:02:43 -0500

I wish I had an answer but I do know the last few years I was in from 2012 to 2015, I was required to take a CBT related to the Gun Control Act of 1968 every year. I know it doesn't count as qualifying but the fact we did this every year I found it a possible waste of time. Maybe if we qualified every year or so often I would see this being a great idea.

It wasn't hard and I paid attention because I was looking for value in it, seeing that I don't own any firearms and I was in a medical AFSC that only qualifies depending on deployments, overseas PCS and/or if they are on a medical team that requires it. Was told it was an Air Force requirement, even though the training was not on a DoD site.

EDIT: I will say it could be a waste of time, because if someone violated it while they are in and could no longer carry a weapon and are in an AFSC like Security Forces that would carry one on a regular basis, the training said they could be retrained. Safe to say that won't happen in 2015, and if someone violated it before they joined, I am getting ahead of myself because they wouldn't even be able to join. And if they do get in trouble, being aware or unaware of the federal law would be the last thing on their mind or to worry about.

Response by SSgt Jim Gilmore made Jan 3 at 2016 8:43 PM

SSgt Jim Gilmore — Sun, 03 Jan 2016 20:43:47 -0500

I can't speak for anyone but myself on this. I had to qualify on M-16 in basic. I again had to qualify prior to each deployment to Southeast Asia along with qualifying on the .38 (old school) and the venerable 1911, .45ACP. While I don't necessarily subscribe to the every man a rifleman first mentality, It is definitely headed that direction. Yes, you should know the business end and how to load the damn thing. I have read where the combat controllers and combat weather are embedding with Army SF and other units. I do agree that USAF should be as well trained and as fit as the other branches.

Response by SPC Jeff Zimmerman made Jan 3 at 2016 8:51 PM

SPC Jeff Zimmerman — Sun, 03 Jan 2016 20:51:49 -0500

Only if you could guarantee that you'd never be under enemy fire, otherwise it makes sense to be trained in basic weapons usage. In today's climate I'd say better safe than sorry.

Response by SSgt Ed Tyler made Jan 3 at 2016 8:53 PM

SSgt Ed Tyler — Sun, 03 Jan 2016 20:53:50 -0500

It goes back to the mid '60s when they shut down all of the competitive marksmanship programs in the Air Force. I was chasing a birth on the Air Force Rifle Team at the time and of all things got stranded in Hawaii because of the decision.

Response by SSgt Rilene Ann made Jan 3 at 2016 8:58 PM

SSgt Rilene Ann — Sun, 03 Jan 2016 20:58:47 -0500

I was active 76-81 and qualified on pistols as member of honor guard.

Response by Sgt William Themann made Jan 3 at 2016 10:00 PM

Sgt William Themann — Sun, 03 Jan 2016 22:00:07 -0500

In 1985 I had to re-qualify on the M-16 to PCS to Osan AB. I think the laws should change and we should have carry qualified citizens. I was a 307X0 Tech Controller!. Worked in the HTACC.

Response by SMSgt Tony Barnes made Jan 3 at 2016 10:09 PM

SMSgt Tony Barnes — Sun, 03 Jan 2016 22:09:40 -0500

Exactly...said that for years. And then at Al Jaber I wasn't allowed to arm up as I went to the airport in the middle of the night. I started out in the Marine Corps and couldn't believe the short sightedness.

Response by PO2 Jeffery Marcussen Sr made Jan 3 at 2016 10:19 PM

PO2 Jeffery Marcussen Sr — Sun, 03 Jan 2016 22:19:34 -0500

gentlemen lets look at it this way things are changing drastically with terror groups popping up everywhere now days. it is getting tantamount that every service member is in jeopardy no matter where they are. and it is foolish to believe that a certain mos or duty station is not a target. i believe it is a disservice to all our personnel not to be trained with at least one type of weapon. look at the recruiting center in tennessee. it is of no tactical value but it was shot up any way. do any of you really believe that only certain places and mos is targeted? no one and i mean no one in a u.s. uniform is immune to being targeted. i think it is foolish not to have every service member trained in at least one type of firearm if not two one pistol and one rifle. they do not need to make expert but they need to know enough to get it on target in the right direction and locked and loaded on the right target. even if they can't hit a target more than 25m away at least they can defend against a terrorist at closer ranges where they will most likely encounter them and not shot there head or feet off in doing so with proper training. and it may not even be on base when it happens it could be a recruiting center or some other none essential location but only a target of opportunity where it is more than likely a gun free location normally. it is time we forgot gun free military locations and have our personnel trained and have if nothing else a weapons safe and weapons in them. i do not like the thought of leaving any warrior unarmed and not able to protect themselves.

Response by SPC Kortney Kistler made Jan 3 at 2016 10:52 PM

SPC Kortney Kistler — Sun, 03 Jan 2016 22:52:22 -0500

Prepping for deployment in 03' we were told, in no way, shape, or form, were we allowed to prepare our vehicles with field expedient gun mounts, up armoring, or any other modifications that might have increased survivability.
My platoon took it upon themselves to acquire the necessary material to construct such devices and waited until we arrived in theater to deploy/employ them. Nobody cared at that point, but many in the rest of the battalion were wondering why we were issued such equipment and they weren't. Then they were rooting around through the dump looking for anything to improve their situation.

Including not being able to modify our equipment, we weren't allowed to train in a manner that would have better prepared us for combat. No familiarization with MA2 or the Mark 19. My platoon requested MOUT training. We requested live fire exercises from a moving vehicle. Denied, denied, denied.
We were Engineers, Combat Heavy. We were there for construction, not fighting (SMH). So, the majority of my company were awarded CABs (including myself) not that many of you care.

You guys with rank saying it's not your job, we don't have the money to train you, there are measures in place so you don't have to worry about that sort of thing, I think it's time to get your head out of your fifth point of contact and realize that there is a war going on. And like all the kids in T-ball, everybody plays, everybody gets to bat. With all that in mind, you should be proficient at your job as well.

Response by SrA Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 3 at 2016 11:44 PM

SrA Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 03 Jan 2016 23:44:39 -0500

Airmen need to be taught weapons handling and self defense just as any other service member. This mindset the Air Force has with being behind friendly lines all of the time or having someone else there to protect them is flawed. This isn't the 1940s or 50s anymore. There aren't always going to be a clear divider between friendly forces and hostile forces. The GWOT should be a great point in case to this. What happens when we enter a war with a country's government and the opposition is a true war fighting force and they make a major attack on a friendly base? Airmen who either don't have access to firearms or aren't proficient with them will just be slaughtered. I have deployed twice and been in the Air Force for 3 years. Every time I've gone to CATM before I deployed I have seen an Airman do something dangerous because of their lack of consistent real world training on weapons safety and handling. The last time I went a SSgt (E-5) flagged the whole line of shooters with a loaded M4 because he wasn't paying attention. Crap like that can easily be corrected. Losing personnel in an attack because of a lack of weapons skills readiness can not be corrected as easily as it could be prevented.

Response by Capt Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 3 at 2016 11:55 PM

Capt Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 03 Jan 2016 23:55:40 -0500

Personally I believe that every service member should be qualified on a rifle and a pistol. As we have seen since 9/11 service members have been called to do things outside of their primary job. Who would have ever thought that we would have Air Force guys running ground convoys, but we did. This took Air Force guys outside the wire and put them in the line of fire. The environment of the military these days is a joint environment. Each branch has their own specialty but there are some jobs during a time of war that anybody in the DoD should be able to do, including defending the base with standard weaponry (M-4/M-16). At smaller operating locations they rely on everyone in the camp to defend it if they are attacked. This was the case of a recent deployment I had with a special operations unit. We had our own SOF security team that was in charge of our personel and equipment. There was a conventional Air Force Security Forces element there that for the U.S. compound and the conventional Air Force element there, which was about 3 times the size of our unit. If the compound was attacked the conventional Air Force plan was for all of their personel to man additional posts along the compound walls. This would include personel such as cooks who rarely touch a weapon, at least for the Air Force. Our unit had our own contingency plan and weapons for an attack because our unit was designed to self sufficient if need be. If we were attacked I would take a rifle, that I'm not currently qualified on but know how to use, in order to defend myself and my teammates. In my time on Active Duty I have only had the opportunity to qualify on the M-4 once, which wasn't for my deployment. I had to qualify on the M-4 while I worked as an augmentee for the Security Forces on my base. During the qualification there were 2 negligent discharges, both from Security Forces reservist. She was a MSgt (E-7) and had been a cop in both the Navy and Air Force but obviously wasn't fully competent with her primary weapons. During my most recent qualification, which was only on the M-9, there was a MSgt who hadn't fired a weapon since she was at boot camp. By this time in a military career you should be an expert with a weapon. Although I personally feel comfortable with weapons, I don't feel comfortable with the amount of time I get with the weapons that I am expected to use in combat. I think in order to solve this, the DoD will have to make a minimum standard for all service members that the services will have to follow. These joint standards would enable the DoD to use any service member to fill critical billets in a time of war. Regardless of our job in the military, the public views us as war fighters, which we should be trained to be.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 4 at 2016 12:17 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 04 Jan 2016 00:17:04 -0500

You and me both, means I'd get to shoot more. I know the m-4/m-16/m-9 bc I own similar weapons, but yea some security forces are completely clueless.

Response by PFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 4 at 2016 12:56 AM

PFC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 04 Jan 2016 00:56:57 -0500

I can't believe that I'm seeing people defend the AF'S lack of training and proficiency. Warfare is asymmetrical, if it gets bad everyone fights, everyone needs to be proficient. The I'll rely on somebody else mentality is exactly how an entire unit gets wiped out or a base gets over run. The strength of the US military is in part because everyone should be cross training knowing not only your job but the person above you, and in this case below if that's how you view the grunts (at your own peril).

Response by MSgt J D McKee made Jan 4 at 2016 3:59 AM

MSgt J D McKee — Mon, 04 Jan 2016 03:59:49 -0500

During Desert Storm, I saw a young Airman with an obviously new M16 in the chow hall. He was in some AFSC other than 811XO. After hearing him talk to his fellows about getting the weapon, I can't remember much about the conversation now, but it was obvious he'd never had much training. I asked him if I could check the weapon, it still had that frosted look they get after deep storage. The little cardboard tube was still in the barrel they put in there before they heat seal them. He was going somewhere downrange and they at least gave him a weapon and ammo, but obviously little training. Had he fired it with the tube in the barrel, he would have hurt himself far worse than his target.

When I went through the Security Specialist Tech School (before it was the "Academy") in 1973, they told us about the Korean war, where some airbase in Korea was guarded by the Army, until the General in charge decided to pull the infantry off to take another hill or some such shit, and the base was overrun. I was told, in the USAF school, that they found the Air Police (good for breaking up fights at the club) hanging from meathooks in hangers with surveillance photos pinned to them showing them trying to use .30 carbine mags in .30 M1 Garands, which use the 30.06 round and not the much smaller .30 Carbine. So they made the Security Police during VietNam. Still haven't got it right. Probably never will because there are too many idiots with no grasp of objective reality who are in positions of authority.

During Desert Storm (I accept this is a sorry example, we simply murdered them, a great war) about 250 security forces were guarding a major war wing of about 7,000 people. One idiot, who happened to be an E9 in the Security Police, actually wanted to set up an ARMORY and have everyone off-duty (what? there is an "off-duty" in a war??) from the security force turn in their weapons. He was shot down by our Colonel, but if he'd been able, he would have cut the already undermanned armed force in half. Munitions people had M16's but there was much dithering about that, including from their bosses who didn't trust their own people. What? You'd rather have an ND or two because it COSTS MONEY to train people and rather risk getting overrun?

During the same war, i had an E8 on my base in the UK tell me I couldn't take a suppressor to Desert Storm because it was "illegal"--again, what?? We have nukes, we have napalm, machine-guns R'us are you kidding me? I had to get an opinion from the base legal office before he would 'approve" of that. Of course, he might have been miffed at being left behind....many assholes were.

The Belgians got it right. I inspected Kliene Brogel (sp) as a NATO Active Defense inspector once, and a fuel truck driver impressed me with the quality of his weapon (something in a 5.56 by FN) and the depth of his knowledge, not the textbook answer of what the range was, but what MOA he personally could do at what range.

Sir Winston Churchill said of the RAF during WWII, to the effect that every airfield should be a hive of armed airmen defending the aircraft. That isn't a quote, he probably didn't say "hive", but that's what he meant. I have to agree with the greatest military leader of the 20th century in this.

Will there ever BE a time when all we have to fight are our enemy, and not retards barely able to feed themselves who are continually waffling on about things they have no clue about?

YES, it's the AIR Force. Of COURSE, the flying things are the primary weapons, BUT:

A fucking SPACESHIP isn't much good if it's burning on the ground or the pilot is dead.

There is no excuse for sending our children to fight for us and not at least arming and training them.

If It sounds like I'm passionate about this, I am. This raked over many old coals for me. I no longer have to listen to idiots pontificate simply because they have more rank than me. Gonna do any good? Nope. At least the USAF isn't still being run like a cheap Japanese car factory. I hope.

Response by MSgt Michelle Mondia made Jan 4 at 2016 5:02 AM

MSgt Michelle Mondia — Mon, 04 Jan 2016 05:02:35 -0500

In case of hostile events...

Response by 1stSgt Eugene Harless made Jan 4 at 2016 5:49 AM

1stSgt Eugene Harless — Mon, 04 Jan 2016 05:49:59 -0500

Every service member should go through the basics of handling, cleaning and doing a familarization with small arms. perhaps a week in recruit training at least.

Response by SFC Rollie Hubbard made Jan 4 at 2016 6:44 AM

SFC Rollie Hubbard — Mon, 04 Jan 2016 06:44:18 -0500

Don't the AF teach the basic rifle marksmanship in basic training?

Response by Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 4 at 2016 8:19 AM

Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 04 Jan 2016 08:19:28 -0500

Because most of the Air Force doesn't carry a weapon day-to-day? We fight in the air, not on the ground. Even if something were to happen, we aren't carrying those weapons around all day...we would end up clustered at the armory, all trying to check them out in a hurry.

If you're that excited about carrying an M-16, maybe join the Army?

Response by Maj Kevin "Mac" McLaughlin made Jan 4 at 2016 8:19 AM

Maj Kevin "Mac" McLaughlin — Mon, 04 Jan 2016 08:19:54 -0500

I don't know if anything has changed but from what I always understood, all Airmen qualify on either the M-16 (Enlisted) or M-9 (officer) upon initial training into the Air Force. From there we continue to qualify in conjunction with our AEF and/or through just in time training before an unexpected/short notice deployment. I had not qualified in a few years about 2 years from my retirement as I was serving in either a joint or non-deployable position. As soon as I got back into a deployable position I was tagged for a short tour (retirement present). I had 3 weeks to prepare for an Air Advisor role (hostile environment) and they qualified me on both the M-4 and M-9. From there I attended the Air Advisor Academy course (great training by the way) where we were required to take Advance Weapons Training, Self Protection, and many of the Combat Arms Training most about to be deployed personnel go through at Ft Dix or Camp Bullis.

We are not a ground fighting force and yes, we do usually defer to those who are trained more to take those roles. Still, After experiencing a Green on Green followed by a Green on Blue event in a 24 hour period on or right outside our own FOB, everyone served time on the wall for 24/7 DFP duty. Additionally, we increased our training in defensive tactics, range time, etc thereafter. We may not have been an elite fighting unit of any kind, but I assure you we could hold our own knowing our Army force protection was there with us and ground/air reinforcements were not far away.

Never would I think as a Cyberspace Operations Officer I would watch a live active shooter event from on top of an old Soviet Air Tower, with a UAV and Apache/Blackhawk support flying overhead in the dead of night. Very surreal experience...

I think the level of training required for Airmen is appropriate and often ridiculed due to some of the anecdotes people can refer to (I have some of my own). Still, time after time, I can also point to events where Airmen have come through as quite proficient in understanding what to do and taking action when required.

Response by MSgt Michael Smith made Jan 4 at 2016 8:24 AM

MSgt Michael Smith — Mon, 04 Jan 2016 08:24:05 -0500

You know, I was in 22 years, and I had to qualify at least every 3 years, and EVERY time I deployed. The Air Force has a distinct mission, we are not ground soldiers, and Airmen who do link up and interact with ground soldiers and operations get the training they need. Stop trying to pigeon hole the military into a generalized stereotype. It is mission diversity and distinctive combat capabilities that make the Air Force, and the US Military as a whole the most effective in the world. We are NOT riflemen first -that is why we are called Airmen. If you want to be a rifleman first go green.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 4 at 2016 12:26 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 04 Jan 2016 12:26:38 -0500

The military has become much more complex than primitive kinetic combat. I would say that there are a lot of members of the Air Force whose more intellectual skills correlate with an aversion to aggression, and since the likelihood of them needing to operate a weapon is incredibly low, more priority is given to enabling the skills that provide the most value to the service. Keep in mind that more people died on D-Day than have died over 15 years in Afghanistan. War has changed dramatically, and we have adapted to it.

Response by MSgt David Webb made Jan 4 at 2016 1:53 PM

MSgt David Webb — Mon, 04 Jan 2016 13:53:13 -0500

I was a medic and qualified expert on the M-16 and the M9. I can also tell you what the difference is between an M-16 and an M-4. I don't knowcwhere you got your theory about us not being qualified rifleman but your ignorance looks poorly upon you.

Response by TSgt Gwen Walcott made Jan 4 at 2016 3:16 PM

TSgt Gwen Walcott — Mon, 04 Jan 2016 15:16:59 -0500

The impression that I had when I was in (ok, so it was the Brown Shoe days) was that all airmen DID have to at least qualify --- at least on the S&W .38 Special Service Revolver and the Colt M-16 ---- and most of us had to also include the Remington 410, the Colt M1911, and the Saco M-60.
Now, they don't??

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 4 at 2016 3:32 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 04 Jan 2016 15:32:25 -0500

One word "funding....."

Response by TSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 4 at 2016 4:41 PM

TSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 04 Jan 2016 16:41:56 -0500

I'm not sure if my original post was posted..
Anyway, I'm a 13ish year SF troop here deployed to many Combat Zones (yes and not really nice ones either, ive been in actual combat) and now a reserve CATM instructor. I see first hand the issues we have on a regular basis. Most people in the AF don't enlist to be 'fighters' the enlist to get out of the house or college and this is the easiest and best money making way to do so. Most think "I'll just wait for SF to get here to save me, that's their job right"?. This has actually need said to me. Right frome the gate we need to create a pass/fail ground combat inviornment for EVERYONE and enforce it. When I was taking fire everyone ran and hid but we kept fighting. It's sickening.

Response by 1stSgt Michael Gartland made Jan 4 at 2016 6:15 PM

1stSgt Michael Gartland — Mon, 04 Jan 2016 18:15:50 -0500

Security forces determines the requirements and conducts the training.

I served in maintenance, operations, and support and never felt qualified on the long gun. I took a few pistol classes since I retired and they were phenomenal. I would've taken commercial classes while I was on active duty had I known how good they were.

Response by SSgt Jon Harrison made Jan 4 at 2016 10:23 PM

SSgt Jon Harrison — Mon, 04 Jan 2016 22:23:02 -0500

As a retired ANG I can say that most of my COMM unit were fairly proficient with the M-16 but not so much for any other weapons. The Air Force has had more hands-on with the M-16 than they did back in the 80's when the only time they saw it was during basic training. I've had 10 times more hands-on with the guard units I've been in than I ever did during my 80's active duty stent.

Response by TSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 4 at 2016 11:31 PM

TSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 04 Jan 2016 23:31:43 -0500

As a prior Marine (88-92) and a CATM instructor going back to 2005, I will warn you now, what I have to say is the outright, honest truth and I pull no punches (and say "fuck" a lot) so if that offends you and are easily butt-hurt, stop reading right now. If you're still reading, I will tell you straight out that the small arms training program the Air Force gives amounts to nothing more than a CYA statement for the USAF. In Korea during 1951, Kimpo airbase was over run by the Chi-coms and NKA. Airmen had zero firearms training and after they brushed aside the Security Police, the took every airman they captured and hung them from the rafters in the main hanger! Sadly, Air Force leadership has the long term memory rivaled only by a fucking goldfish! In the Marines, you get Expert, Sharpshooter or Marksman (the shitter seat award) and it WILL have an effect on your promotions! In the Air Force, there seems to be an emphasis on volunteering or education but what happens if they can't shoot? The command will like a monkey flinging shit at a wall hoping for something to stick, keep sending them back out over and over again until they do qualify. I had a MSgt. that the shit finally stuck to the wall on her 8th fucking attempt and that was with a barely passing score of 18 out of 50! There is no further adverse reactions should they fail to qualify. I seen a 2nd LT when I was in the Marines that got a 186 with a passing score of 189 out of 250 possible. The skipper had him beat his face in front of the entire Company formation! Don't give me that "unprofessional" or "hazing" bullshit! He embarrassed the Company so the skipper made damn sure he knew what embarrassment the company had to feel having a non-shooting fuck leading a platoon! It worked! Next time he qualified and everybody knew that God save the poor bastard that ever failed like that again!
Want to know what it's like for CATM instructors out there doing this job? Do a Youtube search for "A Day in the Life of a CATM Troop." That's one I made and again, I pull no punches about what I consider my career highlight film. Everything in that video is based off of real events and only the names have been hidden to protect the incompetent!
The other problem is in the mentality. I've had a med group Captain tell me she was scared of guns (hoplophobia) or the elitism of how their war is in the air. I lso had a F-15E pilot try to tell me that one too once. Kind of took the wind out of his prima donna sails when I mentioned the name Captain Scott O'Grady getting flamed and now having to rely on an M9 while he E&E'd on the ground!
No, sadly, it will take another Kimpo massacre, the Air Force will trot out their 522 waving it in their peter-beater saying, "Well, they were trained", and then somebody taking a look at the level of training they need to "qualify" if not the whole Air Force culture.

Response by Capt James Warren made Jan 5 at 2016 12:53 AM

Capt James Warren — Tue, 05 Jan 2016 00:53:36 -0500

I see both sides of the argument; as an enlisted flight line worker I qualified expert on the M16 and M4. As an officer I qualified on the M9, but the writing was on the wall from the start: if I was responsible for the defense of the installation, we'd lost the war, and were simply trying to survive. In the Air Force, SF provides Force Protection. That's doctrine. Me as an Intelligence officer maneuvering on the battlefield is ridiculous when my mission set provides so much more to the overall fight from inside the hardened facility (RPA ops).
But here's the other side: I made sure I understood how to maintain and operate the weapons I'm qualified in, and I maintain that proficiency on my own time, on my own dime. I own the civilian version of each one (and some others), and I regularly visit my local range to keep my skills sharp. It's not like riding a bicycle, your skills stagnate. I'm committed to serving in the profession of arms, and in the case of the Air Force, that means going beyond the requirement to ensure you're prepared for the fight you hope never comes.

Response by TSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 5 at 2016 4:22 AM

TSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 05 Jan 2016 04:22:16 -0500

“ The internal defense of USAF bases and the survival of downed aircrew members may be dependent upon individual proficiency with assigned firearms. All Air Force personnel have defense responsibilities against overt and covert enemy action. To discharge these responsibilities, the fundamental military concept of competency with firearms must be reinstated within the Air Force. ”
— General Curtis E. LeMay
From the man who started CATM/SAMTU........

Response by SrA Daniel Hunter made Jan 5 at 2016 10:46 AM

SrA Daniel Hunter — Tue, 05 Jan 2016 10:46:14 -0500

If the base is overrun, all the Marines are dead. Should all Sailors need to learn land navigation? Should all Soldiers learn water survival? Should all Marines need to learn how to read? ;)

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Jan 5 at 2016 3:13 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Tue, 05 Jan 2016 15:13:22 -0500

And we learned that weapons cleaning is an imperative.

Response by MSgt Steve Shook made Jan 6 at 2016 2:33 AM

MSgt Steve Shook — Wed, 06 Jan 2016 02:33:18 -0500

These are the Instructions for AF weapons qualification and Arming Categories. Category A is Pararescue, SF, Combat Weather, TacP, Red Horse, etc,. Category B is everyone else that fills a deployment billet, they receive weapons training before deploying. The AF does not have the CATM personnel or training ammunition budget to qualify every Wrench Turner, Personnel or Services troop annually.

Additionally based on my experiences during the First Gulf War its not that safe giving everyone in the Air Force or the Army a damn rifle, we took them away from the tourists about a month in, the Army just never gave their admin and mechanics bullets and they still almost blew up the entire base.

"2.4. Weapons Training Requirements. AFI 36-2226, Combat Arms Program, contains specific training requirements for each arming group, personnel selected for overseas assignments, and personnel assigned to fill a unit type code (UTC) where qualification with duty
weapons must be met prior to authorizing personnel to bear firearms. AFCFMs may impose additional firearms proficiency or sustainment training policies once personnel are weapons qualified in accordance with AFI 36-2226. Only personnel task-certified through combat arms sections are authorized to conduct live-fire proficiency/sustainment training; refer to AFI 36-2226 for proficiency training requirements. Unit commanders must ensure the following training is completed.

2.4.1. Qualification Training Frequencies. Generally, Group A personnel with an arming requirement must complete weapons qualification annually and Group B personnel tasked to deploy complete weapons qualification during pre-deployment Just-in-Time training.
Specific weapons qualification training requirements and frequencies are directed by AFI 36-2226.

2.4.2. Overseas Assignments. Before being stationed overseas, personnel identified by personnel processing code (PPC) must receive small arms weapons training IAW AFI 36-2226 and use of force training IAW section 2.5. of this instruction.

2.4.3. Mobility Forces. All personnel assigned to fill a UTC receive small arms and use of force training as prescribed for their respective qualification group.

Response by SSgt Mike Hogan made Jan 6 at 2016 11:46 AM

SSgt Mike Hogan — Wed, 06 Jan 2016 11:46:08 -0500

I agree with you. I was in communications during my years of service. I was told to be sure to destroy the comm gear if we got overrun. WTF give me an M16 so I can defend my post and myself while destroying the gear. Anyway, government is to cheap to give ammo to the AF. My kid deployes to the big sand box tomorrow. He was allowed to fire the M4 for 40 rounds. That was the extent of his training.

Response by Sgt Judy Leonard made Jan 6 at 2016 11:03 PM

Sgt Judy Leonard — Wed, 06 Jan 2016 23:03:53 -0500

Every member I new had train and qualify every year

Response by MSgt Darren VanDerwilt made Jan 8 at 2016 10:48 AM

MSgt Darren VanDerwilt — Fri, 08 Jan 2016 10:48:31 -0500

I agree completely. Any argument against it, especially from the laughable CATM types, ignores the fact that this is how the Marine Corps operate. FYI, they maintain and operate fighter aircraft while having to remain proficient with a rifle. The concept of Air Force personnel being "in the rear with the gear" ignores the reality of modern warfare.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 11 at 2016 1:25 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 11 Jan 2016 13:25:34 -0500

Your question is incorrectly asked. All USAF personnel are trained/qualified on the M-16/M-4. Select personnel are trained on M-9 based on Carrerfeild, Duty position, or Special Duty assignment.

Your question should be, "Why aren't USAF personnel proficient on their primary duty weapon?"

The answer is simply mission requirements. The Air Force by design is not a forward fighting force. Air Force deploys to a secure location then generates alert aircraft flying force.

If you ever get a chance read your bases OPLAN requirements. It will answer a lot of your questions.

(Yes...carrerfield is misspelled, but I'm not re-typing half this post to correct it.)

Response by SrA Conrad Lewis made Jan 13 at 2016 10:41 AM

SrA Conrad Lewis — Wed, 13 Jan 2016 10:41:16 -0500

I was a boom and we carried 9's and was expert on both the 9 and 16 but my job was to refuel planes that came up to our ass for a lil gas and when deployed we had armed guards go with us when we went off base so really no need for it but damn I felt better havin my 9 when we did. I agree with you though, more training and carrying needs to go on

Response by TSgt Dan Decker made Jan 14 at 2016 2:52 PM

TSgt Dan Decker — Thu, 14 Jan 2016 14:52:17 -0500

Has it changed? When did it change? I had to qualify with the M-1 Carbine in Basic, last flight to use the M-1; everyone after that used the M-16. I had to qualify every year after Basic with the M-16, fired Expert every time. During the Vietnam War, I had a defensive position assigned at Udorn Royal Thai Air Force Base next to my shop. They kept our weapons and ammo in a conex parked next to our building. We would have had to line up to get our gear issued if we had been attacked. But it was planned that we WOULD defend ourselves.

Response by SGT Benjamin Lindsey made Jan 16 at 2016 10:46 AM

SGT Benjamin Lindsey — Sat, 16 Jan 2016 10:46:28 -0500

It's not only the Air Force, I have seen this in the Army also. There is a video going around social media of an NCO in the reserves that has issues at a range. Her excuse is the she is a reservist. That is what normally follows with lack of soldiering skills is an excuse why they are not up to par.

Response by TSgt David Scott made Feb 9 at 2016 1:46 AM

TSgt David Scott — Tue, 09 Feb 2016 01:46:28 -0500

I was in the AF for twenty years, and a Desert Storm vet. It was so upsetting to me that many of the airmen that I served with in Saudi Arabia couldn't shoot their way out of a wet paper bag. To make matters worse the day after we arrived in Rhiad they (USAF) took our M-16's from us. I spent the next four months there empty handed and they wonder why I was paranoid. AF really needs to rethink their position on that

Response by CPL Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 10 at 2016 3:58 PM

CPL Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 10 Feb 2016 15:58:18 -0500

I'm just gonna leave this here... there will always be someone that doesn't know how to use a rifle, its sad, but true regardless of branch. (watch until about 1:30, rest is commentary)

Response by A1C Robert Chabot made Feb 18 at 2016 9:51 AM

A1C Robert Chabot — Thu, 18 Feb 2016 09:51:24 -0500

if the army , or marines need insurtion or evacuation, they hop on an aircraft, and "ditty maw" to get that aircraft airborn, somehow, the whole airbase ,is involved, all the grunts need to do is " have our 6. keep them off us, we'll get you outta here if need be. if you can't shoot a gun, you can't shoot a gun. air police esspecially, are wannabe warriors, from their world of warcraft video games. very capible of standing in front of cars. but if the base needs defending, we always had the army on speed dial. former c-130 crew chief 1971-1975

Response by CW2 Carl Swanson made Mar 14 at 2016 12:23 PM

CW2 Carl Swanson — Mon, 14 Mar 2016 12:23:50 -0400

Sorry, but the Air Force just has a totally different mentality sometimes. When I was in Task Force Hawk in Albania in 1999, we had the combat operation on one side of the airfield. Full battle rattle, ammo issued, no saluting, the whole deal.
On the other side of the airfield, was the "humanitarian" mission with the Air Force. Those folks were literally running around in sneakers, shorts and t-shirts and were not worried for their safety because "we are the humanitarian mission, nobody wants to hurt us."
What?! The security forces for the Air Force were there in their armored Humvees, and were actually pointing their weapons at us as we arrived on the airfield.
Sometimes, you just can't relate!

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 14 at 2016 3:32 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 14 Mar 2016 15:32:14 -0400

I am fully capable of accurately firing my assigned weapon, plus I fire my privately owned weapons to maintain/improve my efficiency. However, if things ever get so bad that an O4 supply officer is having to pick up a rifle and fight off the mongol hordes, you are already having a very bad day and the best option is to find the nearest operational vehicle and GTFO. just sayin.....

Response by SrA Leah Murchie made May 18 at 2016 1:45 AM

SrA Leah Murchie — Wed, 18 May 2016 01:45:04 -0400

When I deployed to Bagram I saw the same thing when I was visiting a friend who was a crew chief, others were having a hard time taking the m-4 apart and putting it back together. My friend told me a lot of the others didn't even know how to shoot it. To make matters worse when we were checking are ammo out we pulled them out of the ammo box and they were all rusted, we had to take them all apart and put new links on. Who knows how long they were like that.... So heads up.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made May 18 at 2016 8:58 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 18 May 2016 08:58:11 -0400

I'm comm and every time I do CATM or when I was in Korea and we did exercises I couldn't help but think how screwed I would be with other people from my unit. I guess from growing up in the Midwest and the fact that my dad took me shooting I knew how to hold a weapon. I've had to as a brand new airman help some senior NCOs put their bolt carrier group back in the right way, or clear a jam, and it really doesn't inspire much confidence. Also, when we had exercises and the SF airmen had all the blanks in the world and they wanted us to yell bang bang it turned into a joke. I wish the AF would change how they do it but I know with today's budget it won't.

Response by MSgt R Gpl made Jun 23 at 2016 9:30 PM

MSgt R Gpl — Thu, 23 Jun 2016 21:30:38 -0400

Members of the Air Force DO QUALIFY on their Primary (and in some cases, Primary and Secondary weapon) prior to deploying. The Base Combat Arms Section conducts weapon classes daily, and at times must teach multiple weapons or courses of fire in the same day. Unless each Combat Arms section were tripled in size (most CATM shops are 4-7 personnel) and had additional firing ranges built and maintained at each base (it's hard enough to manage the ranges we currently have) there is NO WAY possible to train every Tom, Dick, and Mary in the Air Force each year. --- Perhaps, If more Airman adopted the 'warrior ethos' and purchased an AR15 and stayed proficient with it throughout the year, they would come to a weapon class much more prepared and be less likely to embarrass themselves in front of other services. - Retired Combat Arms Instructor (21 Years)

Response by MSgt Darren VanDerwilt made Jun 25 at 2016 2:46 AM

MSgt Darren VanDerwilt — Sat, 25 Jun 2016 02:46:36 -0400

This mindset may likely put people into body bags. It's the 20th anniversary of the Khobar Towers bombing. I arrived a week after the event. While there I asked, "what would happen if several hundred radicals attacked the installation, are ther enough weapons for everyone to help defend?' The answer was a strait NO. There were only enough weopons for the SF people assigned.

So here we are in the 21st Century, where 4th generation, asymmetric, non-linear warfare is the rule versus the exeption. During training exercises, years after the 91 Gulf War, we were still practicing for SCUD attacks while ignoring the ever growing likelihood that a small unit could wreck havoc and shut down the flying operation. While we're hunkered down in our simulated bunkers a team could easily blast the door open, toss in a few grenades, then walk through gunning everyone down.

The problem revolves around the unrealistic training and certification requirements along with little grasp of common sense. For example; during a PACAF IG evaluation exercise, a team manning a machine gun (M-60) was given an exercise input "weapon fails to fire." The crew quickly evaluates the weapon when the IG team gives another input, "Fireing pin is broken." The crew grab another Fireing pin, replace it, then function check the weapon. The IG failed these guys for not using Tech Data. It's supposed to be a combat situation for goodness sakes!

It's my opinion that Air Force leadership are Hopliphobes. They don't trust their Airmen with weapons for personal protection, but trust those same Airmen to keep their multi-million dollar weapons systems flying.

Response by MSgt Devon Saunders made Jun 25 at 2016 9:08 AM

MSgt Devon Saunders — Sat, 25 Jun 2016 09:08:15 -0400

If a Airman can't take care of a weapon and what's required to care of it and use it, that's a sign of a shitty instructor... Maybe YOU The Air Force CATM instructor needs to look in the mirror.

Response by 1stSgt Nelson Kerr made Aug 30 at 2016 8:08 AM

1stSgt Nelson Kerr — Tue, 30 Aug 2016 08:08:13 -0400

OK h where are you going to find the training days to prepare fore something that last happened half a cetera ago? Since seduces are dammed full now what skills are you going to drop off the schedule? The likelihood of an AB being over until is too low to give up other mission capabilities to prepare for.

Response by Sgt Joe Butler made Aug 30 at 2016 9:07 AM

Sgt Joe Butler — Tue, 30 Aug 2016 09:07:50 -0400

I was in the Air Force from 1966 to 1970. When I went in, I did think we would get more training in weapons and hand-to-hand combat. We had one day at the range after classroom on the M-16. Though I did obtain the Expert Marksman ribbon, that may have been dumb luck. We had no hand-to-hand combat training. When I was in we had the shortened basic due to Vietnam but I think that was a mistake. I agree with you completely that the Air Force should do a lot more to make every Airman capable of properly using rifles, handguns and hand-to-hand fighting.

Response by Maj Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 30 at 2016 9:47 AM

Maj Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 30 Aug 2016 09:47:02 -0400

That's an age old problem. It wasn't that much of a problem during the 24 years I served because we weren't deploying to combat theaters all the time. I served 24 years, 11 years enlisted in Telecommunications. I qualified on the M-16 in basic and then qualified again when deploying to Okinawa. I never touched a weapon after that until I qualified again in OTS. I got in a lot of range time and experience cleaning weapons as an SP and carried a 16 for two years working missile security.

If I were still in, even in Telecommunications I would want as much range time as I could get especially if deploying to a combat theater.

What's my personal weapon now? It's this GAU. And yes I can easily strip it and clean it.

Response by Sgt Diane Nicoloff made Aug 30 at 2016 11:45 AM

Sgt Diane Nicoloff — Tue, 30 Aug 2016 11:45:49 -0400

It has been several years since I was in the Air Force and I do not know if the standards have changed, but when I went through basic training in 1984 you were just required to shoot the M-16 you did not have to qualify and you only had to do M-16 training once every four years unless you were security police or law enforcement and then you had to qualify every six months. I was an Inventory Management Specialist. On my second assignment I was in a combat rated unit and then I had to qualify on the M-16 every year. Our unit deployed all over the world in hostile environments and we were one of the first units on the ground to set up communications during Desert Storm and Desert Shield and we all knew how to use our weapons. So it was based on your MOS or the unit you were assigned to. Many MOS's in the Air Force will never see combat or a hostile theater of operations.

Response by SSgt Samuel Johnson made Aug 30 at 2016 11:50 AM

SSgt Samuel Johnson — Tue, 30 Aug 2016 11:50:26 -0400

I totally agree. I was in a Combat Crew career field. I was a member of a mobile RADAR team who would set up near the FEBA. Our RADAR was a big target and we knew it. We trained often on many weapons and knew we became 11B's (Infantry) when the RADAR was gone. Prepare for the worst, hope for the best!

Response by MSgt Don Dobbs made Aug 30 at 2016 1:37 PM

MSgt Don Dobbs — Tue, 30 Aug 2016 13:37:09 -0400

Today Airmen are taught the M-16 from early on in Basic They now carry an M-16 dummy weapon from I believe the first Week Of Training to the 6th WOT. They are now also deployed to "The Field" during warrior week where they learn Air Base defense chemical warfare and self aid buddy care. Things have changed a lot for AF trainees since I was an MTI. I agree with the intent of the post because when I deployed to Somalia in 92 we had Airmen that were clueless abut their weapons and how to set up a tent etc. The main drawback to this training is the actual experience of deployment. If an Airman serves several years without deploying he/she loses the skills taught in Basic.

Response by TSgt James Carson made Aug 30 at 2016 2:41 PM

TSgt James Carson — Tue, 30 Aug 2016 14:41:38 -0400

Hate to say it, the Air Force only trains most of its personnel to be techs. It's up to individuals to seek training in infantry style weapons. Most Air bases most likely expect a nuclear attack which means infantry weapons will be of little use. In foreign countries the Air Force relies on the host country for guidance on defense. Turkey is a example to watch at this time since the Air Force has facilities there.

Response by TSgt James Carson made Aug 30 at 2016 2:52 PM

TSgt James Carson — Tue, 30 Aug 2016 14:52:57 -0400

I'd like to say I am expert on rifles and pistols. I relied on outside training to become qualified. The Air Force was often hit and miss on training when I served from 1969 to 1991. I learned because of history of overrun bases during Korea and Viet Nam. Weapons are locked up in the arms room on base and most likely unavailable to airmen as often the case in Viet Nam. You usually found one one the ground and then you'd look for ammo as best you could. Usually though you were just a free target when maintaining assigned aircraft.

Response by MSgt Joe Marcom made Aug 30 at 2016 3:47 PM

MSgt Joe Marcom — Tue, 30 Aug 2016 15:47:58 -0400

Regrettably, what you say is true; except for the Flight Line Security troops and some Spec Ops guys, the Air Force has been hoplophobic at least since the '60s. As an air cargo courier, I qualified with the S&W "Victory Model" .38, and later, with the M2 carbine; but I was the exception. Many years later, I got my small arms expert ribbon, but only because I was working as a medic with a JTF Bravo team and because I asked. The nature of the current threat mandates that EVERY troop needs to be small-arms qualified. In defense of my branch of service: except for the men and women on the flight line, we ARE a bunch of skilled technicians with little that is primarily of a military nature. I was originally an Army draftee, and there is a world of difference between the two services.

Response by MSgt Ronnie Kelly made Aug 30 at 2016 4:01 PM

MSgt Ronnie Kelly — Tue, 30 Aug 2016 16:01:51 -0400

During my 24 years I too was concerned about this, fortunately I was required to qualify annually at least. For a short time we were required required to qualify on the the M16, 38 cal revolver and due my job, also on 38 Stub Nose used for concealed carry. The latter part of my career it was the M4,M16,M92 and12 ga. Often when deploying as a squadron all support personnel would have to go get required so they could be armed when required. I knew people who had been in 10 plus years and the last they touched a weapon was in basic. To feel more at ease when were out on a mission with extra people who weren't part of my crew, I always made a point to ask when was the last time they qualified, what weapons they were qualified in did they think they could use one without shooting one of my crew. Used to be surprised at the answers I got , but got use to it and pressed on. To this day I feel that you put on the uniform you are required to be able to pick up weapon, no matter which one, and be able to defend yourself and your bothers and sisters. Call me old school if you want. But if stand in front of you, you should at least have my back cov
ered.

Response by Sgt R Inskeep made Aug 30 at 2016 5:09 PM

Sgt R Inskeep — Tue, 30 Aug 2016 17:09:31 -0400

I joined the USAF so that I could learn a skill and I wouldn't have to carry a weapon. I qualified with M-16, .38 and .45, but never had to carry one outside of the range.

Response by TSgt Liza Kazee made Aug 30 at 2016 6:33 PM

TSgt Liza Kazee — Tue, 30 Aug 2016 18:33:29 -0400

Having been deployed twice as an Army asset, even though I was Air Force, I agree that all members should at least be proficient with at least one of the weapons listed. During my 1st deployment I spent a few days at COP Keating and knowing how to use your own weapon as well as others if needed was vitally important. The following year the COP was overrun. During my 2nd deployment our FOB was hit daily, like clock work. I was glad I knew how to handle and take care of both my weapons. It'seems an important thing that all military members should at least have a basic knowledge of.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 30 at 2016 7:18 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 30 Aug 2016 19:18:58 -0400

back in my day we have to shoot and qualify with the m-16.. then strip and clean and put it baack together... also we have to perfrom guard duty for the air hospital when deployed

Response by SMSgt David A Asbury made Aug 30 at 2016 9:48 PM

SMSgt David A Asbury — Tue, 30 Aug 2016 21:48:40 -0400

I retired from the Air Force in 1993. When I entered the Air Force, I got the job as a Security Policeman. That was the job I picked and I got it. During my career as a Security Policeman, I got the training on many weapons. I went thru AZR, which is combat training for those Security Policemen who have orders to Vietnam and Korea. My suggestion for those who want to learn about weapons that the Security Forces use, contact their Operations Superintendent.

Response by SrA A.A. Hall made Aug 31 at 2016 2:30 AM

SrA A.A. Hall — Wed, 31 Aug 2016 02:30:32 -0400

I don't know what's up with the new Air Force, but what I'v seen & heard they make me discussed. When I was in we all went thru rifle training & had to go through it every 6 - 12 months. I even have a ribbon for small arms excellence & proud to say I keep up on my hand gun & rifle skills. Even have taught myself to shoot left-handed as well. I honestly don't know where the Air Force is heading, but it doesn't sound or look good. Sgt. E-4 USAF 31st FMS

Response by Sgt Terry W Drake made Aug 31 at 2016 8:53 AM

Sgt Terry W Drake — Wed, 31 Aug 2016 08:53:03 -0400

Mike Christ married my daughter. But to respond to the comment about weaponry, I was deemed an expert in the field and won the Florida marksmanship challenge in 1969.

Response by 1stSgt Nelson Kerr made Aug 31 at 2016 10:46 AM

1stSgt Nelson Kerr — Wed, 31 Aug 2016 10:46:45 -0400

I am retired USAF, but from an Army family. I find the idea that anyone in the Air Force is trained to Infantry level Combat skilla is silly, with and exception for special ops types. Most peole even in the Army are not trained to that level. Since traini b g and maintaining that level of skill is a n full time job who is going to maintain the equipment?

Response by Maj Bill Smith, Ph.D. made Aug 31 at 2016 11:55 AM

Maj Bill Smith, Ph.D. — Wed, 31 Aug 2016 11:55:58 -0400

I grew up with weapons, so I qualified as expert with the M-16 AND 38.

During Vietnam there were times during the Tet Offensive when Air Force bases were attacked and it was all hands on board. I also have known some surviving Air Force Helicopter gunners whom are still appreciated by Army and Marine who were in combat and were happy when their helicopters arrived to withdraw ground troops.

I'm grateful for the skill sets of all our military. For example, some of the best mechanics in the world work on our aircraft, ships, etc. And, I appreciated those who provided security for these men (and today women). Could go on - but there is no need to do so.

I also spent 3 years attached to Army. I trained military officers from all of the military services.

In my final assignment, I became very especially appreciative of the Marines who provided security for us in Belgium. To take on that commitment, they couldn't be married and were prepared to sacrifice themselves for us.

Response by Sgt GoatDriver Ram made Sep 1 at 2016 12:41 AM

Sgt GoatDriver Ram — Thu, 01 Sep 2016 00:41:38 -0400

The AF is 75% technician oriented and when it comes to being caught between a rock and a hard-place as it was back during Tet, it doesn't take long for the AF tech to catch on the metal end of the rifle points toward the evil-doers rolling over the parameter wire. Nope! the AF is not to be 100% PJ qual'ed and that AF program is way over-board in SEAL related training. Thanks for your concern and we will do better with the general AF population twd M-16 proficiency .

Response by MSgt Darren VanDerwilt made Sep 2 at 2016 10:42 AM

MSgt Darren VanDerwilt — Fri, 02 Sep 2016 10:42:07 -0400

There's more to it then just packing heat. You need training, lots of it. A bunch of Airmen trying to do their daily tasks while humping a rifle, or even packing an M-9 on the hip would be very problematic. I had advocated that the Air Force should keep it's people better trained in the use of firearms with each duty section maintaining an armory. The problem here is funding. To do this, each section will have to have a secure locker with an individual able to issue out weapons. Then there's the requisite loading barrels and arm/disarm procedures. Then consider all these Airmen requiring training in small unit tactics, communication, movement, shoot-don't shoot, etc., with training drills. These are perishable skills. I prefer an avionics technician to concentrate on fixing airplanes.

Response by PO2 Kristy Williams made Sep 3 at 2016 11:58 AM

PO2 Kristy Williams — Sat, 03 Sep 2016 11:58:40 -0400

Hey! Sorry not all of us in the navy know any of that either.

Response by SrA Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 7 at 2016 2:03 AM

SrA Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 07 Sep 2016 02:03:26 -0400

This is no longer the truth as Nov 2015 The Air force is starting to crack down and get more stricter on weapons qualifications depending on unit and command. The Air-guard unit I was with had given individuals three chances at weapons qualifications and If you fail to qualify a third try around your career was at stake or on the chopping block depending AFSC. How do I know this because it happen to me. I can't speak for all units, but weapons qualifications is starting to become just as important as PT fitness qualifications and its being added as a way for reduction in force to weed certain individuals who may not be a good fit within the Air force culture.

My suggestion is to anyone who failed weapons qualifications the first time, I would suggest going to a private range for practice while getting private instructions under a qualified instructor depending on the area of residence

Response by SrA Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 7 at 2016 2:17 AM

SrA Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 07 Sep 2016 02:17:21 -0400

Depending on unit & base for active,reserve, and guard this is no longer the truth , as of Nov 2015 the Air force is starting to crack down and get more stricter on weapons qualifications especially if the unit happens to be a deploy able unit . The Air-guard unit I was with had given individuals three chances at weapons qualifications, and If you fail to qualify a third try around your career was at stake or on the chopping block depending AFSC. How do I know this? because it happen to me. I can't speak for all units, but weapons qualifications is starting to become just as important as PT fitness qualifications and its being added as a way for reduction in force to weed certain individuals who may not be a good fit within the Air force culture.

My suggestion is to anyone who failed weapons qualifications the first time, I would suggest going to a private range for practice while getting private instructions under a qualified instructor depending on the area of residence

Response by SrA Michael Dorwaldt made Sep 8 at 2016 12:42 PM

SrA Michael Dorwaldt — Thu, 08 Sep 2016 12:42:44 -0400

As a flying buff crew chief I was m-16 and m-9 and 38 qualified. I thought of it as a good thing. However, I truly don't believe I would trust some people with a weapon of any sort, including a butter knife! I believe it was a Japanese officer who stated something to the effect of if they were to invade the Continental 48 they would be fighting a war they could not win, because if the fact of at that point the civilian population would blow them to hell.

Response by MSgt John Darchangelo made Dec 15 at 2016 3:29 AM

MSgt John Darchangelo — Thu, 15 Dec 2016 03:29:55 -0500

As a retired Air Force member, I prefer the M-249. Yes, I know how to use it. If one isn't available, I'll take an M-60..

Response by TSgt Dan Decker made Dec 15 at 2016 12:16 PM

TSgt Dan Decker — Thu, 15 Dec 2016 12:16:32 -0500

When did that requirement get dropped for Air Force personnel? We had to qualify out of Basic or we didn't leave Basic. Then we had to qualify every year and before every deployment overseas. I was in the last flight to qualify on the M-1 Carbine out of Basic. The silly thing actually rattled if you had the temerity to shake it!

Response by SSgt Boyd Herrst made Dec 29 at 2016 4:42 PM

SSgt Boyd Herrst — Thu, 29 Dec 2016 16:42:45 -0500

I remember back in my early days in the AF I had to shoot again when I got to my base. I had got expert but they said I was lucky. Even though the guy next to me got pulled out of the line in the last half of the firing. And I was last guy on the line. I got in good with some M.P.s via some Army Cook candidates at Fort Lee, The Quartermaster School. I got invited to go to the range to fire as they had some open slots. I fired expert again.. a Lt Col was there who verified it,
Nope doesn't count, it wasn't a AF group. I kept the target though for keepsake purpose.. that was back in '71. I had join AF Reserve in '70 and that was when I first got expert.. I was scheduled to go to range at Wright-Pat I think or am Army camp not far from there. Had some nasty weather that weekend.. firing cancelled, so I missed out. The next spring I got opportunity to go Active AF. I took it, got to my base and I talked to some Security Specialists..they said let us talk to our Supervisor, maybe he can find a slot on the firing line.. one of them hinted at a bribe(not money but coffee and pastries..). I said I'm just an A1C like you guys, I have no control over that .. I did talk to Sarge at D.H. And he got me a half can coffee and some pastries for the training staff.. I got my slot.. I fired and got expert again.. great firing weather, clear day .. when we were done I got asked to step out and away for a few minutes.. I could see the timbers shake on that building.. the Instructor gave me my paper to take back. It was in a envelope.. I didn't find out until I got back to Squadron.. a few days later, i thought it was bad news.. Tng Sgt. Came by D.H. and gave me the word and gave me a pkg. it had the AF Ribbon for shooting. He said save it for Cmdr.'s call, we'll award it there.. They
Handed me one, not knowing I already had one. The 1Sgt. Asked me how I got
A slot to fire.. I told him.. he just nodded and walked away.. it seemed they had been trying to get slots for 3 months and here comes a Cook and he gets to fire 2 weeks after he gets on base.. S'thing not right.. the matter got dropped, Cmdr. said no use in brooding over it.. it's done !..

Response by A1C Misty Henry made Jan 1 at 2017 11:15 AM

A1C Misty Henry — Sun, 01 Jan 2017 11:15:03 -0500

Ya know, I wondered that myself! We only had to qualify in basic in 1995, and never again.

Response by Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 6 at 2017 10:47 AM

Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 06 Jan 2017 10:47:21 -0500

I think it's because of the role the Air Force is expected to play. The whole point of aircraft is to launch them from safe areas and fly them into combat. If the enemy is "knocking at your door", then your aircraft are already at risk. For combat vehicles, they're much more fragile than your average Abrams tank or MRAP. It doesn't take much to put an aircraft out of commission.

Bottom line, if your average Air Force personnelist or comm guy has become part of your front line force, you have more problems than whether or not they are qualified to shoot.

Response by SrA Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 12 at 2017 3:00 PM

SrA Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 12 Jan 2017 15:00:26 -0500

Sorry to Say my fellow veterans, but Airmen now into today's Airforce must qualify at least in the Airguard unit I was in. I know for fact. I fail qualifications three times due to my own fault and was one of the main reasons why I got the boot besides not getting the CBT'S done on time. I was discharge under honorable all because I didn't take weapons qualifications seriously by practicing at the local range after failing.

Response by SrA Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 12 at 2017 4:29 PM

SrA Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 12 Jan 2017 16:29:45 -0500

My units was very strict on weapons qualifications because we deployed a lot. if you failed after the third try, you could kiss your career good buy even if you were a outstanding Airmen. This was around the time like last year when the military was cutting back on the needed soldiers to save on cost, so if you failed in a certain area they would find away to get rid of you and my fate was failure of weapons qualification.

Many units are starting to get stricter, and if you can't shoot you become useless. I enlisted in 2012 and was honorable discharge around November of 2015. I passed PT and CDC'S but Failed CBT'S and Weapons Training with M4 Rifle so a decision was made to cut the rest of my contract short. I should have took extra lessons outside of my unit after my failures their were no excuses because the area Lived around had plenty of shooting ranges including some with m4 rentals. I guess the moral to the story is you live and you learn .

Response by TSgt James Carson made Jan 27 at 2017 3:27 PM

TSgt James Carson — Fri, 27 Jan 2017 15:27:40 -0500

I was qualified with rifle and pistal when I was in the US Air Force. Since 1969 to 1991. My primary AFSC was Aircraft Structural repair. I was also a crew chief on A-10A 77-0270 for four years at RAF Wood bridge, Egland. I was part of bas e security with a rifle several times and at differant bases. This was only a very few job assignments I had when I was in the Air Force. I don't know what people do these days. I guess they might just do a 9 to 5 job schedule now for all I know. We worked 72 hours at a time many times.

Response by SSgt Nicholas Merchant made Jan 28 at 2017 6:13 AM

SSgt Nicholas Merchant — Sat, 28 Jan 2017 06:13:35 -0500

Its funny I was stationed at a nuke base as SF when the base went into excersise to upload b52s the entire base was mobilized and used wd had a HUMV with a cook in it who decided to play with his m14 like a toy a round was fired next to the drivers ear, there is no simple answer here because every base has a different mission and different needs all i know is weapons training in basic is not dnough

Response by SSgt Boyd Welch made Feb 7 at 2017 4:48 PM

SSgt Boyd Welch — Tue, 07 Feb 2017 16:48:25 -0500

Two dynamics at play here. When I grew up, dads and granddads taught weapons safety to boys and sometimes girls. We learned the proper way to handle a weapon, the safety rules, different types of ammunition, how to safely clean a weapon and reassemble. The only pressure was "What you gonna do if a big old buck comes into view and you have a misfire or a jam of the bolt?". One dynamic is that fewer families actually have weapons in the home so younger service members do not get the foundation prior to military service. The second is that USAF has traditionally not been a combat arms specialty requiring the stunning reality of what can happen to the ill-prepared or poorly trained. I say everyone should be required to demonstrate marksman level proficiency with both the M4 (in my day it was M-16) and the handgun of choice. Weapons drills would help overcome the reticence to learn the weapon once you've drilled so long that muscle memory takes over.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 9 at 2017 2:00 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 09 Feb 2017 14:00:25 -0500

I just recently finished doing a firing course with Navy MPs around 120 to be exact. They could not hit the broadside of the barn. It took most of them around 10 mags worth of ammo to zero their targets. Even when we went to the qualifing range they still couldn't hit anything. The Army ended up almost running completely out of ammo on the range.

Response by MSgt Robert Wiebel made Feb 28 at 2017 5:33 AM

MSgt Robert Wiebel — Tue, 28 Feb 2017 05:33:20 -0500

All the civil engineering prime beef airmen are M-16 qualified. Officers also qualify using a handgun. I qualified expert each time I went to he range between 1971- 1980.

Response by Capt Jason S. made Feb 28 at 2017 6:28 AM

Capt Jason S. — Tue, 28 Feb 2017 06:28:31 -0500

When I was in the 82nd. I learned formations and how to leap, cover and scan. I took a group of medics and pushed back a smaller group of rangers who where picking off my unit one by one during a training exercise. My 1st Sgt was clueless to what I was doing and open fired on me and disrupted my attempt to push the invasion out of the compound perimeter. They left anyways. Another time I took two other medics and captured a ranger by out flanking him. He was surprised that I knew how to do these maneuvers.
I grew up in the Country and played war with my brother. We watched war shows all the time. I listened to WWII, Korean and Vietnam Vet stories. They told me what happened, the mistakes that where made. I played strategy games.
I could hit every target spot on up to 250 yards because I could see the bullet hit or miss the target. Now at 300 yards I could not see it because it was to far away. They test my vision to be at least 20/10, they told me that they did not test people anymore than that unless they where going to be pilots.
When I went in to qualify I hit every target never missed until I did the burst where I actually only hit 3 out of 9. The M-4 is so easy to use compared to the M-16 it is amazing. The scope was incredible compared to having to qualify with the old iron sites. Yet as a Nurse they let me pass because I had a perfect score before the burst. I was the best marksman in the class. In the 82nd when I went through we never fired burst at a target to hit it. That was a new concept. Burst was just fired for fun and for effect. We could see that when burst was fired that the weapon pulled up. Yet we never learned or where taught how to adjust for that like they do now.
My Doc and my RT where poor shots and told me that they would be better at hitting someone if they threw the weapon at the person than actually fired the weapon. I told them just let me do the shooting then if we ever had to do so.
I am glad I went into the 82nd because they taught everyone tactics because we where all first and foremost combat infantrymen then I was a medic. Even though I told myself I was a medic first. They treated us as infantrymen for the most part. We did security, we dug and layed in fox holes. Set up concertina wire.
In the Air Force I learned almost nothing. When I brought up security concerns, as I was taught in the 82nd to do. I was told to keep my mouth shut because I was only a nurse and they laughed at me. twice until the rockets where landing and people lives where at risk the first time and the second time when they found explosives in a bunker right before an attack. Yes, the Air Force has a lot to learn. Everyone, is part of the security team and should be listen too and trained. No, one should be blown off even if they are just a nurse, they might just have been an Army 82nd Airborne paratrooper who did security before they became a nurse!
I feel your frustration and I know lives have been lost because people are not trained and we don't do the right thing which could have saved us lives and money. Yet we waste money in other areas! I have seen people die after information was given that could have saved them by me and other officers who had prior experience (Prior Special Forces, Engineers and so on) Yet we where told by members of Congress that, things where handled and the people at the pentagon knew better than the people on the ground.
After several people died and a few months went by they did some patches, and took a few of our recommendations into consideration. Always to little to late. They let people die and spent millions doing nothing. Same old thing. It still bothers me and I think it will the rest of my life but what else could we have done when no one else would do anything even all the way at the top (Congress and White House)! God bless all who died and forgive the people who could have saved them. I tried and many others did the same, good officers who cared but where just beaten down.
The system never changes.

Response by A1C Jimmy Watsonj made Feb 28 at 2017 6:48 AM

A1C Jimmy Watsonj — Tue, 28 Feb 2017 06:48:06 -0500

While in Air Force I was classified as Expert on Carbine would that be same as in Army and Marines?

Response by SSgt Benjamin Rice made Feb 28 at 2017 6:59 AM

SSgt Benjamin Rice — Tue, 28 Feb 2017 06:59:41 -0500

I myself was in a Combat Comm unit. I think that the only reason that many of us didn't have problems was that we were into firearms outside of the AF and most of us had our own AR's. I have seen what you are talking about with many of the younger airmen coming in and it's really disturbing for exactly the reasons you mentioned. Other than the biennial requal on the M16, most (younger airmen) didn't touch any firearms outside of the unit.

Response by TSgt David Johnson made Feb 28 at 2017 7:04 AM

TSgt David Johnson — Tue, 28 Feb 2017 07:04:00 -0500

In the first 1/3 of my career I was a law enforcement specialist in Security Police before cross training. In Basic we all had m16 familiarization. For most people that was it. I was given training more extensively with the m16, ar 15, M60, .38 S&W Combat Masterpiece etc. but that was only for inside the wire. The Army worked the outside wire areas. Not to cast dispersion on any one, but if given the choice of only the experienced trained brothers in Security Police or people with only familiarization of weapons to support my 6. I'd have to stick with my brothers.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 28 at 2017 7:14 AM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 28 Feb 2017 07:14:20 -0500

It's a cost versus reality issue. The cost of training everyone annually versus the odds of it ever being necessary. Bullets, range use, wear and tear, man hours, etc. The juice isn't worth the squeeze when you look at the mission of the Air Force. We're not a ground fighting branch and even if WW3 kicked off we wouldn't send in the AF to fight on the ground.

Response by SrA Joel Lachapelle made Feb 28 at 2017 7:27 AM

SrA Joel Lachapelle — Tue, 28 Feb 2017 07:27:12 -0500

I was in communications. Let's concentrate on the job we were trained in.

Response by Sgt John McRae made Feb 28 at 2017 7:27 AM

Sgt John McRae — Tue, 28 Feb 2017 07:27:48 -0500

I was in the Secuirty Police in the late 70's, early 80's and think most people join the Air Force more for the technical aspects of the job rather than being a fighter. The majority would rather leave that up to those of us in the Security Forces since that is our specialty. But I do agree that everyone should be required to qualify each year with basic weapons just in case.

Response by SMSgt Roger Horton made Feb 28 at 2017 7:28 AM

SMSgt Roger Horton — Tue, 28 Feb 2017 07:28:41 -0500

When in doubt give your ammo to a MARINE. Better yet, reload his mags for him.

Response by Capt Scott Stone made Feb 28 at 2017 7:37 AM

Capt Scott Stone — Tue, 28 Feb 2017 07:37:48 -0500

I was MC in the AF. We had to qualify with handguns in case we had to defend overrun medical facilities. Never touched an M16 until I separated. Now I have an AR10. Guarantee you this Texas boy NEVER mid loaded a rifle in him s LIFE. Daddy wouldn't stand for it.

Response by Lt Col John (Jack) Christensen made Feb 28 at 2017 7:46 AM

Lt Col John (Jack) Christensen — Tue, 28 Feb 2017 07:46:33 -0500

Fog of time may be affecting me here, but I recall having to qualify on the M-16 when flying B-52 missions during Vietnam and again when assigned to a MUNSS in Turkey. Think AF bases need to qualify based upon assignment vs. qualify everyone.

Response by MSgt Mike Rockwell made Feb 28 at 2017 8:08 AM

MSgt Mike Rockwell — Tue, 28 Feb 2017 08:08:54 -0500

Ok, here is my story. After entering Active Duty in '82 I was always on deployment with the exception of being an instructor at CAFB, SC (now Joint base Charleston). I started with the RDF (Rapid Deployment Force) and had to qualify annually, those non-deployment years were bi-annually. As an Avionics Specialist / Wrench turner we always told that we were the last line of defense of the Aircraft. We knew we were screwed if anyone got past the Army/Marines, SFS then to us....but we would and did deploy to places where there were no Army or marines, and sometimes no AF SFS people either. We would go in set up bases, then the others would show up later ...

My last deployment was right after 9/11/2001. I was handed an M-16, yes a 5 digit serial number slick side M-16. Complete with a bent and completely worthless gas tube, a split gas key, the butt pad falling off, and a 1:12 twist barrel. And guess what ammo we were issues, M855 green tip. The 1:12 twist was designed for the 55 gr M193... Luckily we never had to use them .... because those 62 gr bullets would start tumbling soon after leaving the barrel at that twist rate... but our SF people said it was completely Ok, what are you complaining about ....

I do think that ALL military, no matter who or what position should at least have a some basic knowledge of what end the bullet comes out of and at least be able to put lead down range.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 28 at 2017 8:38 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 28 Feb 2017 08:38:08 -0500

Just tell the bad guy's that their quarters is substandard and so the air force can compensate them, cause they too relax . 11BP....

Response by SSgt Lonnie Purvis made Feb 28 at 2017 8:53 AM

SSgt Lonnie Purvis — Tue, 28 Feb 2017 08:53:41 -0500

Why aren't Airmen required to learn to use a rifle? Let me ask a few questions. Which branch of the military sends officers into the battle area while leaving the enlisted behind enemy lines? What is the most important non-human asset in the Air Force? Why aren't Army soldiers required to learn to repair fixed wing aircraft?
Each branch has a specific function. Taking the time to train Air Force personnel how to shoot and maneuver would be an incredible waste of resources.

Response by MSgt Richard Randall made Feb 28 at 2017 9:07 AM

MSgt Richard Randall — Tue, 28 Feb 2017 09:07:34 -0500

I noticed through the years how incompetent AF security forces were in programming a missile guidance set on a Minuteman ICBM. They were also pretty useless in troubleshooting a Launch Enable Control Group or AFSATCOM fault indication. Those ignorant SOBs were also with clueless with performing a Launch Control Test, reading MGS SAE control words, calibrating the guidance chiller, changing launch facility batteries and motor generators. Loading Command Data Buffer target sets were WAY out of their league as was changing DSAP solid core memory or “odd squad” SFT components.

Worthless, I tell ya, totally worthless! I find this totally outrageous! What are we paying those guys for?

One other thing, Sparky. I did qualify on the M16/A2, the S&W 38 Model 15, the Beretta M9, SA 1911 45 and the Winchester 12 gauge shotgun… and I was just a bit twiddlin’, spark chasin’, low life maintenance troop.

Response by PFC Leander Yazzie made Feb 28 at 2017 9:29 AM

PFC Leander Yazzie — Tue, 28 Feb 2017 09:29:13 -0500

Hear me out!

Response by MSgt James "Buck" Buchanan made Feb 28 at 2017 9:53 AM

MSgt James "Buck" Buchanan — Tue, 28 Feb 2017 09:53:54 -0500

Using WWII and Korea as their model, many, if not most, people who enlisted in the AF did so with the idea that they would not have to carry/fire a weapon. Along with SF there are a few career fields where knowledge of weaponry is paramount. I'm thinking of TACP and weather folks who regularly pull duty with the Army, including being on the front line areas. Today's battlefield has changed, and it began changing with the Vietnam experience with mortars and rockets being lobbed into airfields. Having retired in 1995 I'm not sure what is taught as "supplementary" during weapons training, but certainly the idea of being somewhere in the sandbox of the Middle East and having to actually protect yourself and others has to be placed into the psyche of those who are doing annual qualification. The concept of situational awareness can b e as important as knowing how to use the weapon. Good luck to you and others as you deal with the "soccer mom kids" who make up today's AF.

Response by SSgt James Atkinson made Feb 28 at 2017 10:19 AM

SSgt James Atkinson — Tue, 28 Feb 2017 10:19:38 -0500

When I was in the USAF, all the new recruits had to do was to fire a few .22 LR rounds down range in boot camp, and that was the extent of their professional training with weapons for the majority of their military career. I was initially assigned to the 46th Communications Group at Barksdale AFB, LA, and volunteered to serve on our units "Contingency Group" for deployments, operations, and so on. It was only as part of this contingency group that I received additional training such as the use of actual .223/5.56 rounds, use of the shotgun, various revolvers, and various pistols and other weapons. The USAF at that time only trained these state-side groups (and certain overseas groups) in CBRN environments, protective clothing, how to pack and hump a ruck, and related tasks. I was utterly appalled at the attitude the USAF had at the time of the lack of common military skills. I was delighted to hear when the USAF was forced to enhance entry-level training in arms, and delighted that (20 years later) they adopted a more realistic view of tactical training. Prior to joining the USAF I was on civilian rifle and pistol teams, and I was an avid hunter so I was already skilled with infantry weapons of how to shoot a proper course of fire, range safety, and so on.

Response by CPO Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 28 at 2017 10:41 AM

CPO Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 28 Feb 2017 10:41:29 -0500

The Photo just has me cracking up.... Ok I'm Navy and at Boot camp we all qualified with the 9. My First command we had no need to qualify it was a cost and necessity not needed we fixed planes State Side and had the Corps and MA's Guarding the base. Then I went to Africa I had to be Qualified on several Weapons and platforms for that. My next 2 commands were all Intel weenies again No need for a weapon, Then I hit a Ship where I requalify on and got initial quals on other weapons. 3 years 2 Deployments where everyone is responsible for the safety of the ship. Now i'm at a base State side that I have no need to be weapons qualed. Why should the Military spend the money on Ammo when I have no need nor will I ever carry a weapon here? When I get to my next Ship I will requalify and be back to carrying a weapon on watch. I think there are those areas that we do not need to train waste money and qualify every year on a Weapon. They don't need it the chance of them needing it is so microscopic as to not matter. If a State side base is over run and they need to know how to shoot.... well we have larger issue at that point don't we?

Now I personal own a small arsenal of small arms and long guns, I go to the range and practice on a fairly regular basis. When my friends and I show up at the range we routinely get asked who we are about to invade lol. We all have CCW's and we all carry when not on Post. I take personal pride in exercising my 2A and in properly qualifying myself. But that's just me.

Response by TSgt Andrea Taylor made Feb 28 at 2017 11:33 AM

TSgt Andrea Taylor — Tue, 28 Feb 2017 11:33:27 -0500

I understand the thought process but my thoughts about this skill are its better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it. If you get selected for deployment you have a 1-2 day training on that weapon system..... That being said would you put your life in that person hand WITH FULL CONFIDENCE OF THEIR SKILLS WITH THE WEAPON.

Response by PO2 Robert Cuminale made Feb 28 at 2017 11:41 AM

PO2 Robert Cuminale — Tue, 28 Feb 2017 11:41:28 -0500

I didn't see any difference with Naval personnel either. Most I have met hadn't touched a small arm since boot camp and that included people who were careerists.
I guess I'm surprised since I was a SEABEE and we did regular range time and infantry training. We weren't infantry by any measurement but could at least defend our camps and work sites to some extent.

Response by TSgt Eric Lewis made Feb 28 at 2017 11:41 AM

TSgt Eric Lewis — Tue, 28 Feb 2017 11:41:38 -0500

I thought that all but medical personnel had to be qualified on M16/M4. I know qualified is a loose word to use, but qualified is qualified.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 28 at 2017 11:59 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 28 Feb 2017 11:59:46 -0500

Honestly just feel like it isn't at the top of the to do list for the great majority of Air Force personnel. It's been said before we aren't a ground force, while yes I would pick up an M-16 if the need arises my duties only required me to carry an M-9, plus you being security forces, how would you like to deal with keeping the entire force current and qualified on a weapon they never use? Additionally how many times I hear you guys don't even have enough rounds to spare for your own selves to practice on, just imagine how many more would need to be set aside to keep everyone current? Just not where the Air Force will dump their slush funds, there's bigger fish to fry

Response by 1stSgt Nelson Kerr made Feb 28 at 2017 12:10 PM

1stSgt Nelson Kerr — Tue, 28 Feb 2017 12:10:28 -0500

Fully Qualified Riflemen, I think you underestimate what that term means or the level of constant traing require to keep trained to that level.

Where exactly hare guy already working 80 a weak on the flight-line going to find the time to have full time training i as a rifleman,

Even AF Security forces do not train to that level of ground combat proficiency, And Marine Or Army rifleman would laugh at anyone who thought that they did. THE USAF has trouble keeping enough skilled techs on the job now so taking them away from those jobs to cover a flaky "what if" would cripple it.

Response by TSgt Joseph Lessard made Feb 28 at 2017 3:08 PM

TSgt Joseph Lessard — Tue, 28 Feb 2017 15:08:50 -0500

I agree with you. I was an AF aircraft technician 1980s and 1990s. I think, especially those of us around our primary weapons, being aircraft and misslies, should also be trained to defend those weapons systems if the need arises. When I was overseas during the Col War, we did train several times on the M-16. I also trained with the 45 due to extra duty as a cargo load monitor. I believe they later switcch to the 9mm. I also think the AF should have a special ops unit like the Navy Seals. Combat Controllers and PJs are good. But they have certain missions. The German Luftwaffe had the first paratrrop units in war. They were elite. The AF should also have a small elite offensive airbore unit. Death from above. They could hit certain targets behind enemy lines, orsecure certain areas until relieved. Smaller than the Rangers. But very highly skilled in airborne strikes. Why should the other branches get all the elite strike units. The air belongs to the AF.

Response by MSgt Harold Robinson made Feb 28 at 2017 3:19 PM

MSgt Harold Robinson — Tue, 28 Feb 2017 15:19:28 -0500

Mishandling your weapon doesn't mean that you are not combat ready. It has to do with Leadership, again not with the training. More airmen need to speak up and stop being so invisible when observing these so called infractions. If an airman is not battle ready rather than blame those in the AFSC/MOS, get the NCO's back in the business of leading and not lagging. Perhaps the problem that you identify with much vigor is not real that wide-spread a problem. Set the example and let your concerns be made know to your 1st line supervisor. That's where it belongs, NOT in social media. MSGT Air Police/Security Police and Aircrew Survival Instructor - AD 25 years most with SAC. 25 more with DoD.

Response by SFC Jim Ruether made Feb 28 at 2017 3:25 PM

SFC Jim Ruether — Tue, 28 Feb 2017 15:25:53 -0500

I was taught even the AF had an always a rifleman first policy in place it just wasn't enforced!

Response by SrA Rex Brown made Feb 28 at 2017 4:46 PM

SrA Rex Brown — Tue, 28 Feb 2017 16:46:18 -0500

Is this a new thing that other specialties are not being trained to use a weapon? When I was in there were times that I was at the range teaching others how to use different types of weapons. I also was security/ law enforcement forces. I spent a lot of time on the range because of the number of weapons that I was qualified on so I was training others on techniques of cleaning and stripping it down to put it back together. If they have stopped this then they have made a mistake it is good for all members to know how to handle a weapon.

Response by Col Jeffrey Swegel made Feb 28 at 2017 7:26 PM

Col Jeffrey Swegel — Tue, 28 Feb 2017 19:26:14 -0500

Yeah....I will tell you, it'd be an overall good thing if all AF had a working knowledge of firearms.

Response by Sgt Albert Castro made Feb 28 at 2017 7:58 PM

Sgt Albert Castro — Tue, 28 Feb 2017 19:58:43 -0500

Many of the other services poke fun at the USAF for being soft. If nothing else the Air Force should give weapons proficiency training to all troops deploying to any hostile theater. What will Air Force personnel do if militants get "inside the wire?" Fighting to survive is key in theater.

Response by SSgt James Stanley made Feb 28 at 2017 9:36 PM

SSgt James Stanley — Tue, 28 Feb 2017 21:36:00 -0500

I guess that's natural thinking for the Security Forces, since that's your job, but that's not the job of the people that work in the communications center. They have their assigned duties no matter if the enemy is at the door. Usually the Communications Center is the most secure place on the base thanks to Security. Back in the old days, though, when I worked in the Crypto Center in Germany we had M1 carbines and 45's hanging on the walls, and we knew how to use them, but not to go out and fight the enemy. They were to keep people from trying to come in who didn't have a crypto clearance.

Response by SrA Fred Smith made Mar 1 at 2017 12:06 AM

SrA Fred Smith — Wed, 01 Mar 2017 00:06:47 -0500

I was an Air Force marksmanship instructor from June 1965 to November 1967, voluntarily cross trained from IBM Data Processing. I was involved in the introduction of the M-16 at Dover AFB in 1965. I realized Air Force was not meant to be a ground combat force, but I felt that all personnel should be familiar enough with basic defensive weapons to defend their base and keep each other alive. Viet Nam was ramping up, and you never knew if it would be your turn to go to a war zone. I was amazed that I would have personnel come to the range who had 10, 15, even 20+ years in service and had not handled a firearm since basic training, including a base commander and senior NCOs. APs were supposed to be qualified with a .38 revolver, M-16, and riot shotgun every six months. All flight crews were supposed to be qualified with a .38 revolver yearly. The quality of some ranges I worked on was one step away from non existent. On base at Dover was a 25 yard conversion of an old fighter plane zeroing pit for pistol shooting. For M-16 we had to travel to Ft Miles near Rehobeth Beach to use an old Army pit range. At Kadena Okinawa we had to drive up island to Onna Point, to a 25 yard corral sandpit backstop with 2x3 framing that held the targets. I'm glad to see that Air Force seems to be more serious about defensive firearms training and better range facilities.

Response by TSgt Mario Guajardo made Mar 1 at 2017 12:40 AM

TSgt Mario Guajardo — Wed, 01 Mar 2017 00:40:32 -0500

I guess times have changed. I retired in 96 but did qualify with the M-16, shot expert the last time I qualified, even though I was aircraft maintenance then when I cross trained to operational intelligence I qualified with the 9mm

Response by COL Charles Williams made Mar 1 at 2017 12:49 AM

COL Charles Williams — Wed, 01 Mar 2017 00:49:49 -0500

I would say... SSgt Private RallyPoint Member, because it is the Air Force, and probably not necessary. Should they be? Yes. But, ammunition and qualifications are fiscal constraints at the end of the day, and the jobs and units that need them most shoot the most.

Response by SrA John Farrell Sr made Mar 1 at 2017 8:30 AM

SrA John Farrell Sr — Wed, 01 Mar 2017 08:30:00 -0500

MY grandsons last week of BMT was this type of training. Not a "Hell Week" but close. Don't know if there is an annual training though. He did get additional training before going to Bagram!

Response by SSgt Dallas Williams made Mar 1 at 2017 9:43 AM

SSgt Dallas Williams — Wed, 01 Mar 2017 09:43:20 -0500

I agree in a large part . AF in my day had even a more dismal record of teaching marksmanship. Fortunately I had been firing rifles and assorted other weapons since I was six years old and could tear down an M-1 rifle or Carbine down blindfolded. More than half my training squadron could not even load a weapon or zero one. Some had never even held a weapon and were scared to death of one... perhaps a good thing since it kept them from shooting someone on the range. All AF personnel should have training in the main issue weapon of the day and know how to at least field strip the weapon blindfolded, fire it with confidence in order to protect themselves in case the time comes that they will actually have to use a weapon for self defense. If the day doesn't come, all well and good but should it come, it is better to be well prepared and alive than to be unprepared and dead.

Response by Sgt William Straub Jr. made Mar 1 at 2017 10:04 AM

Sgt William Straub Jr. — Wed, 01 Mar 2017 10:04:50 -0500

I had the same question 40+ years ago as a Security Policeman in Thailand, up along the Laotian border on the Mekong. The only personnel that carried and knew how to use weapons were Security Police. I don't think anyone else fired a weapon after Basic. Pilots and Aircrew members were proficient. Sorry to see nothing has changed. And back then the possibility of Action on an Air Base was more likely.

Response by TSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 1 at 2017 10:26 AM

TSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 01 Mar 2017 10:26:07 -0500

The Air Force is swamping its troops with soul sucking, pointless CBTs. Get rid of these and now you have the time to train. Next go through and get rid of the tons of waste programs/funding (the Air Force takes the cake here) and now you have the funding. Problem solved.

Response by TSgt Daniel Johnson made Mar 1 at 2017 12:15 PM

TSgt Daniel Johnson — Wed, 01 Mar 2017 12:15:35 -0500

AF is the specialists of the Air not ground combat and to make us equivalent to the Army/Marines either one would require so much additional training that it would diminish our nation's Air Power. I'd rather be manning the berms with a platoon of well trained riflemen than a Wing's worth of half trained Airman at my back. That said I am a AF Qualified Marksman on the M-16/M-4 and I've never attempted to be M-9 qualified. Later in my career I was qualified on crew served weapons during convoy training such as the M-240, M-249, and M-2. Also earlier in my career before I was retrained I was Pig (M-60) qualified when I was a Civil engineer as part of our Prime Beef exercises where we went and played war games at Fort Polk. In the AF we don't have degree's of marksmanship your either Qualified, non-qualified, or a Marksman. My proficiency does not come from my military training. It came from growing up with weapons and my father a retired cop who has been shot on two separate occasions both times off duty being a be prepared for anything kind of guy.

Response by MSgt J D McKee made Mar 1 at 2017 5:20 PM

MSgt J D McKee — Wed, 01 Mar 2017 17:20:28 -0500

I answered before, below, but had another thought---the USAF lacks weapons training, the USMC infantry doesn't, or don't seem to from the outside. What I do remember the Marines lacking on one occasion was bullets in their guns. Or at least magazines. It was on the TV news in the 1980's when they walked ashore in Beruit, Lebanon, all kinds of guns and gear, and not a one of them had a magazine in their weapon. That was on the news and I watched it from the safety of the UK. I couldn't believe that. This was the Marines who got blown up not long after that and killed 200+ of them, I think it was. So, Marines, please answer a question I haven't thought of since the 1980's---was this common practice back then?

Response by SSgt James Stanley made Mar 1 at 2017 9:09 PM

SSgt James Stanley — Wed, 01 Mar 2017 21:09:58 -0500

I did already.

Response by TSgt Ed Turner made Mar 2 at 2017 9:37 AM

TSgt Ed Turner — Thu, 02 Mar 2017 09:37:05 -0500

My leadership class project addressed this exact issue back in the 90's. Although our fellow Reservists were supposed to qualify every three years, the average maintenance airman had not done so for eight. Although they individually felt confidence in their own abilities, several expressed more concern about fellow troopers than a potential enemy.
Although airmen aren't expected to withstand a protracted siege, we should at least be able to "hold the fort until the cavalry arrives".

Response by Maj Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 3 at 2017 4:17 AM

Maj Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 03 Mar 2017 04:17:05 -0500

The Air Force's raison d'être is "air, space and cyberspace superiority" as the Air Force mission is to "fly, fight and win in air, space and cyberspace." After the experience of World War II and nuclear weapons, the Air Force was born mainly to strike distant adversaries and conduct nuclear operations. Although the Air Force branched from the Army, its organizing principle is aviation forces both combat and service, providing the Army with close combat and logistical air support (strategic air warfare, airlift, aerial refueling, intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance).

However, I do agree that rifle qualification should be part of Air Force Readiness. Currently, only airmen who bear firearms on duty, who are armed in-garrison, or deploying to a contingency operation are given proper weapons training and are limited to the type of weapon they are authorized to carry. As for my AFSC, if deployed, I will only be trained on the M9.

The Air Force requires an annual Active Shooter Training (Expeditionary Active Shooter Training for airmen deploying) that teaches airmen to "escape, barricade, or fight" but again, your fighting chance is limited to the type of weapon you have been trained on and authorized to carry. Although this training also discussed that recent shootings in Germany and Afghanistan have changed the way that leadership views the criticality of weapons handling skills and that commanders must ensure weapon training extends beyond qualifications training, Air Force has yet to incorporate these into actions.

The Air Force is just different that way, also probably why it doesn't have its own battle cry.

Response by MSgt Joseph Rende made Mar 4 at 2017 12:28 PM

MSgt Joseph Rende — Sat, 04 Mar 2017 12:28:09 -0500

Because some dumbass in SAC Headquarters convinced other dumbasses that they coud save money by not arming all military personnel assigned to the bases. SAC was the leader in this idea.

Response by MSgt Michael Lane made Mar 4 at 2017 4:41 PM

MSgt Michael Lane — Sat, 04 Mar 2017 16:41:14 -0500

The issue is proficiency; I am a firm believer in it. You either do something or you don’t you don’t maybe do it. The Air Force has for longtime treated weapons qualifications as a joke. As I remember my AFSC would fire like 50 rounds every two years and out of that you are qualified for combat. We were not trained to March, run, crawl, with a weapon. While at Eglin AFB we would have exercise with unloaded weapons I can’t tell you how many time I would get on a bus with people that had for whatever reason the bolts pulled back and they hit the stock down on the floor of the bus and all you could hear was the sound of 9 or 10 bolts going forward and you could tell they had no idea what had done at least at Kelly AFB we were issued blank’s and we would go to camp Bullies and were actually attack but we were never trained in anyway how to coordinate fire or move. In my AFSC we would watch a training film on how to put out a fire, in my 22 years I had seen 4 aircraft burn to the ground. So I think that maybe we should do hands on firefighting and watch a film on weapons use.
That all being said SP,OSI, CE especially Prime beef, PJ’s, Forward controllers, and Combat weather do get more training and are qualified and maybe more (sorry if I missed anyone) but the last thing you want is a bunch of people around you that don’t know what the hell to do in combat.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 5 at 2017 11:21 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 05 Mar 2017 23:21:29 -0500

They got cheap did not want pay for AMO and the virtual Weapons training stucks

Response by Col Kenneth Klein made Mar 7 at 2017 9:48 PM

Col Kenneth Klein — Tue, 07 Mar 2017 21:48:02 -0500

If it is the Air Force, why aren't you a pilot? Because we all have a different skill to bring to "the fight". The Marines (my first service) wear crossed rifles to signify all are riflemen. Each service has a role, and within those services a task - cyber, space, air base ground defense, etc. All have to familiarize with the weapon to become a member, but not everyone needs your level of expertise...that's why we need you. I expect Airmen join the military for a litany of reasons, but to carry a weapon may not be the primary reason. Bottom line, teach them well.
Col K2 USAF retired (but an enlisted Marine first)

Response by SGM Joel Cook made Mar 7 at 2017 10:40 PM

SGM Joel Cook — Tue, 07 Mar 2017 22:40:52 -0500

I was on a Joint Task Force in Baghdad, Iraq. Several Air Force personnel had huge difficulty adapting to an outside the wire OPTEMPO. Our CO was an Air Force Colonel. It got back to me that he had shot the clearing barrel on two occasions because he could not remember to drop the magazine, clear the chamber, and pull the trigger. The next convoy he and I went on Together and every time thereafter, I accompanied him to the clearing barrel and talked him through it. He always wanted to clear the chamber, then drop the mag. This left a round in the chamber which he then shot the barrel with. I know he shot the barrel one more time after that and got a verbal reprimand from his next higher Commander. I find it hard to fathom that the Air Force feels that weapons training prior to combat zone deployment is not important nor time effective. Last time I checked the Air Force was part of the US Military. Not saying you have to be a weapon expert but competence and safety are a must. Just like knowing how to fly an aircraft correctly, or drive your vehicle, or just about anything else that can result in your death if not done to standard.

Response by A1C Michael Rowland made Mar 15 at 2017 3:35 PM

A1C Michael Rowland — Wed, 15 Mar 2017 15:35:59 -0400

I absolutely agree. EVERY member of the military should be able to handle a rifle and sidearm and be required to go through bi-annual training and practice for it.

Response by Sgt Kevin Doris made Mar 17 at 2017 2:04 AM

Sgt Kevin Doris — Fri, 17 Mar 2017 02:04:53 -0400

When I joined in 1972 we spent 1 day doing survival training and the gun range. Survival consisted of marching to a mess tent set up a couple of miles away. There was no salt or pepper for our meal. The gun range we learned to break down the weapon and put it back together. Then off to the range to fire like I think 100 rounds. If your gun jammed you stuck your thumb in your ear till a qualified person un-jammed your gun. When I was headed to southeast asia we spent a whole day firing-prone, thru windows,other ways-clicked off some rounds in auto. I remember interrogation resistance training. and who knows what else. We were going into a hot area and they wanted us to have some training. I had a an air force buddy at Bien Hoa AFB during Tet. He was a crew chief like me. Someone told him to get in a hole, handed him an M-16 and ammo and to shoot the enemy.
But remember, your job is to protect the base and personnel on the base. My job was to keep the birds flying. There's a big difference in job descriptions. Didn't you have the occasional thought to ride co-pilot in a F-16 just once? Why couldn't you? Cause you don't know squat about the aircraft. I flew co-pilot on a mission (complicated story) in an OV-10 because I knew the aircraft. Stick to your job and do it well Airman-all the best.

Response by SSgt Boyd Welch made Mar 23 at 2017 1:00 PM

SSgt Boyd Welch — Thu, 23 Mar 2017 13:00:25 -0400

As far as the base getting overrun scenario, with one armory on base (USAF) and no weapons prior issue except to SP's, you couldn't distribute the weapons fast enough to prevent total annihilation of the base. "Who's got the keys? Where are the freakin' keys???". So I see weapons qualified as a moot point unless weapons issue is standard. Even the Ft. Hood tragedy shows that administrative control of weapons hinders an effective timely response.

Response by MSgt James "Buck" Buchanan made Mar 30 at 2017 1:39 PM

MSgt James "Buck" Buchanan — Thu, 30 Mar 2017 13:39:03 -0400

Think about where the original air arm of the military was stationed during WWII, and even WWI....always at a safe distance behind the front lines because they could get to the fight under their own power with sabotage really the only threat. Thus, minimal firearms training was needed except for whatever security personnel were necessary to have around. Even in the Pacific most aircraft were far from the battle except those stationed on an aircraft carrier when the battle was brought to them. Coming through Viet Nam the face of war began to change as guerilla warfare became almost the norm and air bases were under constant threat from the ground. Unfortunately there was no lesson learned and new tactics/strategy put into place. This was partly because we were still the baddest dog on the block and could attack anywhere in the world from bases within the good ol' US of A. Base defense needs to and should change as now even bases within our borders are subject to hit and run attacks and everyone needs to know not only how to pull the trigger, but also how to get more bullets loaded to keep fighting. I always felt vulnerable except during those times when I was stationed on an Army location and we had to do things their way.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 13 at 2017 1:27 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 13 Apr 2017 13:27:43 -0400

I don't have time to fight the enemy. I need to get this damn Aircraft off the ground and out of here. That's what the Army and Security forces are for. Give me enough time to get that bird in the air and out of here. After that, I can pull a trigger, but do you really want me to? I might see that 16 once a year.

Response by A1C John Reese made Apr 20 at 2017 9:30 PM

A1C John Reese — Thu, 20 Apr 2017 21:30:32 -0400

USAF '76-'80. We were taught to use the M-16, but only briefly. Those with a rural background got it quicker than those from an urban life. I didn't really care if I qualified, since the "aim" in Basic was to get us used to following orders and looking like we were in the military. The reason for the stress on familiarity with arms? Air Force units had been overrun before during Vietnam, and this was a fairly fresh memory with our instructors.

Response by MSgt Darren VanDerwilt made Apr 21 at 2017 10:58 AM

MSgt Darren VanDerwilt — Fri, 21 Apr 2017 10:58:14 -0400

Why? Probably for the same reason Security Forces or Hospital personnel don't go out and wrench on aircraft. Airpower is about taking the fight to the enemy's center of gravity, shutting down their ability to prosecute their plans by destroying the means to that end. Everyone has a role to perform to that end.

Response by SMSgt Mike Morrow made Apr 24 at 2017 8:18 PM

SMSgt Mike Morrow — Mon, 24 Apr 2017 20:18:26 -0400

Most Airman will never see combat. If a base is attacked the non-combat troops are usually removed, in Germany they issued a card with a serial number of an M16 and you were told to report to the amory for the weapon, then make your way to the French coast and a specific port for a ride home. The base personnel were not expected to fight that was left up to the Security Forces (Cops). In Thailand the base was attacked and all personnel where recalled from off base. About half were so drunk they had trouble even walking, yet they were issued a weapon and told to get ready. Total ClusterF**k. Thank God the Amory had the sense not to issue ammo. The Air Force fights with airplanes not groumd troops normally. I had to qualify annually with a .45acp because I was on flying status. Never saw an M9 until after I retired.

Response by PO3 April Strayer made Apr 25 at 2017 8:59 AM

PO3 April Strayer — Tue, 25 Apr 2017 08:59:16 -0400

What I understand, air national guard any way only us to qualify on the M-16 a few months before they or if they deploy.. not sure for active duty.

Response by PO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 27 at 2017 10:03 PM

PO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 27 Apr 2017 22:03:37 -0400

Seabees have to qualify annually, but there are some I wouldn't give a pointy stick to, much less a weapon.

Response by SMSgt Robert Westwood made May 2 at 2017 4:31 PM

SMSgt Robert Westwood — Tue, 02 May 2017 16:31:34 -0400

In 1965 the 12th TFW deployed to Vietnam. As a cargo courier I carried an M16 and 60 rounds of ammo in three 20 round magazines. At this time I was an AGE mechanic. When we arrived in country we had 13 Security Policemen. As a result, those of us on the aircraft maintenance side became part of a fire team. We eventually go a ROK battalion as our outer perimeter.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made May 5 at 2017 1:08 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 05 May 2017 01:08:39 -0400

To be fair with my AFSC the running joke is if we have a weapon, everyone else on base is dead and we're fucked anyway.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made May 12 at 2017 11:08 AM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 12 May 2017 11:08:01 -0400

When I came in everyone learned in Basic then had to renew their quals at least annually. Even then you still had those kinds of issues, although not quite as much. I think the more you have ready to defend the better off you are. But from what I've seen as other than SF there are some who just don't have the ability and I wouldn't want around me with a firearm if something happened.

I've always been told the reason we don't now is budget cuts. Since Airmen, realistically speaking, are almost never in a spot where a weapon would be required it was viewed as an easy budget saving measure. Fewer weapons needed, fewer instructors needed, lot less ammo needed.

Personally I agree that if you're in the military you should maintain proficiency with your expected firearms/weapons. With the lack of training it's one reason I bought my own AR-15 style rifle, and plan to get a 92FS since I've been qual'd on the M9. It's also why I was allowed to PCS into California with it when otherwise they'd prefer to lock you up for crossing the state border with one. But from an overall strategic viewpoint, in the current environment, I can't knock leadership for the decisions overall. I'd prefer it to be otherwise, but preferences aren't always feasible.

Response by TSgt Greg Echols made May 12 at 2017 8:49 PM

TSgt Greg Echols — Fri, 12 May 2017 20:49:48 -0400

I was aircraft maintenance most of my career but I was sent over to the SF squadron because they were undermanned and I can say that I think all of the USAF needs to take this type of training up a notch. It didn't seem to be that hard for non-SF airmen to do some OJT with the SF NCOs and be an effective "rifleman". This was before the fun in Afghanistan. So what if a c-130 full of maintenance & supply personnel has an IFE and lands in the middle of nowhere Afghanistan. There is no Army or Marine unit there to protect them. These airmen will need to defend themselves. If is foolish to expect these airmen to know how to do any kind of integrated defense when all the training they get is a trip to the M16 range once a year. The USAF needs to get rid of things like transgender sensitivity training and replace it with squad-level perimeter defense.

Response by MSG Frederick Otero made May 14 at 2017 7:02 PM

MSG Frederick Otero — Sun, 14 May 2017 19:02:14 -0400

Yep, the services should take a page out of the Marines training philosophy every service member a rifleman first and foremost or at least that was the way it was and i doubt it has changed. One never knows when they will be called out to hold the line. VIRIS ET HONOS

Response by Cpl Joshua Caldwell made May 14 at 2017 8:28 PM

Cpl Joshua Caldwell — Sun, 14 May 2017 20:28:05 -0400

It makes no sense. You would think there would be a great outcry from the active duty members of the USAF. I sure as Hell would want to know how to fight, just in case my base was over run. That is EXACTLY why the USMC trains every Marine to be a rifleman first, no matter what their MOS is. The Marine band once defended the nations capital during the war of 1812 because they were the only federal troops available.

Response by SGT Bryan O'Reilly made May 19 at 2017 9:00 AM

SGT Bryan O'Reilly — Fri, 19 May 2017 09:00:56 -0400

That's a damn good question, Staff. I agree with your assessment, but I'd go even further. This nation was built by warriors from conquest and has required constant vigilance to maintain. While we serve, the rest of the country gradually becomes more gentrified and less able to assist in its own defense should the need arise, which at some point it will. It's foolhardy to believe otherwise. Our gun ownership is not a privilege, it is a birthright for a reason and as such, Being familiar with basic small arms safety should be a matter of course for all able Americans. That such is not the case with some members of the Air Force is unacceptable. Especially given that they are just a generation removed from when they were still Army

Response by Capt Christian D. Orr made May 27 at 2017 2:52 PM

Capt Christian D. Orr — Sat, 27 May 2017 14:52:32 -0400

Amen, bro! As a Security Forces veteran myself, my thoughts exactly, ESPECIALLY in this post-9/11 world we live in!

Response by A1C John Weiss made May 28 at 2017 12:39 AM

A1C John Weiss — Sun, 28 May 2017 00:39:11 -0400

I would agree with you. I think everyone should be taught how to handle a weapon. Me I'm old school S.P K-9

Response by 1stSgt Jeff Blovat made May 28 at 2017 9:30 PM

1stSgt Jeff Blovat — Sun, 28 May 2017 21:30:02 -0400

I see your point however back in the day weren't all Marines as Army personnel were primary infantry? I carried the M-16/M-4 for 22 years of my 25 year AF career. It was easy to see not everyone in the USAF was comfortable with a weapon. However, as a SPS/SF member, I had extensive training for years on all weapons in the USAF inventory. There are many specialty codes in the AF. I bet a lot of SFS members would be unfamiliar with tool of other AFSC trades. Just for thought....

Response by PO3 William Fusick made May 30 at 2017 1:02 PM

PO3 William Fusick — Tue, 30 May 2017 13:02:31 -0400

Take the Naval Seabees as an example. I was a heavy equipment operator but had to train with the Marines for combat duty. In Vietnam we had to man our own bases perimeter and if attacked in the field would have to defend our positions. Could the Air Force have the same training?

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made May 31 at 2017 7:13 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 31 May 2017 19:13:42 -0400

I was active duty in the AF for 8 years. I started as a weapons maintenance technician. Basically I loaded bombs and ammo on aircraft and maintained the weapons systems of the aircraft. We were required to qualify annually with our rifles, while I was assigned to fixed wing aircraft. When I went to the CSAR (combat search and rescue) side still doing the same job, we were required to qualify alot more but we also carried an M9 at all times when we had our weapons vault open and when the helicopters had weapons loaded on them. So, some of us that are not SF do qualify and do carry weapons daily.

Response by CPT Wes Marsh made Jun 1 at 2017 2:33 PM

CPT Wes Marsh — Thu, 01 Jun 2017 14:33:11 -0400

Money. That is it. Do not pass go, do not collect $200. The Army used to require even the clerks and jerks in the Puzzle Palace to qualify on the rifle range, but last century that was changed to only those who had an individually issued weapon. Money. Less bullets, less cost, less wear and tear on weapons. More time behind desks doing important paperwork, less time on the range playing grab ass and doing "army stuff, sir!"

Response by SSgt Boyd Herrst made Jun 4 at 2017 8:43 PM

SSgt Boyd Herrst — Sun, 04 Jun 2017 20:43:04 -0400

I enlisted in the AF Reserve in '70 and became a Cook.. I qualified in basic on the M-16, later on 38 for when I was on Honor Guard. At a later time I got assigned to the base hospital, j as on Honor Guard there also. Thre seems to be a prob
With them about me being qualufied on the 38 because I was assigned to the hospital and would be a non-combatant,
They said it was ok being on firing detail
Because we fired blanks.. but I couldn't be firing team NCO because the .38 had live rounds.. it was a.big todo over it all..
I just kept it quiet about the times I was
Firing team NCO.. I had to use my regular days off to get time at the range. One of the diet techs asked me where I was going in my fatigues and I told him Honor Guard practice.. at the range, Igor to fire the .38.. I wanted to see him run up to the
Hospital and tattle.. I'm on the Guard and
They'd just have to live with it.. I enjoy
Firing and that is that !

Response by SSgt Rick Scharnberg made Jun 6 at 2017 11:11 AM

SSgt Rick Scharnberg — Tue, 06 Jun 2017 11:11:27 -0400

In Basic I fired 36 rounds from an M-16, I was sent to Germany after Tech School. When I processed in I signed a sheet of paper and was told to sign beside my rifle number. When I signed out for my discharge I was ask if the signature beside the rifle number was mine? I said yes and that was the only time I knew I had a weapon assigned to me.
I joined the Army National Guard ,an qualified in the M-16, 45, M-60, M-2 50Cal., and the old grease gun. I qualified with the TOW, LAE, Javelin . Air Force weapins training is a farce.

Response by PO2 Robert Cuminale made Jun 9 at 2017 9:09 AM

PO2 Robert Cuminale — Fri, 09 Jun 2017 09:09:11 -0400

The Navy is just as bad. Even with 30 years in most sailors will be found to have never touched a small arm since boot camp. Not all duty is on ships, we do have land based facilities that would need small arms capable personnel if attacked.
The only exceptions are Gunners Mates, Bosun's Mates, Master At Arms, SEABEEs and SEALs. If there are others I don't know who they are.

Response by MSgt Frank Martin made Jun 9 at 2017 9:48 AM

MSgt Frank Martin — Fri, 09 Jun 2017 09:48:31 -0400

I always took my time at going to the Range seriously.

I agree with you though.. the USAF when I joined in 1984 told me that the Army clears the ground and the Air Force Builds the base... and if it gets dire.. you might need to know the use of a M-16/M-4 rifle to defend the installation, but that is only if the Security Police (Before Security Forces) were not able to do the job.

But later in the late 1990's that attitude changed and I was sent to the Air Mobility Warfare Center three times for "deployment training" were we actually went out and trained in tactics, up to and even using mock battles in MILES gear. We were taught that the Army no longer has the assets to "protect" the USAF personnel, and we would have to do the jobs ourselves.

But the vast majority of the USAF were still doing their job to support the mission to support the war fighters.. the Pilots. After I retired.. I was glad to see that Basic Training were finally having trainees actually have rifles and the manual of arms.. not just a Dry Fire and Wet Fire day like when I was in basic training.

Response by SSgt Samuel Johnson made Jun 9 at 2017 10:18 AM

SSgt Samuel Johnson — Fri, 09 Jun 2017 10:18:27 -0400

I started my career in a FACP or Forward Air Control Party in Germany. EVERYONE had a weapon and knew how to operate it. Later I PCSed to a NORAD SOC in Arizona. I initially thought, "no weapons"? Later I realized, our mission was different. We took out enemy forces WAYout there. I sat in Arizona and watched intercepts hundreds of miles off of the California coast. The stress of military aircraft in near proximity to 747's with 200+ passengers on board, trying to make pilots do precisly what you want to avoid collisions, led me to believe this was no place for weapons ready for the grabbing.

So, I see everyone's thoughts but understand the USAF has many different environments to work in. I was a grunt in a USAF uniform and a blue suiter too, in two different environments. Qualification in both scenarios is a good idea, but in reality, a hidden or controlled environment, I'll yield my weapon to the SP's if they need backup though, I was ready, capable and willing.

Response by Cpl Bill Johnson made Jun 9 at 2017 11:39 AM

Cpl Bill Johnson — Fri, 09 Jun 2017 11:39:18 -0400

Airmen (including officers) of all genders should, at the very least, know how ro load/unload/make safe a standard rifle. They should also have some facility with aiming it and shooting it. Why? Because other nations have paratroopers and special forces, just like we do.

Response by SSgt Jason Lindbeck made Jun 10 at 2017 1:00 PM

SSgt Jason Lindbeck — Sat, 10 Jun 2017 13:00:48 -0400

As a retired CATM guy I can promise you that A: all USAF personnel are required to qualify with the m4/m16 before entering a warzone on deployment (barring special circumstances or requirements for non combatancy such as a Chaplain) and B: Security Forces Airmen will be both the best at firing and the very, very worst at firing. This is because for some unfortunate reason security forces has become the catch-all for idiots who failed in other places.
To focus specifically on your question, though, it is possible to skip firing during basic training. It is also possible in certain career fields to make it to Chief without ever touching a gun, provided you never deploy. This means that lack of experience can cause confusion and the appearance of idiocy. The important thing is to move past it without calling undue attention, correct the error, and help build muscle memory.

Response by Capt Al Parker made Jun 11 at 2017 2:43 PM

Capt Al Parker — Sun, 11 Jun 2017 14:43:13 -0400

Depends on the job, when I was in TAC I had to be qualified on "M1 Carbine", also when I was in SAC in a Prime Beef unit (additional duty) I had to be qualified with weapon
weapons and site protection. Back then all basics had weapons training. Even in the ADC at radar sites I was expected to handle an M1.

Response by SFC Tony Bennett made Jun 12 at 2017 3:24 AM

SFC Tony Bennett — Mon, 12 Jun 2017 03:24:19 -0400

While I was contracting in Afghanistan, I met several Air Force personnel who were COMPLETELY UNARMED. I even asked what were they supposed to do if bad guys were coming over the fence. Said the SP's were there to handle it. Mind you this is in an active war zone.....

Response by MSG Brad Sand made Jun 12 at 2017 10:29 AM

MSG Brad Sand — Mon, 12 Jun 2017 10:29:57 -0400

Wow, I was not aware of this. Puts some comments I have seen from those in the Air Force in context.

Response by SSG Jeffrey Monk made Jun 13 at 2017 12:40 PM

SSG Jeffrey Monk — Tue, 13 Jun 2017 12:40:10 -0400

That's why I bought my sister a shoulder right and the extended 9mm mags for her issued Beretta. Though she doesn't carry an M4 she did qualify expert every three to six months when not deployed while stationed at Herbert Field. It all depends on your job and environment.

Response by MSgt Benjamin Grady made Jun 13 at 2017 8:10 PM

MSgt Benjamin Grady — Tue, 13 Jun 2017 20:10:31 -0400

I was in Air Force CCT for 10 years TACP 1.5years and we were trained on individual and crew served as well as explosives.

Response by TSgt Kenneth Hancock made Jun 17 at 2017 11:04 PM

TSgt Kenneth Hancock — Sat, 17 Jun 2017 23:04:33 -0400

as a retired air force mechanic, i can tell you it is probably better that most members are not issued weapons. though during the korean the chicken squadron abandoned their mechanics , flew off in their aircraft and the troops were hung from the hanger with safety wire. when i was osan they did issue weapons during exercises. don't know if the 51st still does this

Response by SSgt James Tadlock made Jun 19 at 2017 12:55 PM

SSgt James Tadlock — Mon, 19 Jun 2017 12:55:17 -0400

I was in Vietnam during the war era. I qualified expert marksman with the M-1 Carbine during basic training in 1965. I stayed on my grandparents farm a lot as a kid and rifles and shotguns were always around. I bought a .22 cal single shot rifle when I was 14. It was very accurate. I could shoot .22 longs and long rifles but mostly just fired shorts. I never had an accident like hitting a farm animal. I have this rifle to this day along with my granddad's 12 guage shotgun . I arrived in Vietnam shortly after The Tet offensive of 1968. My duty section was 377th Cmbt Spt Grp Mail and Message Distribution Center located in 7th Air Force Hdqtrs Bldg. My duty hours were 2000 hrs - 0800 hrs for the 1 year tour of duty. We had racks filled with M-16 rifles and .38 S&W pistols inside file cabinets along with ammunition. We never carried arms unless on a specific mission where supervision determined the need for them. Such as carrying classified to the burn area and burning while others stood guard. Some times we pulled CQ Duty in the hut area (at night) using a small hut for shelter which was situated along the perimeter fence. We only had a pistol for defense. Thank goodness I never had to fire a shot, but I feel that I could hold my own.

Response by SPC Franklin McKown made Jun 23 at 2017 8:28 PM

SPC Franklin McKown — Fri, 23 Jun 2017 20:28:45 -0400

When we deployed to Desert Storm, Gen. Tilelli ,Who commanded 1st Cav Div ,issued an order I violated the SHIT out of.(OF course I won't say about THE REST of my platoon my crimes are my own )but I am a Gray wolf scout from the 80s Only women and people that can get caught never wore an inverted Gerber MkII on their Alice gear, or a pokey thing of some type,SOME fools used expensive weighty Buckmasters or NIGHTMARISHLY priced Crawford handmade knives( It made for an UNMERCIFUL ribbing when they lost it} BUT we fought with our knives DESPITE what the army said or trained ,THEN or now,because we hunted THEM and when we found them is was OUR asses face to face.
AND you don't use THOSE kinds of blades to open CANS.
I called that 'OL mafia override, because MINE will come home.
I respected all my cadre and tried not to be difficult, it worked sometimes too.
My platoon leader was a mustang ,THANK GOD.
THE ARMED forces will bury many soon if Korea kicks off THEN they will want ALL of theses things either by doctrine or on the side.
It's like they are going girly on killing because they think contractors will save them.
I suggest prone ,"DIME and barrel" drills DAILY .

Response by TSgt Walter Thalacker made Jun 23 at 2017 9:03 PM

TSgt Walter Thalacker — Fri, 23 Jun 2017 21:03:26 -0400

Sounds like you want the Army Air Corp back. Simply put, the AF doesn't have Infantry, Air Cav, Cav and all the fun toys that the other services have and there is a reason for it. AF is a back shop, a support function, an air superiority asset not a slug it out on the ground force. As far as how many others than those in SF that can shoot, probably hit or miss depending on childhood experiences. The expectation for folks to be as familiar/proficient with the weapons systems as SF or other branches comes down to training. The other services spend as much time weapons training as we spent in the entirety of BMT and I'd bet the same rings true with the time spent by those that go through the SF Tech School. That said, you'd have to double the time spent in BMT with half of it spent on weapons to reach the level of proficiency of which you speak.

Response by CW2 Michael Mullikin made Jun 24 at 2017 11:25 PM

CW2 Michael Mullikin — Sat, 24 Jun 2017 23:25:37 -0400

Be serious! Do you really want a bunch of Zoomies running aroud with weapons?

Response by CWO4 Jim Doran made Jun 29 at 2017 10:59 PM

CWO4 Jim Doran — Thu, 29 Jun 2017 22:59:25 -0400

The main problem is usually money. When I was on active duty the annual small arms training allowance per sailor was minor. Most of it was used on fam firing aircrews, security police, special ops and the like. Most small arms ammo was shot by members of the various Naval Base Weapons Departments. They owned the guns, the ammunition, and in most cases the range.

Response by TSgt Mario Guajardo made Jul 6 at 2017 6:06 PM

TSgt Mario Guajardo — Thu, 06 Jul 2017 18:06:08 -0400

I served 76-96 as a flightline maintenance fire control specialist then crosstrained to operational intelligence, shot expert with M-16 with periodic training, qualified with .38 then 9mm, also with periodic training...I did not experience what you describe

Response by SSgt James Cottrell made Jul 6 at 2017 7:19 PM

SSgt James Cottrell — Thu, 06 Jul 2017 19:19:15 -0400

As a teen I had .22 that looked like a M-1 Carbine. I shot that alot. When I went into the AF in 68 I qualiifed no problem. When I went to Thailand I was an Augmentee on the perimeter (all 3 tours, Udorn, and NKP) I was in two or three firefights and responded well. I knew I a had 120 rounds and stayed on semi. I actually liked security duty to my commo job. I liked being out in the open better.

Response by CAPT Hiram Patterson made Jul 14 at 2017 11:38 AM

CAPT Hiram Patterson — Fri, 14 Jul 2017 11:38:51 -0400

Everyone should at least have had FAMFIRE (Familiarization Fire) on the M-4 and M-9 even if they never carry or need to use one. On my first Iraq tour with a Marine Civil Affairs Group I got to fire an AK-47 as well as throw several live M67 grenades during our pre-deployment training. I've shot guns all my life so weapons use/handling is second nature.

Response by SSgt Jason Lindbeck made Jul 20 at 2017 4:42 PM

SSgt Jason Lindbeck — Thu, 20 Jul 2017 16:42:12 -0400

So it's one or the other for USAF. If you deploy, you must qual with either the m4 or the m9, usually the former. Beyond that, however, security forces handles the security, and there would never be a reason at home station for anyone else to arm up. Members of arming group A (SF, AFSOC, and certain Supply folks) receive training annually, plus whatever their unit's OI requires.
In extremely rare cases, certain personnel may be short notice deployed (inside of 72 hours) and dont get to attend their class. This is EXTREMELY rare, and only done in cases where they will be surrounded by other armed personnel.

Response by Cpl Armando Mireles made Jul 20 at 2017 5:01 PM

Cpl Armando Mireles — Thu, 20 Jul 2017 17:01:47 -0400

Every service should include basic rifle/hand gun training and qualifications.

Response by SFC Michael Peterson made Jul 21 at 2017 9:45 PM

SFC Michael Peterson — Fri, 21 Jul 2017 21:45:19 -0400

The Air Force spend their money on creature comforts like great food in their DFAC, cable TV in every barracks room, 4 star hotels while on TDY. I doubt they care about spending money on ammo. They don't even have a serious PT program, do they?

Response by LCDR Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 23 at 2017 7:39 PM

LCDR Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 23 Jul 2017 19:39:39 -0400

Everything comes at a cost. What are you willing to exchange for the time needed to make airmen proficient?

Response by SSgt James Tadlock made Jul 23 at 2017 9:41 PM

SSgt James Tadlock — Sun, 23 Jul 2017 21:41:29 -0400

You are absolutely right. I have heard some say that the govt wants to save on weapons and ammunition. In Vietnam we had enough m-16s and ammunition but no training on the weapon prior to leaving the states. We also had S&W .38 cal pistols which we carried whenever we were burning classified. There would be suspected VC locked in cages around the area. It woulda been hell if we were ever shot at. We probably would all been killed. But I will say that Air Force Security did a good job protecting the base during TET offensive 1968. And there were others who assisted. Over 1000 VC were killed.

Response by SMSgt Clayton Cortinas made Jul 24 at 2017 3:32 AM

SMSgt Clayton Cortinas — Mon, 24 Jul 2017 03:32:35 -0400

I flew with several aeromedical evacuation squadrons during my 30 year Air Force and Army carrier. We received formal live-fire training once a year and the so-called "Just in Time" training prior to each deployment. Once in country we were assigned an M16 and either a 30 cal or 9mm handgun. We would be issued the weapon (usually the handgun) prior to each trip downrange and returned it to the armory upon RTB. We were also aware that Marines and Army personnel would not always be available to provide security if stationed down range and that we would have to do it ourselves. Yes, in spite of the Geneva Convention's policy of unarmed medics. Being a reserve unit more than a few of our medics were full time law enforcement and more than familiar with the use of firearms. So, I would say it all depends on which Air Force unit you're assigned to.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 27 at 2017 2:26 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 27 Jul 2017 14:26:11 -0400

To the colonel I would like to say that the army aviation side of the house has to fix and fuel and arm aircraft as part of there mission and we still qualify yearly on our individual weapons and as crew serve weapons Gunners but some how we are able to do that while maintaining a high flight ops tempo. And the Marines do the same. Maybe the air Force doesn't put enough trust in it's people thinking that can't retain enough training to do more than just aircraft related duties

Response by PO1 Mike Dean made Jul 28 at 2017 9:39 AM

PO1 Mike Dean — Fri, 28 Jul 2017 09:39:12 -0400

Because the Air Force is a country club with Marines on the outer perimeter to protect them? Sorry, couldn't resist..... but you left the door open.

Response by SMSgt Sheila Berg made Jul 28 at 2017 6:48 PM

SMSgt Sheila Berg — Fri, 28 Jul 2017 18:48:09 -0400

Weapons training was mainly for those deploying. I agree the Air Force needs to rethink that policy. Attacks can happen anywhere even in CONUS!

Response by Sgt Jd Ledford made Aug 1 at 2017 9:45 AM

Sgt Jd Ledford — Tue, 01 Aug 2017 09:45:39 -0400

As a USAF VET I first qualified in basic. Then more during PJ training. The Air Force has several units that are combat trained to fight. These units stay in the shadows and are not very well known. Like it was said the Air Forces job is not o be a ground fighting force!

Response by TSgt Tom Margol made Aug 2 at 2017 12:29 PM

TSgt Tom Margol — Wed, 02 Aug 2017 12:29:32 -0400

Unfortunately too many seem to fit your assessment of never needing to fire a weapon. Personally, would have loved to be able to keep a M-16/M-4/M-9 handy. Although scary, was kind of funny watching clueless ones trying to figure simple procedures on them when I was in.

Response by TSgt Tsgt Tommy Castillo made Aug 3 at 2017 7:54 PM

TSgt Tsgt Tommy Castillo — Thu, 03 Aug 2017 19:54:54 -0400

The Airman should be able to be called up and defend the base or anything else that needs protecting. Period

Response by SFC William Stephens A. Jr., 3 MSM, JSCM made Aug 4 at 2017 3:13 PM

SFC William Stephens A. Jr., 3 MSM, JSCM — Fri, 04 Aug 2017 15:13:49 -0400

So who in the AIR FORCE wears red jackets and big gray gloves no wonder they can't load M16 the correct way anymore. LAMO!

Response by PVT Mark Brown made Aug 4 at 2017 4:20 PM

PVT Mark Brown — Fri, 04 Aug 2017 16:20:09 -0400

What does the term "Armed Forces" really mean? While I was in I was pleased to spend time on the range with any of a number of weapons. My QRF assigned weapon was the wonderful M-60 (I qualified with this weapon.) We should all have a basic understanding of at least one side arm and one long gun. Training and re-qual should occur on at least a semi-annual basis - no exceptions.

Response by SFC Jim Ruether made Aug 4 at 2017 6:27 PM

SFC Jim Ruether — Fri, 04 Aug 2017 18:27:23 -0400

I think you are spot on with your assessment of the AF's weapons training and qualification. Once your aircraft is shot down its you and the enemy and your service pistol. Same goes for a forward operations area that is suddenly over run by the enemy. You get up you grab your rifle and ammunition and you go fight the enemy.
My son's a Capt. Flying KC-10's and he was taught at home by his G.I. Daddy to shoot with a single shot Winchester .22 and then the Colt 1911 and the M16A1 Rifle and later the Beretta and the M16A2 Colt Rifle. He has been asked to be on an AF pistol marksmanship team but with his ops tempo where it is, he has no time right now to do that.

Marksmanship begins in the home.

Response by MSgt John Ryan made Aug 5 at 2017 9:43 PM

MSgt John Ryan — Sat, 05 Aug 2017 21:43:22 -0400

SF defend the base and resources, Army and Marines take the fight to the enemy... so so you want the tech who keeps the AC flying carring a gun or working a wrench... if you have called CAS you know the answer

Response by TSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 10 at 2017 8:23 AM

TSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 10 Aug 2017 08:23:17 -0400

I served 3.5 years in the Army 69 -73. Got out and came back into the ANG Mech in 89 and discovered I had gotten to soft to be a grunt. I was ready to throw in the towel when an AFRES recruiter enticed me. I switched to Air Force. Compared to mechanized infantry it was like a vacation on week-ends' I can best describe the Air Force as "Kind of Military!" I did enjoy 17 years in the Air Force 605/2T2 and worked with a lot of great Airmen. Uh or is it AirPeople? I never was politically correct nor did I ever mean to be insulting. A WAC is a WAC, a WAV a WAV and God Bless the Donut Dollies.
All that being said I was a LRRP, an Aero Scout in OH6As. I worked and or trained with Rangers, Seals, SF. I do believe the most amazing men I ever worked with were the air Force Green Foot para-rescue.
Like I said the Air
force is "mostly" kind of military so AirPeople mostly are not down for a real fire fight.

Response by MSgt Paul Freed made Aug 16 at 2017 10:18 PM

MSgt Paul Freed — Wed, 16 Aug 2017 22:18:22 -0400

Sad thing is, after I retired I got an M4 style 5.56 rifle and have shot more rounds in the last few months than I did in 24 years in the Air Force. I was an avid hunter and a good shot (made Expert although I never turned it in to the personnel office because I didn't want to have to add another damn ribbon to my rack). I would have loved to have practiced more with the M-16. Lord knows I was a good shot with my 30-30 and 22LR.

Response by SSgt Jeff Martin made Aug 17 at 2017 9:40 PM

SSgt Jeff Martin — Thu, 17 Aug 2017 21:40:24 -0400

What AFSCs are issued weapons besides the police and various aircrew and pararescue?

Response by CW4 Alex DeLorey made Aug 18 at 2017 8:09 PM

CW4 Alex DeLorey — Fri, 18 Aug 2017 20:09:57 -0400

In the 80's, I was sent from Bragg to the pentagon TDY. From the Pentagon, a small team of us, including a young Navy type was sent to El Salvador to provide some training. One night while in the southern part of the country a host country training base was hit by the bad guys. Our site was removed from that site but you could hear some of the explosions in the distance and we quickly set up on the perimeter. I was stuck in one position with the navy guy. Real nice guy, proficient in his specialty, and very smart, but no idea about how to use an M-16. I did what I could in a few seconds not knowing if we would be hit. I locked and loaded for him, placed it in safe mode and told him where to aim. I stressed not to open fire until he heard from me as there were friendlies walking the perimeter. Anyway, a long winded way to say you just never know when danger will head your way, especially these days I thank God we were not hit and would have felt better if this kid had received some minimal training. It wasn't his fault, just the system

Response by 1st Lt Randy Varner made Aug 24 at 2017 12:27 AM

1st Lt Randy Varner — Thu, 24 Aug 2017 00:27:03 -0400

M_9 is what i was equiped with grate close combat gun for long distance m-16 came in handy it dosent jam as offten then most all thogh i. Trew it in the mud to see what it well do it did jam for proxamently of a mil a sec then fix the spring magazine. That jamed

Response by SFC William Bethea made Aug 30 at 2017 11:04 PM

SFC William Bethea — Wed, 30 Aug 2017 23:04:28 -0400

I will be blunt and to the point. The Air Force comes from the Army Air Corps, any lineage claimed from WWI and WWII is to Army Air Corps, not Air Force.
There are different thoughts on way the Air Corps left the Army, more then some was political. It gets convoluted beyond that. (My Grandfather stayed Army, my Great Uncle became Air Force, both served as Army Air Corps during WWII; both retired as Colonels.)
Both have since passed, they would be apalled to see the state of the current military.
From a retired fu#@, quit asking and make it right. Doesn't matter your branch, your push to the fight does. If that is no longer taught, we have failed.

Response by SSgt Joe Simonelli made Aug 31 at 2017 10:35 AM

SSgt Joe Simonelli — Thu, 31 Aug 2017 10:35:11 -0400

I agree completely. I was in the air force during Viet Nam. I never had to go there but I heard stories about the Tet offendive and some airmen had to rely on army troops when their air base was overrun. I always worried abput not being fully trained with a weapon.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 1 at 2017 7:38 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 01 Sep 2017 19:38:06 -0400

I went into the air force on Dec 14, 1970.. in basic I had to qualify with the m16.. and then again the second time when being sent over sea again.

Response by Sgt William Collins made Sep 4 at 2017 11:57 AM

Sgt William Collins — Mon, 04 Sep 2017 11:57:17 -0400

To be a rifleman, you have to concentrate on rifle-consciousness. That's why Marines carry them around all through training, clean them every night and spend two weeks learning to fire them. Air Force members simply have a lot of other things to learn. If they need to learn about firearms they will be taught. Meanwhile, I don't see a lot of enemy troops getting to an airbase past the A-10s, F-16s and Raptors . . .

Response by SSG Wayne Wood made Sep 10 at 2017 11:07 PM

SSG Wayne Wood — Sun, 10 Sep 2017 23:07:37 -0400

We had a saying when I was in - "Better have it and not need it than need it and not have it." One of my biggest fears was running out of ammo in a tight spot, "BANG! BANG! BANG! - click." "OOPS!" I always scrounged as much ammo as I could. Heavy, yeah, but it was nice to be alive to carry it.

I think that's the same with weapons training in all branches. Personnel in all branches - and I think the branches would benefit from at least familiarization with the major personal weapons system, be it M-16, M-4 or whatever new weapon DoD acquires. Back right after Vietnam the Army did away with bayonet training for awhile. We were told we were not likely ever to need it and if we did things would have gotten so bad it would probably not matter. A few years later they realized their mistake and re-instated it. I remember one brass hat saying there was something to the "spirit of the bayonet." I agreed then and still do - I think the parallel applies.

BTW: I had two younger brothers and a son join the Navy - all three were disappointed they didn't receive at least SOME type of weapons training in their Boot Camp. One of my brothers and son both volunteered for security duty that allowed them to carry arms and train with same. Again, better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it.

Response by A1C Carol Taylor made Sep 11 at 2017 10:58 AM

A1C Carol Taylor — Mon, 11 Sep 2017 10:58:13 -0400

Not everyone learn to qualify for M16 only the people in MP school.

Response by MSgt Arvin Stott made Sep 20 at 2017 8:37 AM

MSgt Arvin Stott — Wed, 20 Sep 2017 08:37:59 -0400

As everyone is saying not the mission of the USAF to have all qualified with weapons. Spent my career in munitions and civil engineering. Which had a armed requirement due to their missions. Being armed in the Air Force is dependent upon the mission being done.

Response by SrA Laura Quarles made Sep 20 at 2017 6:52 PM

SrA Laura Quarles — Wed, 20 Sep 2017 18:52:25 -0400

When I enlisted in 1988 we had a day at the range in BMT. Having grown up hunting it was easy for me. (I have no idea if the AF still does that or not.) Then I was fortunate enough to become an AMMO troop (IYAAYAS!) and we had to qualify annually with M16s, as we guarded our own munitions and special weapons movements, as well as the Bomb Dump itself.

I think every basic trainee should have at least the basics (no pun intended) of firearms safety and operation.

Response by LTC Robert Gray made Sep 21 at 2017 3:51 PM

LTC Robert Gray — Thu, 21 Sep 2017 15:51:06 -0400

The Air Force never learned the lesson of Vietnam when Air Bases routinely over run. Every member of the Military should be full qualified with a personal weapon. Intent of a Branch mission is one thing. Reality on the ground is a separate reality.

Response by TSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 21 at 2017 4:37 PM

TSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 21 Sep 2017 16:37:17 -0400

only certain units with in the air force are required to be qualified on weapons use. all air force personal qualify in basic training. all flight crew, mp's/sp's, cct, af sec ops, and crew chiefs are required to qualify on weapons use in case of an attack. any air force base that has sensitive areas such as the flight line, hangers, runways, or command areas have heightened security and are contained with in a fence that's with in a fence with controlled access. personally I don't think there are enough weapons to hand out to all af personnel.

Response by MSgt Terry RaZor made Sep 21 at 2017 6:29 PM

MSgt Terry RaZor — Thu, 21 Sep 2017 18:29:13 -0400

Former reservist at McCord. We were doing a field exercise. I, the mobility NCO advised the Captain in charge that the way he was deploying his defensive perimeter they would be shooting each other and attempted to diagram a mutually supporting group of fire teams, crossing lanes of fire et al.
I was told to bugger off.
When the aggressors attacked lot's of MILES gear started beeping. The aggressors hadn't raised their weapons, or fired a shot.

Response by CWO2 James Mathews made Sep 25 at 2017 9:05 AM

CWO2 James Mathews — Mon, 25 Sep 2017 09:05:28 -0400

My service time was in the Navy, submarines, and we did not get a chance to shoot a weapon very often either. However, we carried a number and variety of hand weapons with us, and everyone was qualified to shoot a .45 pistol since they were carried on the deck watch. I guess that, in my view, if you are in the US Military, you should know how to use a weapon. If not, then why not simply use civilians to do the supply and admin work? Those who deploy, and all air crews should be trained in weapon usage also, in my estimation, or why are you designated as military? That is my opinion, and I am sure that many here will object to that idea, as many already have, but emergencies, that require the need for weapon usage arise all the time, and particularly now in this period of political upheaval!

Response by PO1 Gery Bastiani made Sep 30 at 2017 10:54 PM

PO1 Gery Bastiani — Sat, 30 Sep 2017 22:54:59 -0400

well in the Navy Seabees and when assigned to a battalion every time we are back at our homeport besides our rate training we spend two weeks of military training which includes a week at the range qualifying with our M16 and .45 and crew serve weapons

Response by Sgt James Hopkins made Oct 1 at 2017 12:03 PM

Sgt James Hopkins — Sun, 01 Oct 2017 12:03:51 -0400

Only those of us in Rapid Deployment Wings were required to qualify every year. I grew up shooting guns and hunting, so it was no problem for me.

Response by SPC Tommy Dean made Oct 2 at 2017 2:54 PM

SPC Tommy Dean — Mon, 02 Oct 2017 14:54:12 -0400

Nowadays you need to be a fully qualified rifleman just to be a civilian. With that said, shouldn't all branches of the military be proficient with small arms? What happens when the last plane leaves and you're not on it??. Fight back or surrender are about the only options.

Response by Capt Seid Waddell made Oct 2 at 2017 3:16 PM

Capt Seid Waddell — Mon, 02 Oct 2017 15:16:59 -0400

Agree completely.

Response by TSgt Paul Wells made Oct 10 at 2017 9:40 PM

TSgt Paul Wells — Tue, 10 Oct 2017 21:40:28 -0400

When we went to Vietnam I had to go to Hamilton AFB, Ca for a refresher course on various weapons including grenades. This was in 1967.

Response by MSgt Albert (Al) Parsons made Oct 12 at 2017 9:59 AM

MSgt Albert (Al) Parsons — Thu, 12 Oct 2017 09:59:31 -0400

As a flight engineer during Nam, I was required to be fully qualified on the M-16 and the .38 pistol (every day carry for flight crews in my outfit). During my AF career I also qualified on the M-1 (Yes, youngsters that's a real weapon), AR 14, AR15, .45, and various other weapons, some courtesy of US Army courses and instructors. I understand the reasoning behind AF Brass saying that not every Airman today needs to be weapon qualified, but ask the clerks and cooks and admin types at Danang and other places in Nam during TET 68, what THEY think of the idea! An Airman who can't defend himself and his fellow Airmen is really only partially trained and unable to do the basic job of defending his fellow Airman and his Airbase. If you can't qualify on the basis issued weapon(s) what good are you?

Response by SPC Mike Davis made Oct 15 at 2017 5:09 PM

SPC Mike Davis — Sun, 15 Oct 2017 17:09:41 -0400

everyone needs to know how to fire a weapon That does not mean they haft to be good at it But you got to know how to defend your self if forced to

Response by CW3 Kevin Storm made Oct 15 at 2017 6:08 PM

CW3 Kevin Storm — Sun, 15 Oct 2017 18:08:10 -0400

Have you ever seen them on the range, it is scary.

Response by TSgt Brian Herman made Oct 17 at 2017 9:16 PM

TSgt Brian Herman — Tue, 17 Oct 2017 21:16:13 -0400

When I went trough basic training (in 1983!) , we had one day of weapons training, with an M-16 sleeved down to a 22 LR round. I got off of active duty in Dec 92, having NEVER fired again after BMT. I joined the Idaho ANG in October of 2000, and retired in Oct of 12. During my guard time, I was able to qualify and deploy several more times. I acquired 6 more years AD in that 12 year stretch. As a 605/2T2 I was in arming group B, having to qualify at least every two years. Lots of truth in several of the previous comments, some decent humor as well. When I was in Djibouti in 2011 the Navy said they had some extra rounds, and so I was allowed to go shooting with them..The funny part of this story, is that my dad had been in the Army back in like 62, and was awarded a marksman award. So of course I wanted one very badly! I always missed the AF qual by one or two rounds, every time I would go fire. So with the Navy, I was able to meet the requirement for a Navy marksman ribbon. Now, if you can still read the guidance, it quite clearly says that ANG members, who are TDY with the Navy and meet the Navy qualification, are PROHIBITED from wearing the Navy ribbon! To the original post, it comes down to a coupe of points. #1, it takes time and money to spend that brass. And of course nobody wants to spend that AF squadron level budget dollar on shooting. It also has a very negative PC point, in that while we are all supposed to be trained, willing and able to do our duty, the powers that be, do not want any more people than necessary, after military service, to be trained, willing and able to kill the "new" enemy. The drunk neighbor, the overly aggressive soccer coach, or pick a bad person. Sorry to be so chatty....

Response by TSgt Tommy Amparano made Oct 18 at 2017 6:06 PM

TSgt Tommy Amparano — Wed, 18 Oct 2017 18:06:22 -0400

I agree. When I was in I got to shoot maybe once every three years. I felt like we were just checking a "readiness" box too. I am figured AF brass was more concerned about keeping planes flying than making sure some medical guy had a decent grouping. Good thing there are plenty of us that own a private collection.

Response by SPC Roger Giffen made Oct 18 at 2017 6:08 PM

SPC Roger Giffen — Wed, 18 Oct 2017 18:08:40 -0400

What will happen to the AF if the Army or Marines defending them are overrun? And the SF is overrun? Y'all are gonna be toast.

Response by CPL Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 18 at 2017 6:09 PM

CPL Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 18 Oct 2017 18:09:37 -0400

Too right. Maintainer here & my last deployment was to a fob with only af personnel. Needless to say we came under fire & I was headed straight to an armory. One of my supervisors asked where I was heading & i told him. He said no, everyone heads to the "bunkers" and wait for the all clear. I thought it was so backwards...

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 18 at 2017 6:16 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 18 Oct 2017 18:16:29 -0400

So, when I was a crew chief in 2010-2011 at Osan AB, I asked why flightline mainainters weren't allowed weapons if NK decided to get frisky. I was told, verbatim "would you trust you with a weapon?" He continued on, "I've had to take down a maintainer out here one time before. It took 5 of us. He was wielding a very larger wrench". Now, whether that was a true recpunting, I'll never know, but I do know that somewhere deep in the Security Forces palet, they don't like the idea of a bunch of crew chiefs namely, touting weapons.

Response by TSgt Scott Hurley made Oct 18 at 2017 6:27 PM

TSgt Scott Hurley — Wed, 18 Oct 2017 18:27:51 -0400

As all Airmen are trained to fire an M-16/M-4 in Basic, they are supposed to re-qualify every year or 2. But it changed when they put us in groups that was done when we get deployed. That is plain wrong. The only ones that got the training regularly were the SF's, Combat Controllers etc., and Certain CE groups like Red Horse. I always knew that there was a rifle with my name on it in the armory. But I would never see it. Unless I was deployed and it is was issued to me at the destination when needed. But I think the AF should return to training with the M-16/M-4 and M-9 on at least a yearly basis. As well as do what is known as fam training so members can fire certain weapons like the M-2 .50 machine gun. By fam training, just knowing how to fire it, clear jams and load it. Nothing else. There would be no to to qualify on them.

Response by PO3 Scot Fahey made Oct 18 at 2017 6:51 PM

PO3 Scot Fahey — Wed, 18 Oct 2017 18:51:49 -0400

1978 to make USN e-5 required one to qualify to stand a topside watch, The 1911 side arm was weapon of the day, sometimes 12 ga shotgun, no weapons qual, no e-5, there came a time when having loaded sidearms went out of fashion (Clinton was President)

Response by MSgt Terry Mahan made Oct 18 at 2017 7:23 PM

MSgt Terry Mahan — Wed, 18 Oct 2017 19:23:08 -0400

Agree, in my time in 73 -97 the only time we went to range was prior to overseas PCS. Minimum training. When I was I ROK told we were responsible for protecti g our Aircraft because there were not enough SP's assigned to base and could not depend on ROKAF forces. Ok, my queztion was where are our weapons,response in armory near SP Building. Problem armory across flightline. Weall agreedbwe would knock ROK troop over the head and use their weapons. With our training we wold probably lasted may be 5 minutes in an attack.

Response by Cpl Mark Sullivan made Oct 18 at 2017 8:02 PM

Cpl Mark Sullivan — Wed, 18 Oct 2017 20:02:49 -0400

SF is not infantry

Response by PFC John Hopping made Oct 18 at 2017 8:19 PM

PFC John Hopping — Wed, 18 Oct 2017 20:19:32 -0400

Because in the Air Force the enlisted send the officers off to fight.

Response by Maj Tim Rogers made Oct 18 at 2017 9:14 PM

Maj Tim Rogers — Wed, 18 Oct 2017 21:14:12 -0400

Absolutely true war story: OIF, 2003 - I was the Logistics Officer for Marine Air Control Group 38, stationed at Al Jabber Air Base in Kuwait. As the offensive was winding down, USAF units stationed there began moving forward to Talil in Iraq. Shortly after this began, I received a call from the 3d Marine Aircraft Wing Logistics Operations Officer, asking if any of our units had any "extra machine guns". Since we had exactly what we rated, I laughed "No! Who the hell thinks we might have 'extra'?" He replied that the USAF wants to arm their convoys, and since they don't have any weapons...not even rifles...(except for the Security Forces stationed there), that they were asking around. IDK if they ever got any machine guns.

Flash forward to 2010 at Camp Leatherneck in Afghanistan. I saw a USAF SSgt struggling with unloading his and showing clear before he went into the chow hall. He seemed to not have the first clue how to operate the pistol. Add to that the fact that he was trying to hold a water bottle at the same time, and I had to step in. He refused my help, and I moved on, hoping that any negligent discharge wouldn't wind up hurting someone.

A bit of a sad testimony when our members of our Armed Services don't know how to operate those arms.

Response by SSgt Jimmy Jackson made Oct 18 at 2017 9:47 PM

SSgt Jimmy Jackson — Wed, 18 Oct 2017 21:47:26 -0400

I would have gone to the range monthly. I was in Combat Comm, insert your jokes at will, and only had to qualify with rifle (M-16) and revolver (.38) once. Would have love to do more often

Response by PFC Bradley Campbell made Oct 18 at 2017 9:55 PM

PFC Bradley Campbell — Wed, 18 Oct 2017 21:55:30 -0400

all our military must be at a minimum basic infantrymen with the base skills. shoot, clean rifle, wear gas mask and shit in the woods.officers included even pilots

Response by SrA Paul Pfeil made Oct 18 at 2017 11:35 PM

SrA Paul Pfeil — Wed, 18 Oct 2017 23:35:49 -0400

Wait when I was in basic, we all had to qualify with the m-16a1, did that change?

Response by TSgt Denise Moody made Oct 18 at 2017 11:45 PM

TSgt Denise Moody — Wed, 18 Oct 2017 23:45:27 -0400

When I joined the AF women weren't allowed to qualify with a weapon unless we were stationed overseas. Really disappointed me. After getting out and joining the ANG I ended up on a base where everyone had to qualify with an M-16 and a pistol...except Headquarters where I worked. Luckily I was able to piggy back with another unit to finally get a chance to qualify which is did.

But, here's the thing. The AF is not the Army or the Marines. We are not riflemen first, were never meant to be ground troops. Our qualifying with a weapon was only in case our base were to be under attack, overrun. That was why, when I first joined, women had to qualify when going overseas but not before.

But hey, if any AF member wants to get qualified and stay qualified with M-4/M-16/M-9 I think they should be able to.

Response by TSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 19 at 2017 9:35 AM

TSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 19 Oct 2017 09:35:02 -0400

An an AF firefighter I was on the PRIME BEEF team....this is the Civil Engineering deployable team that would be sent to forward operating locations. We were required to qualify every year with our weapons since we never knew where we might be going. AF SF were the primary defense but we knew how to use our weapons if we had to.

Response by SSgt Thomas Crosser Jr. made Oct 19 at 2017 1:24 PM

SSgt Thomas Crosser Jr. — Thu, 19 Oct 2017 13:24:44 -0400

This is a problem in the AF mentality. We forget Korea, when one of our bases was overrun and the enemy slaughtered Air Police, maintenance, anyone left. Yeah, you need to know how to fight, and how to shoot, rifle or pistol. You just never know, and history has a nasty habit of repeating itself for those who ignore. Change the mentality, get the kids shooting in Basic, make all base personnel qualify yearly with the M-9, every two years on the M-4/M-16 platform and selected troops on belt fed weapons. You cannot count on a handful of cops to completely secure your base, especially downrange. We don't have enough bodies. And you cannot expect the AF to evac everyone in time, nor should we count on the Army or the Marines to pull us out of the fire.

Response by TSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 19 at 2017 8:04 PM

TSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 19 Oct 2017 20:04:33 -0400

I was part of CE for my first 6 years and had to qualify annually. Also I deployed to an Army FOB for 7 months as a Firefighter/EMT and the base was loaded with nothing but Army. Air Force ran the medical mission and security. There were more than 300 SF out there defending the base. I'll never forgot how to assemble/disassemble an M16/M9/M4. I think once a year is good for every AFSC. I didn't realize every AFSC didn't qualify once a year until I became a recruiter. What a shame, just one day a year and everyone wants to complain about money, training comes first!

Response by PFC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 22 at 2017 3:20 AM

PFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 22 Oct 2017 03:20:15 -0400

Me personally I don't care if your a rear echelon or on a ship, special ops, pilot, air crew, artillery, engineer, medical, science or infantry I believe we all should go through basic rifle marksmanship going through basic it was very nerve racking when I was in the Navy it took going out to the fleet to learn rifle marksmanship we live in a world where there is no front lines today got to have that capability. I think it should be standard for all branches.

Response by PO3 B Al Eisen made Oct 25 at 2017 1:57 PM

PO3 B Al Eisen — Wed, 25 Oct 2017 13:57:05 -0400

As a reactor operator, I didn't have a need for rifle training. As a civilian, I paid for my missing training myself. Such is life.

Response by 1stSgt Dexter Swanstrom made Nov 1 at 2017 7:58 PM

1stSgt Dexter Swanstrom — Wed, 01 Nov 2017 19:58:07 -0400

When I retired from the AF in 92 there were two categories regarding weapons training. Cat A was SF LE, pilots, any person required to carry a weapon on a daily basis to guard high value items ( supply types moving drugs etc). Cat B was pretty much everybody else. You were required to qualify on the M-16 in basic. Later when you went overseas you received training on the M-16 enlisted, M-9 officers. Once over seas you went once a year to requalify. You were also taught the basics, clearing, cleaning and of course disassembly and assembly. ( yes I had one student who could not assemble the three basic parts groups of the M16). You were also taught ammunition packaging. How to identify what the caliber was how it was stored and how to break down the crates to get the ammo. Medical services were also trained. About the only ones that weren't were the chaplains. Rudimentary but better than nothing.

Response by SSgt Liam Babington made Nov 2 at 2017 11:49 AM

SSgt Liam Babington — Thu, 02 Nov 2017 11:49:07 -0400

Quite frankly when I was in, and was deployed we were qualified before we left home station! With that said, we are technically focused, not infantry

Response by COL Arthur Kaff made Nov 5 at 2017 7:25 AM

COL Arthur Kaff — Sun, 05 Nov 2017 07:25:11 -0500

It appears the Air Force is picking up on the concerns you have referenced to some extent. I understand the Air Force now requires completion and qualification for all during a rifle qualification course on the M-16 in Air Force basic training.

Response by Sgt Paul Nadas made Nov 5 at 2017 9:10 AM

Sgt Paul Nadas — Sun, 05 Nov 2017 09:10:33 -0500

Here are my thoughts from my own personal experience. I joined the Air Force at age 17 in 1963. I 'qualified' as Expert in marksmanship in Basic Training, but admittedly I had the advantage of both already being a keen shooter who had been well-trained in the handling of 'small arms' courtesy of my time as a Boy Scout, and having the advantage of extraordinarily keen vision (20/10) I seem to recall that stateside, the weapons we used on the various ranges for 'qualifying' were 'clapped out' old M2 .30 caliber WWII era carbines. In some cases these rifles were so worn out that standing behind a shooter, you could actually see the arc of the bullet in flight(!). Cut to Viet Nam where I arrived for my 'tour' in October of 1965. I was issued a brand new Colt Armalite AR-15 (M-16), several clips, and some ammo, plus an old Colt .38 'Special' Police revolver and ammo for it. I received no training in either weapon, nor had I ever held the brand new (M-16), having seen it fired only once while at 'survival training' at what was then Stead Air Force Base near Reno, NV before shipping out. Army and Marine troops were still being deployed with the M-14 which was quite a good, accurate weapon, but heavy and not particularly well-suited for the kind of terrain and operational requirements that they faced 'in country.' What happened was kind of 'epic.' After being deployed for months 'out in the boonies' (relative to the sprawling Than Son Nhut Air Base outside Saigon), I had occasion to return to the base. In the interim, the base had come under attack one night and in the ensuing panic and disorder amongst untrained, unprepared, undisciplined, Air Force troops deployed there (what we derisively referred to as 'Saigon Warriors') The results were predictable: more Air Force casualties from 'friendly fire' than from the enemy. (That said, the Air Police deployed as Security for the base who faced the brunt of the attack by the VC and the USAF dog handlers acquitted themselves well.). That incident spelled the 'End' of giving weapons to everyone and anyone deployed to VN. When I showed up at the base with my M-16 and Colt revolver on a Western-styled 'gun-slinger' belt, I was regarded as an 'Outsider' and....inherently 'dangerous.' It was laughable, of course, but....I think the point I am trying to make is that if one is deployed to a 'Combat Zone' as a member of a military force, one should not only be equipped to defend oneself from the 'enemy' but also be well-trained and conversant with all proper procedures to be an asset in case of an emergency and not a Liability to oneself and one's fellow troops. (End of Long Winded rant....LOL! ;-)

Response by SGT Arthur Tompkins made Nov 16 at 2017 7:49 PM

SGT Arthur Tompkins — Thu, 16 Nov 2017 19:49:23 -0500

In 2004 they had an Air force Unit pulling escort service for supplies to LSA Diamondback in Mosul. They would use Tampa down to Bagdad. They would always come back with some trying stories.

Response by TSgt Philip Prigmore made Nov 16 at 2017 8:07 PM

TSgt Philip Prigmore — Thu, 16 Nov 2017 20:07:13 -0500

I just saw this post. Every member of every branch of the service should be proficient with every weapon they might encounter. Yes that will be a lot of additional training, but it would be well worth it. With proper training with all fire arms, the personnel will achieve additional self respect and the ability to defend and protect themselves and their fellow members regardless of where they are located. When I was in the Air Force and went through basic training, we learned how to disassemble, clean, and reassemble the original M16. We then were given 150 rounds to prove what we learned. My brother had gone through basic a few years earlier and told me if you didn't qualify you were given an additional 150 rounds for a second chance to qualify. If you qualified, you got to police up a field behind the firing line while those who didn't fired the second chance 150 rounds. I grew up in East Tennessee and Alabama. I started shooting at age 5 and was rabbit and squirrel hunting by age 7 with a single shot .22 bolt action rifle. I didn't think the two individuals on either side of me would qualify, so I put 50 rounds in each of their targets. I put the final 50 rounds very scattered on my target. Yes, I didn't have to police that field and I got to fire another 150 rounds which were all located in an approximately 8 inch circle. I have a tremendous respect for all firearms. I know how to properly handle any firearm handed to me. I am saddened that this is not true for the current members of the Air Force. They never will know where they might be stationed, and it just might be in a very hostile location. Trying to learn once there is a drastic mistake. It takes more than just one time with a weapon to insure some familiarization. It takes a whole lot of training to learn how to handle that same weapon with enough proficiency to save your life and anyone else with you.

Response by PO1 Michael Eisenman made Nov 18 at 2017 3:29 PM

PO1 Michael Eisenman — Sat, 18 Nov 2017 15:29:29 -0500

Strange though, as Navy I qualified M16, M9, even M1 and .45. I was subs, a nuke electrician, but required to hit a barn door. I never was required to be an expert but proficient enough to put lead downrange. In the Bees of course we had to be a little more accurate but I always appreciated Jarhead bullet sponges because we were not ground pounders. Having worked as civilian on a space wing base I agree, keep weapons out of the airman's hands. And most of the security forces were worth squat anyway such as leave weapons in the head, forget their clip when going on watch, and have no idea how a metal detector worked. SF was the one's with the most drunk on duty charges, domestic abuse, and stealing. A couple of them were so professional they took dumps just about everywhere, offices, hallways, even the middle of the bathroom floor. Several females carried M4s but had no rounds because they couldn't qualify, they carried them so no one would know how sad AF security is. And they had four hours every week on the range under instruction. I am guessing the instructor was Security Forces. But I know the best and brightest didn't get duty on the Colorado prairie so maybe there are some security forces that don't aspire to reach Barney Fife level.

Response by SSgt Ronald L. Colbert made Nov 19 at 2017 7:11 PM

SSgt Ronald L. Colbert — Sun, 19 Nov 2017 19:11:17 -0500

When I enter the Air Force in 1961 I had to take training both with a 45 and M-1, later was trained on
AR 15 and 3 man team for the base security. This was my second AFSC. I continue this training every 6 months in various Base locations and overseas until 1975. Then once a year until I Retired in 81. So I believe it depended on the AFSC or you changed career field. Yes we had also lean to breakdown weapons and handle ammo cans.

Response by SMSgt Sheila Berg made Nov 29 at 2017 11:30 AM

SMSgt Sheila Berg — Wed, 29 Nov 2017 11:30:32 -0500

Air Force required annual weapons training for those on mobility status. Sadly with the concern about spending and shortage of weapon instructors has had an effect.

Response by Capt Emanuele Corso made Nov 30 at 2017 7:53 AM

Capt Emanuele Corso — Thu, 30 Nov 2017 07:53:47 -0500

Oh Boy! Showing my age! When I enlisted in 1960 we did have to qualify with the .30 carbine. Then when I was in OTS we had to qualify with a sidearm (.45 automatic and that damn snub-nosed .38). I agree with the Sgt. this is a vital skill for all AF personnel. The AF doesn't generally have to operate like the ground forces but then you never know when those skills are going to be necessary and that is not the time to learn which end the trigger is on.

Response by SrA Timothy Whitley made Dec 1 at 2017 6:49 AM

SrA Timothy Whitley — Fri, 01 Dec 2017 06:49:25 -0500

As an x AP I was fully aware that we were the air base defense (abgd). As as ssgt security forces you should have been aware of that too.

Response by CPT Derwin Howell made Dec 8 at 2017 12:54 PM

CPT Derwin Howell — Fri, 08 Dec 2017 12:54:55 -0500

If Air Force personnel are not intended to carry a weapon as the Army or Marines do daily, then why pray tell are Air Force personnel sent to combat zones in support roles? I've been assigned to Combat Out Posts and Afghan Brigade Command Posts where Air Force S2 personnel were in both TOCs and with handguns. Bottom-line, in my humble opinion, there are no "rear" areas in today's asymmetric battlefield so the Air Force needs to hone some battle skills for all its soldiers before it's to late.

Response by MSgt John DeLallo made Dec 10 at 2017 11:49 AM

MSgt John DeLallo — Sun, 10 Dec 2017 11:49:02 -0500

Duh, I was on mobility for 14 years, served as a Law Enforcement officer for my first 3, and qualified with the K-38 Combat Masterpiece (S&W Model 15), the M-1 Carbine, the M-2 carbine, the crank bolt "sniper" rifle with the Unertl scope, the M-60, the CAR-15, and the M-16, and the combat shotgun. I even learned how to operate an M-1 Garand for ceremonial purposes (military honors at funerals). I carried a non-issued .45 during my Vietnam tour, and still carry a .45 as my EDC (every day carry). Even after moving on from Law Enforcement to Purchasing, I was still required to qual on the M-16 at least annually. Since every man in our unit, and woman too, was required to annually qualify with the M-16, I'm confused. Is USAF saving money on guns and ammo? When did this policy begin. I served from 1968 until 1989, and retired as an E-7.

Response by SSgt Daniel d'Errico made Dec 12 at 2017 3:05 AM

SSgt Daniel d'Errico — Tue, 12 Dec 2017 03:05:52 -0500

Well, the ARMY and MARINES can't always be around to defend air bases. So the Air Force personnel (aside from security police) have fill in. When I was in Germany, working Tactical Air Control, (mobile radar) . We had to defend our site with all the available bodies we had. Unfortunately we had some Rambo wannabes, who could shoot, recognize enemy targets or keep their mouths shut. Once in awhile we interacted with Germany Army troops to see how well we could do. 60-40 in favor of the Germanys.

Response by SGT Gary Sokol made Dec 28 at 2017 6:22 AM

SGT Gary Sokol — Thu, 28 Dec 2017 06:22:19 -0500

after being discharged from the army, I considered enlisting as a chaplain's assistant in the air force reserve. I thought it was a bit ironic that it is one of the few jobs that require proficiency with weapons, since they are tasked with the responsibility of force protection and physical security.

Response by MSgt Thomas Mason made Jan 3 at 2018 10:31 AM

MSgt Thomas Mason — Wed, 03 Jan 2018 10:31:41 -0500

The Air Force largely operates from fixed facilities with concrete runways, hangars, control towers, precision landing systems, POL storage, motor pools, clean rooms for repairing sensitive systems, some of the best fire fighting equipment in the world, meteorological systems and air/ground operation areas. Not to forget the tremendous number of supplies and spare parts we keep on hand. We are largely technicians, not combat troops except for flight crews and our outstanding security personnel. If many of us have a "beef" with our Air Force - it's our constant attempt to move away from Ground Support for our Army and Marine Corps, a case in point? The A-10 Warthog!

Response by MSgt Arvin Stott made Jan 4 at 2018 11:00 PM

MSgt Arvin Stott — Thu, 04 Jan 2018 23:00:27 -0500

It is interesting to hear all the talk about how the SF is the infantry and that everyone else doesn't need to be armed or trained. Having been a 46370 and 55272 I can tell you that there are other people in the AF that do get trained with weapons. If anything, there should be more training. The problem of prescribing more training is that you run up against budgetary issues. Very few people in the AF have had the experience to use their weapons effectively. Also very few have been trained on individual movement and squad tactics.

The big element for leadership is the balance of doing the job you have been trained for and then attempting to find the time and budget to train for the basics of combat. At some point this lack of training will come back to bite us.

Response by SMSgt Alan Saunders made Jan 7 at 2018 8:50 PM

SMSgt Alan Saunders — Sun, 07 Jan 2018 20:50:15 -0500

When Airmen are handed a combat mission, they receive the necessary combat training and go perform the mission well. Air Force 2T1s (Vehicle Operators) were tasked to augment the Army 88M soldiers who had been heavily tasked in convoy operations in Iraq. They were trained, equipped and deployed to perform the mission - and performed extremely well. While the nature of the convoy missions demanded a more defensive posture, any Airman working outside the wire needed to be prepared for anything. Security Forces were tasked with perimeter defense - generally in close proximity to wherever the AF base is; or personal defense - generally wherever a senior officer needs to go. On the other hand, convoy operations moved people and equipment between bases, posts or other locations sometimes hundreds of miles apart through hostile territory. Not better, not worse, just different. My advice? Train everyone to a high level of proficiency.

Response by SSgt Jack Rupert made Jan 8 at 2018 3:03 PM

SSgt Jack Rupert — Mon, 08 Jan 2018 15:03:17 -0500

I went into the AF in 1970 and was taken to the range to learn how to shoot the m16. While in Germany , CE Prime Beef was also taken to the range, some prime beef members were tagged during alerts for security police extra support. That was between 72-74.

Response by SGT Glenn E Moody made Jan 10 at 2018 1:22 AM

SGT Glenn E Moody — Wed, 10 Jan 2018 01:22:49 -0500

how dose that happen I have never seen that the magazine in backwards doesn't it only fit in the receiver one way rounds up. in my day it was the M-16-A1 but I did my time as a rifleman in the ARMY infantry as A M-60 gunner with a M-1911 .45 sidearm it is my understanding that every branch goes to basic training before they go to MOS. training

Response by MSgt Brian Williams made Jan 10 at 2018 7:48 AM

MSgt Brian Williams — Wed, 10 Jan 2018 07:48:14 -0500

The AFSCs that require the regular use of a weapon are qualified. I guess it is kind of like asking why an Air Force dentist isn't qualified to fly an F-16. This isn't like JAG where an F-14 pilot is also a SEAL trained lawyer.

Response by GySgt Duane DaVein made Jan 20 at 2018 5:49 PM

GySgt Duane DaVein — Sat, 20 Jan 2018 17:49:37 -0500

Let us hope we never get to a point were all members of the Air Force need to be fully qualified as riflemen.

Response by SSgt Aaron H made Feb 2 at 2018 8:45 AM

SSgt Aaron H — Fri, 02 Feb 2018 08:45:16 -0500

This must be new. When I was in we all went to qualify on the M16 during basic. After that you hit the range once every couple years at your base to stay "worldwide deployable." It was no different than keeping your shots up to date. I was maintenance, and then Comm, but still had to stay qualified. This is new to me.

Response by Maj Robert Thornton made Mar 15 at 2018 10:12 AM

Maj Robert Thornton — Thu, 15 Mar 2018 10:12:44 -0400

I can't speak to the current USAF situation regarding firearms training, only during my career. As an RN and then a Nurse Anesthetist, I was on mobility teams, except during my time stationed in the UK. I was required to be qualified on the handgun in use at the time. I qualified on both the 38 revolver and the 9mm Berretta. Additionally, I was able to take an enlisted spot, if there was an opening, and qualify on the M-16.
Our enlisted personnel on mobility qualified with the M-16, the officers with a handgun. Even then I believed that officers should also be qualified on the M-16. The purpose of our being qualified was for the protection of ourselves and our patients in a combat zone, not perimeter security. That was to be provided by our security forces, as it was explained to me.

Response by Chris Brown Brown made May 24 at 2018 4:51 PM

Chris Brown Brown — Thu, 24 May 2018 16:51:40 -0400

do you go on ground to

Response by MSgt James Lindsey made Feb 13 at 2019 7:12 PM

MSgt James Lindsey — Wed, 13 Feb 2019 19:12:13 -0500

I was assigned to a Forward Air Traffic Post. We qualified every six months to be able to deploy to a location closer to the front lines. I also was trained on the use of M-60, Granade launcher and setting up Claymore mine. I deployed to Desert Shield/Storm the first thing that happened was to turn in our rifles for storage. It was determined that we would no see Combat up close. I was ready but grateful I was not up front. Our mission is getting aircraft in the air. I always took my mission seriously including training. Others not so much. Be careful what you wish for. Thank you for your input!

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 12 at 2019 10:36 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 12 Sep 2019 10:36:45 -0400

Well I talked to a Vietnam vet about when the m16 was first issued and he first saw it. It was on an airman on guard in Vietnam. He asked about it and asked to see the ammunition. He was told I wasn’t issued any... the point is maybe they need to re-evaluate parts of the training.

Response by SPC Charlie Msrtin made Sep 12 at 2019 10:53 AM

SPC Charlie Msrtin — Thu, 12 Sep 2019 10:53:28 -0400

When I was in the Air Force (an 88155 Security Specialist with ABGD no training,) the Air Force had an SP augmentation program in which other AFSCs would get very basic training in asset and base protection. I remember several individuals being as you described. Mind you, this was in the mid-to late 80's.

Response by TSgt Claude Everhart made Sep 12 at 2019 11:44 AM

TSgt Claude Everhart — Thu, 12 Sep 2019 11:44:55 -0400

I was Squadron Moblity NCO, and I can assure you that everyone in my Squadron were up to date on weapons qualifications M16
The only people trained on M9 were couriers

Response by SP5 Gary Smith made Sep 12 at 2019 5:04 PM

SP5 Gary Smith — Thu, 12 Sep 2019 17:04:12 -0400

If you can’t shoot, you ain’t military.

Response by SSG Steve Thomas made Sep 12 at 2019 5:05 PM

SSG Steve Thomas — Thu, 12 Sep 2019 17:05:32 -0400

All branches of the military should have training in basic handling of the M4, and basic marksmanship, thier lives might very well depend on it.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 12 at 2019 8:26 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 12 Sep 2019 20:26:59 -0400

That’s not how the Air Force works. I’ve worked with all branches and yes, they are all fairly proficient with their primary weapon and secondary if assigned one. However, the Air Force is a more technical branch. What I mean is we value the expertise in AFSC and the secondary focus is on weapons proficiency. This is why we are generally better at our specific job than, say, our Army brethren in the same/similar MOS. Being an expert in a field is not a bad thing, trust me. And also trust me when I say you probably don’t want most airmen holding a weapon unless the base is being overrun

Response by PFC Eric Stosius made Sep 12 at 2019 8:34 PM

PFC Eric Stosius — Thu, 12 Sep 2019 20:34:47 -0400

Because they are hiring on intelegence an good behavior. Not common sense and cunning.

Response by Amn Harry Graham Jr. made Sep 12 at 2019 8:48 PM

Amn Harry Graham Jr. — Thu, 12 Sep 2019 20:48:50 -0400

I did and I was a computer programmer.

Response by GySgt David Barber made Sep 12 at 2019 9:58 PM

GySgt David Barber — Thu, 12 Sep 2019 21:58:21 -0400

I can’t write what I am thinking.

Response by MSgt Don Bradshaw made Sep 12 at 2019 10:00 PM

MSgt Don Bradshaw — Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:00:38 -0400

The RAF has been training all its personnel on weapons and basic Air Base Defense since WWII. Who better to secure a work area than a troop that works that area and knows the other people that work that area? There is never enough Security Forces to secure a base especially in an insurgent environment. Look back at Vietnam and the current War on Terror for examples. All personnel should be able to defend their areas. Well I'm just an old retired fart, what do I know.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 12 at 2019 10:33 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:33:32 -0400

Every member of every branch of service should qualify with the issued service rifle/small arm. All ranks, all specialises.

Response by LT Don Mead made Sep 12 at 2019 10:56 PM

LT Don Mead — Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:56:10 -0400

The Air Force is more like the Navy than the Army or Marines. Their weapon is an air frame rather than a rifle.

And besides who is going to park a few billion dollars worth of equipment in an area so insecure that your maintainers are a vital part of security.

Response by PO3 Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 12 at 2019 11:33 PM

PO3 Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 12 Sep 2019 23:33:03 -0400

I knew one guy, won’t say branch, that hated guns and told his command if they gave him a gun he wouldn’t use it in a life threatening situation and his team would be more In danger. So they moved him to a unit where guns were less than necessary.

Response by SSgt James Peacock made Sep 12 at 2019 11:35 PM

SSgt James Peacock — Thu, 12 Sep 2019 23:35:45 -0400

I was a Weapons Specialist (load toad) in the Air Force for 12 years and was qualified in the M16 and the 45. Never used them once while loading munitions on any aircraft and can honestly say that I would not want most of the folks I worked with to have a weapon. They weren't allowed to have hammers either.

Response by LCpl Sam Thomas Jr. made Sep 13 at 2019 12:19 AM

LCpl Sam Thomas Jr. — Fri, 13 Sep 2019 00:19:46 -0400

Truth be told, and no disrespect to the Air Force or the Navy, they need professionals that can instruct and can instill esprit de corps. The Army and Marines need to have some involvement in training these civilians to become military personnel. How can one be expected to defend the country that we swore to protect, if they can't operate a weapon or be knowledgeable in self-defense to protect yourself, and the one next to them?

Response by MSgt Charles Pippen made Sep 13 at 2019 1:37 AM

MSgt Charles Pippen — Fri, 13 Sep 2019 01:37:29 -0400

As a Command Post controller 1983-1989- I was required to be proficient with the .38 revolver (Air Force sidearm before 9 mm) and the M-16.

Response by SSgt Mike Finch made Sep 13 at 2019 9:46 AM

SSgt Mike Finch — Fri, 13 Sep 2019 09:46:22 -0400

When I went to Lackland in 1982, we spent about 4 hours in the classroom and did a single disassemble/reassemble as a group. The next day we spent about four hours on the range shooting M16s that were converted to shoot .22LR. We were not allowed to clear our own jams. And with the ammo, they jammed a LOT. Nope, raise your hand and a red hat would get to you. Needless to say, the time given to shoot meant nothing.

My AFSC (flight simulator tech) didn't require the use of a weapon. But, with the "Project Warrior" emphasis at the time, I sure didn't feel like one.

Sounds like not much has changed.

Response by Lt Col George Roll made Sep 13 at 2019 10:27 AM

Lt Col George Roll — Fri, 13 Sep 2019 10:27:06 -0400

I Commanded the 4th Combat Comm. Sq./Gp. During that time everyone in my unit had to qualify with the M-16 on a yearly basis and more frequently if we could get the ammunition. The same for my TACPs while I was in COMBAT CONTROL we all maintained proficiency with our weapons. It is up to the Command and the Sq. Commander ti put emphasis on maintaining that proficency.

Response by Cpl Rc Layne made Sep 13 at 2019 10:49 AM

Cpl Rc Layne — Fri, 13 Sep 2019 10:49:00 -0400

The answer to your question is simple. It's a lack of interest. From the top leadership position in the air force on down. If something is not important to the top, it is never important at the bottom.

Response by MSgt Beverly Chmelik made Sep 13 at 2019 11:25 AM

MSgt Beverly Chmelik — Fri, 13 Sep 2019 11:25:53 -0400

Please explain on where the time to train my traditional Air Guardsman is going to come from when there is not nearly enough time to train them in their actual job. We spend 80% of the time training for 10% of the job.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 13 at 2019 11:34 AM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 13 Sep 2019 11:34:04 -0400

I’m a maintainer in the AF and have wondered why they will not qualify us on the M9, but will issue us a M4/M16 to carry around the flightline and put on the ground to work as we provide security to our own area. Use common sense, train with the most useful weapon

Response by SPC Gregory Godek made Sep 13 at 2019 1:47 PM

SPC Gregory Godek — Fri, 13 Sep 2019 13:47:17 -0400

I think you’re spot on about basic weapons training. I’m a US Army Infantry veteran, so by comparison to an airman, my training was more comprehensive. Remember 2-1-2 for a misfire...Tap the underside of the magazine twice, pull the charging handle back and release once, hit the forward assist twice.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 13 at 2019 1:59 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 13 Sep 2019 13:59:02 -0400

I generally agree with your opinion. Insider attacks were a major concern while I was deployed to Afghanistan in 12 and then again in 13. That being said, I think the AF should place more emphasis on defending ourselves (through use of firearms) and also make us qualify more often so that the AF members who did not grow up around firearms are generally more comfortable and competent with them. God only knows how many negligent discharges happened every week due to Airmen not being comfortable and competent with there weapons. I find it funny that some people claim costs as a reason for not qualifying more often ( we probably spent more money with the boondoggle of getting greeen boots that don't stain black only to switch uniforms again). Anyway, I agree with you. Aside from AFSOC and Security Forces, the Lions share of Air Force personnel are probably not very proficient with small arms and we could use a culture shift more in line with our sister services.

Response by SrA Steven Howard made Sep 13 at 2019 5:13 PM

SrA Steven Howard — Fri, 13 Sep 2019 17:13:59 -0400

4 years as an avionics tech. Never fired a weapon after boot. I’m like you. All military active duty should be qualified on a rifle annually.

Response by SSgt Stephen Doorey made Sep 13 at 2019 7:15 PM

SSgt Stephen Doorey — Fri, 13 Sep 2019 19:15:06 -0400

As a Bomber Crew Chief I was qualified on both the M16 and the .38 . Got the ribbons and clusters, too. Big deal. Our job was/is to fight in the air. Fly, Fight, Win. YOU, were trained protect and guard us, so we could bring the fight to the enemy. Army and Marines

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 13 at 2019 7:48 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 13 Sep 2019 19:48:05 -0400

Whoa, why's it gotta be a communications airman? Ha.

Response by LCpl Darrell J. Farley Jr. made Sep 13 at 2019 9:47 PM

LCpl Darrell J. Farley Jr. — Fri, 13 Sep 2019 21:47:48 -0400

This falls back to June 25, 1950! My Father (1st Marine Division) my Uncle was Army my other Uncle Air Force. Marines qualified at 500+yards, and the Army wasn’t far off. My Uncle in the Air Force said he never touched a weapon in basic or any other time. This he said was why his fellow Airmen were killed wholesale when the North Koreans overran our air fields! Dad said the bodies they recovered were shot in the back as they ran from the Reds. Mechanics, Cooks, Clerks etc. Never learned to defend their Air Fields.
In the Marines, whether we were a cook, clerk or mechanic. All Marines go to Infantry Training School and can function as an infantryman if needed. Even in the Navy Sailors qualify with weapons, many volunteer for Auxiliary Security Force.
Those who don’t learn from the past are doomed to repeat it.

Response by SSgt Grant Winman made Sep 13 at 2019 9:57 PM

SSgt Grant Winman — Fri, 13 Sep 2019 21:57:16 -0400

I started out as Security Forces and got my B shred for Combat Arms. The whole point of Combat Arms is to ensure Air Force personnel are profient enough with small arms to protect themselves and the base. I agree, it's not as effective as it should be. We don't think the Air Force culture needs to change or the various Specialties focus either. We don't need everyone to be infranryman. I do think higher standards and more training would help a lot.

Response by SSgt Ricky Brand made Sep 14 at 2019 9:43 AM

SSgt Ricky Brand — Sat, 14 Sep 2019 09:43:58 -0400

I was an avionics troop, I was required to qualify yearly on the m-16, easy peasy, qualified as "expert".

Response by SFC Paul Ranges made Sep 14 at 2019 11:59 AM

SFC Paul Ranges — Sat, 14 Sep 2019 11:59:54 -0400

At a minimum, airmen should be trained for the M-16/M-4 platform. Even the Navy does that! Qualification isn't required, but at least they can load and press a trigger.

Response by SGT Sean Moore made Sep 14 at 2019 2:12 PM

SGT Sean Moore — Sat, 14 Sep 2019 14:12:24 -0400

I’m retired Army, but totally agree with you. USAF & USN should incorporate mandatory rifle & pistol basic qualifications during basic training. At the very least... rifle.

Response by SFC Richard Riggins made Sep 14 at 2019 3:46 PM

SFC Richard Riggins — Sat, 14 Sep 2019 15:46:11 -0400

Army National Guard here, during hurricane Katrina, had an Air Force construction unit arrive, with NO weapons, to pull security. Took a couple of days for their weapons to arrive, while my people were pulling, short handed, 12 on, 12 offs.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 14 at 2019 8:15 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 14 Sep 2019 20:15:55 -0400

Honestly, I believe in the way the Marines do it, be a rifleman first job second. Being on active duty for 9 years I only shot CATM maybe like three times (Bmt, when I was trained as a SF augmentee, and before I pcs'd). It really bothers me that we can't be like the Army and Marines. Because Security Forces can't do it all. Of course, the military budget for the specific needs and requirements of the service answer this question. Hell, it baffles me that civilians who own AR's similar to our M4/M16's have more knowledge on a weapon we use to cause destruction to our enemies than our Airmen. A great need in my view. Let's say if an Airman is Pcs'd over on a GSU base in a foreign land like say England/UK where there is hardly a security force or a small detachment from a host nation country providing base defense. In where I was, you may have less than 8 to 10 Host nation base defense personnel and it wasn't enough to ensure base security/safety. Questions that always had you thinking what if shit hit the fan? What if we had a terrorist act or some random joe blow who is might be a protester or a random person and was to cross over the defenses? It was paramount that those on the base regardless of AFSC was proficient and trained on the M16. Unlike here in the states where likely that is to occur, but whether being stateside or overseas (if deployed or posted there) every Airman needs to be familiar and trained on the M16/M4. Because we can sit and be the chair force all day watching Youtube and completing CBTs in small arms training of the M16, but when it comes to actually applying knowledge on base defense, we need time to shoot it and be with the weapon. Less knowledge equals lives lost depending on how you look at the scenario and what an Airman might come across. You never know in todays world. Think about it

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 14 at 2019 8:23 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 14 Sep 2019 20:23:47 -0400

Hell, what about just basic martial arts and self defense? We should be trained on this too, the Marines and Army provide actual hand to hand combat training to most of its personnel. That is also a thought

Response by Sgt Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 14 at 2019 10:37 PM

Sgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 14 Sep 2019 22:37:13 -0400

The Chair Force is not a ground combat force. We do not have the same basic mission as the army and Marine Corps. Which is to locate close with and destroy the enemy through fire and maneuver or close combat. Hey I'm thrilled to death you know how an M-4, M-16, & an M-9, function. However you DO NOT HAVE A CLUE on how to lead a squad of airmen effectively in a defensive wedge formation or even why the wedge and not echelon or linear formation. As a current TSgt in the AF as well a former Marine Corp Infantry Sergeant with combat experience I understand why we do what we do, and the Army/ Marine Corps does what they do. Not our mission.

Response by CPT Brad Wilson made Sep 15 at 2019 2:32 AM

CPT Brad Wilson — Sun, 15 Sep 2019 02:32:21 -0400

Some have said on here that there is no need for most Air Force personnel to be armed and know how to use a weapon. Here are some examples from history. Clark Airbase 1941 Most aircraft destroyed all personnel became infantrymen at that time the Air Corps was part of the Army so I believe they were trained on basic infantry tactics in Basic. Henderson Field Guadalcanal. Constantly attacked and while most of the aircrew and ground crew were Marines in the later stages there were Army pilots and ground crew and they had to defend the airfield. Tet 1968. All major airbases were attacked and many were penetrated All personnel had to defend themselves and equipment until security forces could seal the penetrations and eliminate the enemy forces. It can happen again

Response by CPL Art Boardman made Sep 15 at 2019 4:41 PM

CPL Art Boardman — Sun, 15 Sep 2019 16:41:07 -0400

They should be efficient with small arms as well. If an Air Force installation is being attacked/ over run. More small arms out there would make a major difference. The Army, and Marines aren't supermen. They do their jobs very well. In given situations. They may need help. The airmen aren't doing anything once their aircraft are gone. They should help defend the installation.

Response by CPT Alex Wilson made Sep 15 at 2019 7:42 PM

CPT Alex Wilson — Sun, 15 Sep 2019 19:42:20 -0400

I once knew a WW2 Army Air Corps vet who told me his story. He was stationed in the Philippeans when the war broke out. All of the Air Corps personnel down to the last man became an Infantryman. Their success in battle against the Japanese was impressive. Ultimately, they were so outnumbered they were forced to surrender. I am of the opinion that all uniformed personnel should have at least a minimum level of combat training. As a former Airborne Infantry officer... I may be a little biased I suppose.

Response by PFC Ronald Watkins made Sep 15 at 2019 8:15 PM

PFC Ronald Watkins — Sun, 15 Sep 2019 20:15:03 -0400

100 percent agree that every person in every branch of our ARMED FORCES need to be proficient in the use and handling of firearms.

Response by PO2 Anthony Garguilo made Sep 16 at 2019 9:50 AM

PO2 Anthony Garguilo — Mon, 16 Sep 2019 09:50:26 -0400

The Air Force thinks of itself more as a corporation than a military force. That needs to change. Warriors first, technicians and pilots second.

Response by SGT Kevin Cannon made Sep 25 at 2019 11:40 PM

SGT Kevin Cannon — Wed, 25 Sep 2019 23:40:01 -0400

Yes I agree,,,every enlisted person should be combat trained or at least marginally aware if no chance of deployment

Response by MSgt Horace Smith made Sep 26 at 2019 2:44 AM

MSgt Horace Smith — Thu, 26 Sep 2019 02:44:36 -0400

In my 24 years in the Air Force, I qualified on the M-1 Carbine, M-16 and S&W Revolver; Expert in every instance. (In fact, I took easy money from SPs who suggested we have a pot when I qualified with the revolver) Then again, I grew up with firearms and still do well with handguns at age 76.

OTOH, it's true that the vast majority of Air Force personnel have jobs that preclude ever having to use a firearm. That changes if/when they are deployed to combat zones where they can be expected to defend their base. I deployed to Saudi Arabia for Desert Shield and we had weapons available but they were never issued to us while there. I retired before Iraq or Afghanistan but I suspect that many AF personnel - especially in Afghanistan - are armed but would only be used defensively. Infantry combat tactics are not part of AF training.

Response by CMSgt George Barrett made Sep 26 at 2019 9:54 AM

CMSgt George Barrett — Thu, 26 Sep 2019 09:54:11 -0400

When we got overrun at Kimpo Air Base by about 100,000 Chinese and NKA in 1950, the only airmen who could use weapons were the 40 Air Police stationed there. The base was evacuated as quickly as possible and those 40 guys held off the enemy for three days. When the Army pushed the enemy back across the 38th, they found those cops hanging in the hanger! From that moment on all airmen were trained in the use of weapons. We have not had a base overrun since that time. I did three tours in the Nam and we were attacked , sometimes daily, and we were never overrun. We still do train them in the use of weapons, but we only make them fire them, normally, before being assigned to a combat area. The difference between us and the other services is that they use their weapons often and because very skilled. Our Security Forces have been sufficient to protect our air bases. The problem is when our airmen leave the base. We have other AFSCs that are very skilled at the use of weapons, normally those who have to operate with the Army or on their own in combat zones, i.e., pararescue, ground air controllers, etc. Another result of the Kimpo incident is that we do not take prisoners unless ordered to do so. Each branch has a different role to perform in battle. Each trains to do just that.

Response by MSgt Joseph Nuben made Sep 26 at 2019 4:15 PM

MSgt Joseph Nuben — Thu, 26 Sep 2019 16:15:11 -0400

I entered the Air Force Mar 55 I was sent to Parks AFB Ca for combat defense school in Jun 55 the course was 5 months and unfortunately we were the last class to get this training some instructors were Army personnel. We were trained in a multitude of weapons mortars recoilless rifle both 30and 50 cal machine gun grenades hand to hand combat law we went into field training etc it is a shame that they did not continue training airman to at least protect themselves .

Response by CPO Manolito Arciaga made Sep 27 at 2019 8:11 AM

CPO Manolito Arciaga — Fri, 27 Sep 2019 08:11:22 -0400

Air Force is not alone! Some navy ratings doesn't require those personnel to familiarize in weaponry, unless they stand watches that requires weapon handling. As a Fleet Marine Force Corpsman, it is a requirement to be knowledgeable in weapon handling and be able to qualify annually. Annual weapons familiarization is must.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2019 10:01 AM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 28 Sep 2019 10:01:56 -0400

The “always a rifleman” concept briefs well, looks great on slides, and even helps motivate at times. But, for some, the expected value of being qualified on a weapons system is much greater than the expected value incurred after calculating the probability that they will ever be in combat. For the Marines and the Army, we do it because for every job, you will likely at some point in your career be assigned to a tactical assignment in which case, your probability of taking fire goes up a lot. The Air Force has a lot of jobs in which the personnel will never see combat. SIGINT linguists in the Air Force for example, you either hang out at a big site in Ft Gordon or Ft Meade or you fly high above the battle somewhere. To me, the Air Force does it right when it comes to calculating these things and actually makes the right decisions more often than the other services when it comes to asset management. And it is because they make the right Benefit/cost assessments and execute based on them rather than use B/C analysis as a “check the block” measure in the acquisition process.

Response by LTC Ken Connolly made Sep 28 at 2019 2:19 PM

LTC Ken Connolly — Sat, 28 Sep 2019 14:19:53 -0400

Run your suggestion up the chain. Who knows, you may get a bite.

Response by Sgt Mike Green made Sep 28 at 2019 7:23 PM

Sgt Mike Green — Sat, 28 Sep 2019 19:23:18 -0400

In Vietnam and Thailand we had Security Police Augmentes. Who were airmen of all kinds of AFSC's who when through a short training, and any time there was a perceived threat to the base they were put out on the perimeter with the regular Security forces. During the TET Offensive the Viet Cong occupied the Barracks area I was in at TSN. The idea that airmen do not need training with Firearms is pure BS.

Response by SrA Phillip Pentzer made Sep 28 at 2019 7:59 PM

SrA Phillip Pentzer — Sat, 28 Sep 2019 19:59:49 -0400

Thats why we have SECURITY POLICE !!

Response by CN Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 29 at 2019 5:29 PM

CN Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 29 Sep 2019 17:29:43 -0400

When I was a kid I competed in rifle competition. My uncle was an officer in AF in Vietnam. When he came home he started winning matches, and I said where did you learn to shoot like that. He said that he learned in Vietnam because often the bases were attacked and they had to practice with m16 on the range regularly.

Response by PO3 Rod Arnold made Sep 29 at 2019 10:56 PM

PO3 Rod Arnold — Sun, 29 Sep 2019 22:56:33 -0400

I agree, all military personnel should be fimular with the most commonly used weapons at the time of their service.
The Navy is also guilty of not having weapons training. For example the only time I had any weapons training was in boot camp and the rifle we trained with was a 1903 Springfield. I had to qualify at the range with rifle who's barrel was basically shot out. At the time the M14 and M16 were the standard issue for the Army and Marines, but we being taught on worn out 70 year old rifles!!

Response by MSgt Allen Chandler made Sep 29 at 2019 11:00 PM

MSgt Allen Chandler — Sun, 29 Sep 2019 23:00:48 -0400

As an aircraft mechanic who retired after 21 years I question efficiency of dedicating 1/3 of my working hours distain proficient in the rifle and other weapons that were used to protect the flightline yes I learn how to use a gun and the allocation had to but that was not my primary duty the rifleman in the army spends most of his time honing his skills the semen on the Navy does the same but they’re not the same skills everyone learns to march everybody going to salute. After that we all specialize it makes good sense to spend most of our time developing our skills in that specialty that doesn’t mean we don’t have secondary duties it just means that the secondary duties are not where our primary skills are

Response by TSgt William Sims made Oct 3 at 2019 9:05 PM

TSgt William Sims — Thu, 03 Oct 2019 21:05:55 -0400

being fully qualified on a M16 only I cannot speak for the other two mentioned but I could field strip and reassemble my weapon in the dark without any problem. never put a round in backwards was classified s expert marksman. but I was raised with weapons perhaps that was the difference. I agree the majority of any armed force should at least be trained in weapons but also agree not everyone should have one all the time.

Response by SGT Kelly Roberts made Oct 10 at 2019 2:50 PM

SGT Kelly Roberts — Thu, 10 Oct 2019 14:50:38 -0400

From what I’ve been told that back in the day they did carry rifles. Korea and early Vietnam. It was under Gen Lemay that we ended up with the M-16.

Response by SGT Kelly Roberts made Oct 10 at 2019 2:56 PM

SGT Kelly Roberts — Thu, 10 Oct 2019 14:56:17 -0400

In my opinion everyone should be qualified to use the basic weapons platforms that are issued. One never knows what will happen in the future. My dad was a retired Senior Chief and when he went through boot camp Infantry weapons and small unit tactics were part of their training. Granted that was in 1949. Just an opinion from a former Airborne Grunt

Response by Cpl Ed Casala made Oct 12 at 2019 8:47 PM

Cpl Ed Casala — Sat, 12 Oct 2019 20:47:43 -0400

Response by SMSgt Ed W. made Oct 14 at 2019 1:16 PM

SMSgt Ed W. — Mon, 14 Oct 2019 13:16:55 -0400

When I first joined the military it was the National Guard in high school. Upon graduation, I went to Basic training at Fort Ord. It was Army basic, during my basic and AIT I qualified on the M-1 Garand and the BAR. When I joined the Air Force for some reason I was sent to Lackland, after I was there a week I was called into the Commander's office and told I was there by mistake and asked if I had ever qualified with the M-1 Carbine to which I answered I had not. So they placed me in a flight that was about to go to the rifle range to qualify. Upon qualifying, I was then shipped off to Tech School. after graduation from Tech school, I then had to qualify each year after that until 1970. For some reason, the next time I was sent to qualify was in the mid-1980s. Then it was with an M-16. That only occurred two times more during my career. My daughter only received introductory training in her ROTC training. However, when she was sent to Iraq, prior to her deployment she was sent to an Army base and provided training with the M-16 and sidearms. To my knowledge troops assigned to duty where they may encounter hostile activities are given training. Combat Communications is an example.

Response by Sgt Autry Haws made Oct 15 at 2019 9:37 PM

Sgt Autry Haws — Tue, 15 Oct 2019 21:37:24 -0400

I was AF Medic from 59 thru 64 and was required to qualify with M1 and M1 carbine. I shot expert. The only time I touched a weapon after that was as a member of the medical groups shooting team. I am disappointed to read your post but not surprised. If you are a member of any branch you should have to qualify with at least the basic weapons.

Response by CCMSgt Stan Fernandez made Oct 18 at 2019 2:30 AM

CCMSgt Stan Fernandez — Fri, 18 Oct 2019 02:30:51 -0400

Not true, back in 1956, in basic training, we were all expected and trained to be weapons qualified. As an aircrew member, we were also qualified in the 45. and 38 calibre pistols. Prior to deployment to Vietnam, we were qualified in the M-16 and the grenade launchers. All Base Security personnel were qualifed in the 50. calibre machine guns and other base defense weapons. Our tactical air control parties (tacp), COMBAT weather ground controllers, and our
Air Rescue personnel were all weapons qualified.
CMSgt, USAF Retired

Response by Maj Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 18 at 2019 6:35 PM

Maj Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 18 Oct 2019 18:35:11 -0400

As an Air Force Security Police (Forces) member I often wondered the same thing. Most member qualified during basic or officer training and then never picked up a rifle against except in some case having to qualify before rotation overseas.
Then again the Air Force has a different idea of ground force protection and that's where we came in.

Response by Lt Col Warren Domke made Nov 3 at 2019 10:06 PM

Lt Col Warren Domke — Sun, 03 Nov 2019 22:06:02 -0500

Retired Air Force here, and I agree the weapons training program in the Air Force could stand some improvement. Rifle qualification is required as part of basic, but it is taught at the familiarization level. I served a tour in Vietnam and was issued an M-16 while there, and we had a class on the weapon before going overseas. I made it a point of becoming very familiar with my rifle and a .38 revolver I had been issued. Fortunately I never had to fire either of these in anger, but I was more comfortable knowing I was prepared in case the unexpected happened. I think all Air Force line personnel should have weapons training beyond basic training just to be a readier combat force, as well as to promote firearm safety.

Response by Federico Olivares made Nov 6 at 2019 6:27 AM

Federico Olivares — Wed, 06 Nov 2019 06:27:24 -0500

Yes, It could happen that an airman gets himself in a bind were using a rifle would be needed. Having said that, Airmen that have a highrisk of being behind enemy lines are almost always sent through SERE and the likes.
Now, lets say an enemy pulls some sort of Blitzkreig and encounters an AF base... well, almost every airman would be either trying to operate the base and try to get air superiority ASAP and admins could very well be trying to destroy every single piece of intel. The AF is not a ground force.
Although I agree maybe they should get some very basic rifle handling but nor much more than maybe one class.
the blietzkreig is a once in a 1000 scenario, and I bet you if a scenario like that were to be even likely, Army units would be placed protecting the AF bases.
Hell, In a worst scenario, I bet you they'd try to get every plane on the air, destroy what it cant be get running, and evac everyone after intel is destroyed.

Response by Cpl Robert Meyer made Nov 6 at 2019 11:27 AM

Cpl Robert Meyer — Wed, 06 Nov 2019 11:27:33 -0500

I fully agree. Every Marine, Navy and Army personnel must qualify with their assigned weapon and more in most instances. All military personnel are supposed to be able to defend their post and our Country.

Response by SGT Arthur Sr made Nov 7 at 2019 2:57 PM

SGT Arthur Sr — Thu, 07 Nov 2019 14:57:50 -0500

I agree with You,they should be taught to defend themselves and U.S.grounds and equipment.

Response by MSgt George Fillgrove made Nov 8 at 2019 3:53 PM

MSgt George Fillgrove — Fri, 08 Nov 2019 15:53:11 -0500

Well Sergeant, I commend your enthusiasm, but I think you have a few points wrong. And I'm speaking to you as a former Security Forces member, more specifically as what used to be called a security specialist.

I don't disagree with you about the need for weapons skills. However, there are reasons....

First, there are those career fields in the Air Force -- mostly medical -- where carrying a weapon violates the Geneva Convention and probably an assortment of other treaties.

Second, in my era of the Air Force, individuals in basic training usually went through familiarization, a dry fire simulation and then "wet fire" where they could have earned the Small Arms Expert Marksmanship Ribbon while still in basic training. Did you know that unlike other services, the Air Force SMEMR is permanent? Then, as I remember, you returned to the range at annually to requalify on the AR-15/M-16 or in my case the M-15 or S&W Combat Masterpiece. If you qualified as expert, you didn't have to return for 24 months unless you chose to.

The number of times I personally returned to the range over the course of my career seemed a lot more frequent because I was also qualified on the M-60 and was once was assigned to an Alpha unit of the original Rapid Deployment Force. The tempo in which I returned to the range, or did my time in a chemical warfare ensemble, seemed more to deal with worldwide deployment status than anything else. The airmen beside me on the range also seemed to represent a variety of support AFSCs with the same deployment status and were not just battlefield airmen.

Therefore, the issue may not be the lack of training. In my era, you could go to Combat Arms and sign up for requalification and be issued a rounds and a weapon to fire. The last time I qualified was just before Desert Storm and I was serving a special duty tour as a recruiter. That last weapon that I fired in service was the M-9, which is the only weapon I chose to pursue post Air Force.

Response by 1stSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 9 at 2019 4:36 AM

1stSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 09 Nov 2019 04:36:39 -0500

The Air Force may never have been intended as a ground force, but as we face a dual-threat of insurgency/terror and high tech warfare, the front lines are becoming blurred. In Iraq we ran convoys, bases were attacked and a threat was always there. We don't have to be trained to fight as the Army or Marines, but we should be proficient in using our weapons. Should we wait until a 3 or 4 or 5 man terrorist squad infiltrates one of our bases and runs around shooting defenseless Airman? It will be too late to conduct training then.

Response by LCpl Jeff Moore made Nov 9 at 2019 1:25 PM

LCpl Jeff Moore — Sat, 09 Nov 2019 13:25:56 -0500

Cause the airforce has adopted more of a quasi corporate military culture.

Response by Sgt Tina Maas made Nov 9 at 2019 2:26 PM

Sgt Tina Maas — Sat, 09 Nov 2019 14:26:03 -0500

When I was in basic training we had handgun and M16 training, but it wasn't comprehensive nor did we carry it further after basic. I'm proud to say I got my ribbon for accuracy, but I'd shot guns before. If a skirmish did break out you wouldn't really want to rely on AF personnel to take up arms. Many do know their way around guns though so if they had to they would.

Response by MSgt Mike (Lobo VNV Original) Morrow made Nov 9 at 2019 3:26 PM

MSgt Mike (Lobo VNV Original) Morrow — Sat, 09 Nov 2019 15:26:56 -0500

I agree that Airmen need to be proficient with the weapon that they could be issued in an emergency.

Response by SMSgt Robert Patterson made Nov 9 at 2019 4:18 PM

SMSgt Robert Patterson — Sat, 09 Nov 2019 16:18:21 -0500

Security Police, now Security Forces are the protectors of Air Bases and Aircraft on each base. In my time in Security Police (1968 - 1972) we had to qualify on the M16, M1, 38 caliber pistol and the M12 Riot gun. I was assigned Law Enforcement duties for the 4 years and only was ever assigned the .38 Combat Masterpiece pistol. I believe we only requalified on an annual basis. We did have augmentees that were pulled from other career fields and they would have to qualify with the M16 or pistol as well. I retrained into the Aircraft Loadmaster career field and was assigned to C-130 aircraft. I was required to carry a snubnose 38 caliber pistol in a shoulder holster under my flight suit. Carried 3 bean bag rounds and 3 hollowpoint rounds. Only had 40 foot long cargo deck to defend. After 5 years on flight status and was reassigned to Recruiter duty for the last 15 years of my career and we no longer were required to qualify on any weapons. I agree with some of the other comments I read on this link, not everyone in uniform is prepared or capable of handling a weapon never mind being able to use one to put down an adversary.

Response by SSG Ron Bogard made Nov 10 at 2019 5:29 PM

SSG Ron Bogard — Sun, 10 Nov 2019 17:29:34 -0500

How does one defend one's self if they're not??
Ron Bogard
U.S.Army ret

Response by Jennifer Lee (Doerflinger) Hill made Nov 11 at 2019 3:16 AM

Jennifer Lee (Doerflinger) Hill — Mon, 11 Nov 2019 03:16:24 -0500

USAF personnel were never expected to fight on the ground! We learn to march because it's an exercise in working as a team. Otherwise, it has no point. It's handy in getting people to buses or across base, but isn't used for much else. (Except drill teams, etc.)

Response by CPT William Jones made Nov 11 at 2019 5:16 PM

CPT William Jones — Mon, 11 Nov 2019 17:16:37 -0500

Generally they are in the rear with the gear. If pilots need rifles to defend their planes they are already in a world of hurt Also it would be about the same as training all army line units to fly jets in support of grunts engaged needing close air support

Response by SSgt Allan Stringer made Nov 13 at 2019 1:29 PM

SSgt Allan Stringer — Wed, 13 Nov 2019 13:29:03 -0500

I was qualified with M - 16 in Basic. When I arrived in Vietnam, I was issued an M - 2, without any info/training - not even a booklet. Yet, I can account for (fifty years later) every round I expended in country, in action.
My prior firearm experience was with a bolt action Winchester .22, and a BB gun.

Response by PO1 David Shepardson made Nov 13 at 2019 6:09 PM

PO1 David Shepardson — Wed, 13 Nov 2019 18:09:07 -0500

You point out a very great reason for civilian firearm ownership (2nd amendment) witch would to some degree provide familiarity to people entering any branch of the military, i was lucky that I learned firearm responsibility from an early age and when I went to basic training was surprised at so many who had no clue with firearms.... I have always wondered if the no clue members were the first to take one because they really never learned.

Response by Sgt Cullen Smith made Nov 21 at 2019 11:31 AM

Sgt Cullen Smith — Thu, 21 Nov 2019 11:31:43 -0500

I guess the Air Force has changed since I was in back in the 80's. Back then we were required to qualify with a .38 pistol and the M-16 rifle. We were also trained in Perimeter Defense. I was so proficient with the M-16 that I qualified as an expert, and while on duty in Turkey I had to re-qualify with the M-16 at a US Army shooting range and was awarded a Army Marksman Medal. Air Bases do come under attack from the ground and I feel all Air Force persons stationed overseas should be trained in defensive measures. Remember Da Nang!

Response by MSgt Brenda Policy made Nov 24 at 2019 11:33 AM

MSgt Brenda Policy — Sun, 24 Nov 2019 11:33:36 -0500

I retired in 2012. Before that I was required to qualify once a year. When did that change? I was also part of a Red Horse squadron and was M-16 and 9 mil qualified.

Response by SMSgt Jeff Kyle made Nov 27 at 2019 12:48 AM

SMSgt Jeff Kyle — Wed, 27 Nov 2019 00:48:16 -0500

I read a few answers to get a feel on others thoughts. First off, I am a Marine. I served for four years as a CH-53 mechanic/Crew Chief. My job was 100% helicopter maintenance. If I was put into a grunt outfit, they’d have to bust me down to E-nothing because I was almost clueless about infantry. I got the same basic training as every other Marine, as well as training on the M-16A1 and M-1911. There were very basic infantry skills taught, which I never used. After the Marine Corps, I joined the Air Force. I worked on UH-1, HH-3, HH-53 and HH-60 series helicopters as a mechanic/Crew Chief. I received zero basic training from the Air Force. I also did not receive any technical school from the Air Force until I was in for 7-8 months. The difference between the two services as it relates to my job was minimal. A torque wrench is a torque wrench. The same goes for every other tool used on helicopters. Uniforms were slightly different once we went to camouflage. Up till then my uniforms were standard AF green and 89th AW blue. I retired from the AF wearing the exact same pattern and style work uniform I wore in the Marines. Our coveralls and flight suits were exactly the same between services. I will tell you that it was this “sameness” that helped me make a successful career. Some things confused me (and still do). Dining In/Dining Out, Airman, NCO and SNCO academies and esprit de corps are different and even having attended all three... confusing when I’m in my “Marine mode”. There were other little things that caught me up short off and on for my 25 year career. But essentially, once a mechanic, always a mechanic.
Now to the point of the question. Being qualified on a weapon, in my opinion, should be mandatory for all AF members. The training and discipline needed to score well enough to pass will enhance job performance. A shooting badge signifying marksmanship enhances the uniform and provides a common thread between everyone, regardless of rank or AFSC (MOS). Having a force of qualified riflemen can only make for a safer, stronger force. It does not make a force of infantrymen. If it ever became necessary to arm up, the trained Air Force Riflemen would be a secondary force used to supplement our primary defenders, Security Forces. Arming up every Airman just makes perfectvsense.

Response by PO2 Gerry Tandberg made Dec 2 at 2019 3:07 PM

PO2 Gerry Tandberg — Mon, 02 Dec 2019 15:07:29 -0500

SSgt, the same goes for most members in the Navy. In 1962 I was instructed in loading, shooting, and clearing an M1 Garland, then never touched a rifle or pistol again during my tour. This is because as an Aviation Electrician I was generally never in contact with the enemy. Of course there are exception, but this is the case for 98% of Navy personnel. Unless your a Gunners Mate we don’t pull triggers, but we make sure the weapons are functioning. Everything I know about side arms I learned after I was discharged and now consider myself an armature. gunsmith

Response by Lt Col John McMahon made Dec 5 at 2019 1:36 PM

Lt Col John McMahon — Thu, 05 Dec 2019 13:36:25 -0500

I can't disagree with your position. I think every Airman needs to be able to defend themselves. Prior to deployment, many, not all go through training dependent upon where they are heading. I had the fortune of going through the Combat Skills course through AFRC before deploying on AEF Silver. It was a decent course but definitely not enough to feel competent so I trained on my own with my local IDPA for techniques. In my old retired Airman mind, I think having the skills to defend should be core Airmen skills so we don't get the snide comments or worse yet, dead Airmen.

Response by MSgt Robert Wiebel made Dec 7 at 2019 7:28 AM

MSgt Robert Wiebel — Sat, 07 Dec 2019 07:28:11 -0500

I served 1968 to1989. As a CE Prime Beef member all CE airmen had to be M-16 qualified. As did Red Horse airmen. I was awarded the marksmanship medal my entire career while I was in CE.

Response by Sgt Monte Linn made Dec 8 at 2019 11:20 PM

Sgt Monte Linn — Sun, 08 Dec 2019 23:20:20 -0500

I was USAF 1979-1983, 51150 (computer operator)
I was also a qualified Marksman with an M-16. I also have two step sons in the military. One is Army Infantry the other is USAF Pararescueman Jumper. I really don’t think you could say our Infantryman is more qualified in combat arms than our PJ. Actually, any enemy on a field of battle would rue the day they met either one of these terrific young men.

Response by PO1 Kevin Dougherty made Dec 8 at 2019 11:55 PM

PO1 Kevin Dougherty — Sun, 08 Dec 2019 23:55:02 -0500

For the same reason the USCG or Navy don't teach it, being a rifleman is not something they do on a regular basis. Security forces, Shore patrol, boarding parties etc, sure, they regularly qualify, the CG even has snipers. (And darn good ones, their teams have been top ten in the last few Int. sniper competitions at Fort Benning). but the regular every day guy, not so much. I was an ET1 and qualified on the .45 because I sometimes had to guard prisoners, and occasionally had to transport classified materials. Oh I did also qualify on the ma deuce and MK-19 as I was secondary crew on both when they were mounted on the bridge.

Response by A1C Vinson Nash made Dec 9 at 2019 1:10 PM

A1C Vinson Nash — Mon, 09 Dec 2019 13:10:22 -0500

During my active duty 1958 - 1963 I was required to qualify with an M1 Carbine. During basic it was an 8 shot bolt action adjustable peep site rifle. On Okinawa in 1961 I also was made familiar with .30 fully automatic carbine and a .30 caliber tripod mounted machine gun, and the old 45 caliber "grease gun". We were at a more or less remote outpost called Ona Point on an East China sea beach and there were regular monthly drills with arms and ammo.
Later in Japan I was still made to qualify with a rifle. It was actually a Mossberg model 1944 bolt action .22 long. I was able to earn a ribbon with that without much trouble because it was identical to the Mossberg .22 long, 8 shot, bolt action, peep site rifle given to me on my 12th birthday.
All this while I was translating intercepted mainland Chinese manual Morse (20351-2). Ohh, I also had to learn to fully care for a Colt .45 semi automatic pistol I carried while on "burn detail" trucking bags full of paper "classified" waste to the incinerator.
Saw all the weapons I never wanted to see again

Response by Capt Dennis Tague made Dec 9 at 2019 11:52 PM

Capt Dennis Tague — Mon, 09 Dec 2019 23:52:47 -0500

I am well versed with weapons - handguns and long guns - but where would I have gotten my hands on one if attacked? We had no weapons lockers in Primary Care Clinic where I treated patients. Nor did we have them available when I was a young airman working on the flight line.
When at Grand Forks when we had the B-52's, tankers, and 150 Minuteman III's, we had the ABGD guys to protect the base. (I know the terminology is different now).

Response by Capt Henry Wolfskill made Dec 11 at 2019 6:47 AM

Capt Henry Wolfskill — Wed, 11 Dec 2019 06:47:07 -0500

In 1073, was assigned to a Titan Missile wing where we convoyed reentry vehicles with security police and armed with M-16's for which we had to be qualified. Before an assignment in Thailand in the Vietnam War had to be qualified on also the 38 pistol in case of attack! In Thailand mostly relied om the Security police for protection!

Response by SSgt Tim Maddock made Dec 11 at 2019 7:29 PM

SSgt Tim Maddock — Wed, 11 Dec 2019 19:29:51 -0500

Times must have changed. When I joined the AF in ‘82 all airmen were M-16 trained are BMT. From there I was further trained at 3 additional AF bases for M-16 and .38’s. There were a few times when the Army provided some guard duty to support our missions, but each of us were expected to maintain proficiency with firearms and provide for our own security & defense.

Response by MSgt Joe Hajik made Dec 12 at 2019 7:30 AM

MSgt Joe Hajik — Thu, 12 Dec 2019 07:30:36 -0500

I agree completely with SSGT CHRIST. If we retain the mentality "we were never intended to be a ground fighting unit". We are set ourselves up for multiple failure points. The AF is not the Force of yesterday..."in the rear with the gear" and even if they were to continue in the rear...an escape from the term "armed forces" is truly illogical. In case you have been sleeping... the horizon has changed and it's not stuck in concrete. In harm's way is our job...train for it or just prepare to die ...pure and simple.

Our senior leadership understand this and we are evolving... "train like we fight" no matter the AFSC. Get of the keyboard and get some weapons training... Its more paramount now than ever before. Plainly speaking, yesterday's AF had members affiliated with weaponry and tactics. Today, there is an extreme lack of this knowledge due to the redicoulous media labeling of "evil guns". I saw train them all.. stop being the old mentality.

Response by MAJ Christoph Himmelsbach made Dec 12 at 2019 12:07 PM

MAJ Christoph Himmelsbach — Thu, 12 Dec 2019 12:07:23 -0500

Different mission requires different tactics. In the Army, the enlisted Soldiers are the primary combat element, where the officers’ (both commissioned and non-commissioned) Primary duties are to prepare those Soldiers for battle.
In the Air Force, officer pilots are the primary combat element, where the Airmen prepare them and their equipment for battle.

Response by TSgt David Olson made Dec 12 at 2019 10:02 PM

TSgt David Olson — Thu, 12 Dec 2019 22:02:49 -0500

My first military time, 3 years, was spent in the US Army as a military policeman. As memory serves I had an MOS of 951, MP, also a secondary MOS of 111, infantry. When I switched branches to the Air Force I was in the Security Police. We were the "infantry" of the Air Force, solely as air base ground defense. We had responsibility for everything inside the wire, the Army had everything else. In my day in the Army we had WACS. The only time I was every in contact with any WACS was at Fort Lewis, WA. Besides the 4th Inf Div, the post played host to six WACS, all of whom handled the paperwork at the rifle ranges. As to why most AF personnel are not fire arms proficient, is the training they receive in basic. I would load my boys into buses for the trip to the range, for a half day of shooting, the same for female airman. It was there they had contact with the M-16. I can still recall me amazement when I was told they fired .22 cal ammo. Whether they qualified or not made no difference as to their graduating. Even while performing as a training instructor(read DS) I still had to quality with my primary weapon, a .38 caliber revolver, then transition to the Beretta M-9, 9 millimeter pistol. As a AF reservist Security Policeman assigned to an active duty SP squadron, I had to qualify twice a year with both M-9 and the M-16. In the event that I failed to qualify I would not be allowed to carry the weapon in question while on duty. I remember in the Army I had to qualify with the M-1 rifle, the carbine, the .30 caliber machine gun, bipod mount.

Response by LCDR Jerry Maurer made Dec 12 at 2019 10:14 PM

LCDR Jerry Maurer — Thu, 12 Dec 2019 22:14:10 -0500

As enlisted army infantry, I qualified in M16 and 45 Cal every 6 months for my 2 year enlistment. As a Naval officer, I wasn't required to qualify once in 18 years.

Response by SSgt Cornelius Strong made Dec 13 at 2019 2:44 PM

SSgt Cornelius Strong — Fri, 13 Dec 2019 14:44:29 -0500

I went through Basic Training in 1965. We had to qualify and earn the small arms ribbon. We spent time with the M16 on the range and breaking it down cleaning and reassembling. When did that change?

Response by Sgt Phil Welch made Dec 13 at 2019 6:02 PM

Sgt Phil Welch — Fri, 13 Dec 2019 18:02:31 -0500

You are absolutely correct. When i joined the AF in 1950, we had M-1s and went to the range a couple times. I though we should have been at the range every day. Every member of the military should be able to handle a rifle and/or a handgun. I fired a .45 once at the range. How ridiculous. For God's sake it is the military after all. I am now 88 years old and go to the firing range every week and can shoot the eye out of a squirrel at 50 yards.

Response by MSgt Chandos Clapper made Dec 13 at 2019 11:15 PM

MSgt Chandos Clapper — Fri, 13 Dec 2019 23:15:13 -0500

I was a flight medic, 1977-2000. I qualified expert on the M-16 and M-9.I also completed Land and Water Survival training. I was considered a non combatant.

Response by CPO Arthur Weinberger made Dec 14 at 2019 7:10 PM

CPO Arthur Weinberger — Sat, 14 Dec 2019 19:10:52 -0500

Because you will spend most of your time sitting and being idle. The Chair Service depends on others to aid them while wearing out chairs.

Response by MAJ Hugh Blanchard made Dec 14 at 2019 8:39 PM

MAJ Hugh Blanchard — Sat, 14 Dec 2019 20:39:52 -0500

Perhaps things are a bit different now as there aren't really "front lines" any longer. We can expect no safe spaces in future competition and warfare. But the USAF Security Forces are very good, in some ways perhaps better than the Army MP's. Mind you, they're both great. I agree that all military personnel should be qualified with a self-defense weapon. My strong personal preference is for a .45 with knock-down powerBut not everyone should be carrying an M-4 (or in my day, an M-16 or CAR-15).

Response by SSgt Russell Stevens made Dec 14 at 2019 9:05 PM

SSgt Russell Stevens — Sat, 14 Dec 2019 21:05:16 -0500

For most of the Air Force it's true, very little training with a weapon. Being in a Combat Mobility Branch it was different.

Response by Maj A. Clark made Dec 15 at 2019 4:23 PM

Maj A. Clark — Sun, 15 Dec 2019 16:23:14 -0500

I was Navy (weapons), then Army ( Cav Scout & ABN LRS-Det) , then Air Force Guard and Res. My other occupation during my Guard years was Law Enforcement, weapons and tactic instructor. My humble opinion is that the Air Force has spent the last 60 years trying to bury much its US ARMY beginnings. I noted an under-culture that looked down upon the nasty and dirty parts of war. Many support units treated bi-annual or tri-annual weapons qualifications like the Black Plague. If you started to talk to them about fire teams, then you might as well be speaking in ancient Icelandic. Of course things become real when your M-Pool vehicle mechanics find themselves acting as truck gunners on convoy duty. Some from our local Air Guard base did just that and they later stopped by the SP shop to say thanks.
If a self-defense culture is to be re-introduced into the Air Force, it will have to start in basic training, and be re-enforced via exercises in which the base is over-run and key facilities are targeted. ( and not relying on the SPs to arrive at the clinic to save the day. )
But as it stands now, any time for real training will likely be wasted on some sort of touchy-feely social engineering training.

Response by SSgt Grover Nunnery made Dec 23 at 2019 3:07 PM

SSgt Grover Nunnery — Mon, 23 Dec 2019 15:07:32 -0500

I was in the USAF from 1966 to 1970. We all had an extensive class on the M16 while in Basic Training. We handled it, stripped it and cleaned it. Then we spent a day on the range with it. Each year we were required to qualify with it. This was for everyone, at least everywhere I was stationed. I'm sure this was far, far less than members of the Army and Marines, but we were no strangers to this weapon. For those of us who grew up hunting, I would imagine we were also proficient with it.

Response by CSM John Mead made Dec 23 at 2019 4:29 PM

CSM John Mead — Mon, 23 Dec 2019 16:29:10 -0500

Why any airman wouldn't ever consider the possibility of having to use a weapon to either defend himself, the airbase, or both is unconscionable to me. As a retired soldier, I've reflected on this occasionally and always came up with the same answer, UNACCEPTABLE. Back in the days of the Cold War and living with the apprehension that Ivan might get a wild hair up his backside and come storming through the Fulda Gap, most Army units would be engaged in stopping that assault whilst air bases in Germany were ever vulnerable to Spetnatz and other commando type attacks. Air Force SP may be trained to engage these forces, but they are totally understrength to offer much deference. Even Army maintenance and other support units have the means to resist and offer up resistance. To have personnel without general knowledge of small arms, i.e., M4/M16, and sidearms is totally inexcusable. Don't even try that lame excuse, "we're technicians, not infantrymen" on me. Army mechanics, logisticians, and others, aren't either, but would put up quite a fight. You flyboys don't have to be John Wayne or Audie Murphy, but at least know how a magazine goes into your weapon and which end the bullet comes out of.

Response by SFC Michael W. made Dec 25 at 2019 12:20 PM

SFC Michael W. — Wed, 25 Dec 2019 12:20:27 -0500

Air Force DEFINITELY should! The ROE has changed since Desert Storm and the enemy DOES NOT CARE what branch you serve! I tell my other half that I wished I was still in and the Training NCO for their squadron...I would piss them off with my sole mission is to keep them alive!

The 7.62 round is color blind, it only knows the color of your blood...red.

Response by 1stSgt Jody Canfield made Dec 26 at 2019 10:42 PM

1stSgt Jody Canfield — Thu, 26 Dec 2019 22:42:00 -0500

As a Marine (never a former or ex-Marine) I later chose a career in the AF. I was a Jet Engine Technician by MOS/AFSC and as I moved up the career ladder we always qualified at an indoor range once a year with the modified M-16 that shot .22 to save money. If you only handle a weapon once a year you're not going to be very proficient at it. I will say that everyone shot until they passed. They are not taught to quickly field strip a weapon as we were in the Marines but they must disassemble the weapon, clean it to the satisfaction of the Range Instructors and reassemble it, then put it away. Can they shoot? Yes. Can they shoot like a Marine? Hardly, but they can hit center mass and many have their own ARs at home so I think they'd do well enough in an emergency situation.
Retired First Sergeant

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Dec 27 at 2019 11:31 AM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Fri, 27 Dec 2019 11:31:13 -0500

I think the AF is remiss if the culture condones lack of marksmanship skills. If weapons are issued, it is imperative to know how to operate them. That should be common sense. The AF will emplace airfields in the safest locations possible. However against near peer militaries, safety will diminish.

Response by Sgt Bob Leonard made Dec 27 at 2019 1:08 PM

Sgt Bob Leonard — Fri, 27 Dec 2019 13:08:37 -0500

I was USAF, 1970-1974. Qualified on the M16 in Basic. About two years in, I was put on the "Tanker Mobility" list,and had to qualify on the .38 revolver. Aside from qualifying on each of these weapons at the range, I never touched them again. I was raised with guns, so I was quite comfortable around them. Some of the other members of my flight in Basic and people I worked with the rest of my time AD.... Mmmm.. I wasn't so sure about.

My son was USAF Security Forces. Spent nearly a year at Bagram Airfield, Afghanistan. At one point, I said that he was Air Force, just like me. Later, he quietly corrected me by saying, "Dad, we in Security Forces don't really consider ourselves to be in the regular Air Force." As soon as he said it, I understood what he meant.

When he got back from Bagram, he told me about a training session they had. The question was asked, "You're in the chow hall. A 'bad guy' comes in and starts shooting. What do you do?" The correct answer was hit the floor!

When asked why, my son answered, "Because the room is filled with Airmen carrying loaded M16s that they haven't fired since they qualified. There will probably be more casualties from friendly fire than from the bad guy."

Do I think USAF members should receive more and regular firearms training? In principle, yes. In practice, that's a whooole bunch of people to train and cycle through a firing range on a regular basis. I think annual qualification would be minimum, six months would be better.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 1 at 2020 11:53 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 01 Jan 2020 11:53:18 -0500

Two things, first as a member of the 10th Mtn Division Staff, during field exercises and deployments our Division Band was also our Division Security Force. So you had to trust that guy who played a trombone in a band to also be proficient in weapons qualification. Second, we used to have a specific time set aside during the week (usually Thursday AM - till noon) this was called Sergeants Time. NCO Leadership at platoon or company (section/flight) level identified areas that needed more training and improvement. We used this time to hone skills such as being proficient with our weapons. Perhaps you could recommend this to your leadership.

Response by CMSgt Jerry Debock made Jan 5 at 2020 5:33 PM

CMSgt Jerry Debock — Sun, 05 Jan 2020 17:33:29 -0500

After my Navy days, 67-71, I joined the Air National guard 79-2008. I was Civil Engineering heavy equipment operator. We had to qualify yearly with small arms, m-16 and 38cal/9 mm for cargo couriers. We backed up the SF’s for aircraft security during alerts.
We were responsible for Base Recovery After Attack( BRAAT) runway repair etc. with no Army or Marine detachments for protection. That all changed after Desert Storm of course, with joint force structure.
Engineers still had to stay current with small arms.

Response by SSgt Michael Ray made Jan 6 at 2020 5:38 PM

SSgt Michael Ray — Mon, 06 Jan 2020 17:38:26 -0500

I had to volunteer to be an SP augmente before I was allowed to qualify. Even being on 'mobility' there wasn't enough priority on weapons training. Probably a good thing for most of my fellow Airmen, as most of them weren't that safe to begin with. Things changed with the first Gulf War. Nearly the entire base SP Force deployed suddenly. Most of us guarding the base were now augmentes. Sort of drove home the need for the training. They were so short of weapon qualified Airmen they were grasping at straws. If I hadn't already been grabbed for augmente duty, I would have been deployed. Took a lot of flack on that, being prepared, but already utilized, no good deed goes unpunished.
I just wanted to be prepared if needed, then I was. Not my fault there weren't enough of us.
Most of the Air Force probably shouldn't be armed on a regular basis, but those that can be should be encouraged to get/stay qualified, at the least.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 10 at 2020 10:14 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 10 Jan 2020 22:14:39 -0500

Anyone can point a gun and shoot. Whether or not ehy are accurate is another thing. And, it's the Air Force. We hardly ever go into positions that would require the use of a gun.

Response by Sgt Anthony Leverington made Jan 14 at 2020 3:45 AM

Sgt Anthony Leverington — Tue, 14 Jan 2020 03:45:22 -0500

Maybe my experience was different because I was assigned to a Special Ops base but, every single person on the base, regardless of job title, had to be M16 qualified. This included complete field strip, cleaning and reassembly and to qualify for expert, we were given 29 rounds and had to score a minimum of 250 out of a possible 290 @ 1000 yards from various positions including, prone, kneeling, over barricade, strong side barricade and standing.
The only year I didn't qualify for expert was, the year they used 22LR conversions to save money I suppose. Those things were junk and would jam every other round. Also, due to the limitations of the 22LR cartridge, we had miniature silhouette targets (about 7 or 8 inches tall if I remember correctly and only about 3 inches wide) placed 100 yards away.

Response by SrA Christopher Snell made Jan 19 at 2020 5:43 AM

SrA Christopher Snell — Sun, 19 Jan 2020 05:43:15 -0500

That might be true NOW but in 1968 I was trained and fired the AR-15 to qualify alone with the colt 45...When I was ordered to VN I first went to Northern Cally for more weapons training ...My MOS was POL...I do agree that each man should be a rifleman first if your in the military !!!

Response by Sgt Susan Mcneely made Jan 21 at 2020 12:17 AM

Sgt Susan Mcneely — Tue, 21 Jan 2020 00:17:07 -0500

When I joined the Air Force in 1979 they still had weapons training in basic for just two days, dry fire day and wet fire on the M-16. I didn't have to qualify again until I went on overseas duty. But I did qualify expert each time. and I'm still a great shot to this day.

Response by MSgt Kerry Lundy made Jan 22 at 2020 10:18 AM

MSgt Kerry Lundy — Wed, 22 Jan 2020 10:18:24 -0500

SSgt Garrett Christ Did you happen to notice that Air Force Bases are usually located to the rear of most battle areas? I was active duty USAF for 21 years and served 3 tours in Vietnam. The first weapon I qualified on was the M1 carbine followed by the M16,M60,50 cal,M79 and the 38 cal revolver. I was by AFSC a special purpose vehicle mechanic but I was also an Air Base Ground Defense augmentee. Now getting back to my lead statement our job as USAF is to fly and fight we do this by ensuring our fighters,bombers,cargo birds are ready and able to provide airborne destruction of enemy facilities, CAS for our fellow Army,Marines and SOF. Research what we did during the battle at Khe Sahn one of our C130 came back to base so shot up by the VC you could literally step through the battle damage but the men on the ground needed their supplies (food and Ammunition). I was at Tuy Hoa AB RVN doing my part by making sure crash/fire trucks were ready if a hot bird came back and the crew needed fire protection. My last active duty assignment in a mobile TACS Wing/Unit. Since we were self contained and ground or air deployable we received the training and range time necessary to accomplish our mission because we did not always set up on a fixed base. My active duty years were 1965-1986. BTW my son and his wife were USAF SF one was LE and the other SF. I have no idea what you were expecting when you joined the USAF but our job has always been FLY and FIGHT not go outside the wire and engage the enemy. Have you ever thought about cross training into one of the AFSC(s) for para rescue or maybe become a member of a CCT (Combat Control Team)? You can always join the Army,Marines or try for the SEALS at the end of your current enlistment.

Response by SSG John Lalli made Jan 22 at 2020 6:23 PM

SSG John Lalli — Wed, 22 Jan 2020 18:23:46 -0500

In Nam, many AF troops were killed with fully loaded m16s in thier hand. Not knowing how to use them,,,,,

Response by MSgt Donald Parker made Jan 22 at 2020 10:14 PM

MSgt Donald Parker — Wed, 22 Jan 2020 22:14:03 -0500

When I was in both active and reserve Air Force, we were required to qualify with live ammo on riffle range with m-16. Then after finished on range, we had to clean our weapon to the satisfaction of the armory instructor. Just as you would in real world. I can't speak for last few years but have heard when AF people help other get stuff mowed, they were armed. Also was in Coast Guard Reserve for six years. We had to qualify and had to use our pistols and ammunition, no government support.

Response by SrA Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 23 at 2020 1:19 PM

SrA Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 23 Jan 2020 13:19:29 -0500

I was in the Air Force during Vietnam. Not only did we receive training with the M-2 and the M-16, I made expert with the M-16 and was highly proficient with a .38 caliber Sub Nose. Every crew member on a B-52 had a .38 with him and knew how to use it. In basic we even saw some training with a 50 caliber machine gun. What has changed?

Response by SSG Colly Saloma made Jan 23 at 2020 3:38 PM

SSG Colly Saloma — Thu, 23 Jan 2020 15:38:49 -0500

They should learn how to use any weapon all the military is using.

Response by SFC Jw Miller made Jan 24 at 2020 1:32 PM

SFC Jw Miller — Fri, 24 Jan 2020 13:32:05 -0500

Airforce SF is not the same as Army or Marine infantry. You are basically an MP.

Response by TSgt Wayne Brown made Jan 24 at 2020 2:13 PM

TSgt Wayne Brown — Fri, 24 Jan 2020 14:13:30 -0500

I was prior army when I joined the af. first time had to gualify with the m-16 the instructor saw me break down the m-16 he asked if I knew how to put together again. I did and qualified expert.

Response by MSG Brenda Neal made Jan 24 at 2020 6:05 PM

MSG Brenda Neal — Fri, 24 Jan 2020 18:05:25 -0500

If your talking about being backed to defending our own soil, I'd want my grandmother to be fully qualified. Our country is demanding we give up our weapons and Grandma is pretty good with an iron skillet! I don't think our safety in the climate of the world today should be based on money. Cross training is possible even though I certainly couldn't fly a plane.

Response by CPO David Sullivan made Jan 25 at 2020 11:38 AM

CPO David Sullivan — Sat, 25 Jan 2020 11:38:02 -0500

How to Tell the Difference Between the Branches of the US Armed Forces!

How to Tell the Difference Between the Branches of the US Armed Forces!

If you give the command "SECURE THE BUILDING", here is what the different services would do:

The NAVY would turn out the lights and lock the doors.

The ARMY would surround the building with defensive fortifications, tanks, and concertina wire.

The MARINE CORPS would assault the building, using overlapping fields of fire from all appropriate points on the perimeter.

The AIR FORCE would take out a three-year lease with an option to buy the building.

Response by SMSgt Ed Turney made Jan 26 at 2020 10:18 AM

SMSgt Ed Turney — Sun, 26 Jan 2020 10:18:36 -0500

Granted the USAF was never intended to be a ground fighting unit, but as everyone knows, stuff happens. For the same reason I carry a weapon concelled in civilian life, it is prudent to be prepared in the military also. As far as the enemy is concerned you are a "solider" even though your country does not classify you as such. A phone call away is too far, too late.

Response by SMSgt Kent Brown made Jan 26 at 2020 5:59 PM

SMSgt Kent Brown — Sun, 26 Jan 2020 17:59:41 -0500

Sgt Christ, thank you for your service and dedication.
So you already know that not all members have to be qualified that's because not all AF members are in combat ready units. Some units are deployable and some are not.
If you think that the AF needs to change something why don't you contact your Command Chief and pass the suggestion on up the ladder.

Response by MSgt Allen Chandler made Jan 26 at 2020 11:34 PM

MSgt Allen Chandler — Sun, 26 Jan 2020 23:34:00 -0500

I don’t remember the amount of time they spent training me but I see fire expert on the 38 caliber pistol 45 caliber pistol in the A.R. 15 rifle. Years later it occurred to me than all the times that I had fired those guns I’ve never boys been shown how to assemble disassemble or clean any of them. As an air crewmember I took them into combat and when I return to the ground I turned them back in and somebody else did all the maintenance. When I was On a special assignment attached to the Marines it never occurred to me that I wasn’t skilled in maintaining the gun like they all were. I knew at least felt they had their doubts about my ability if we were we got into trouble but no one ever said anything to me. On the other hand I spent more than a year in training as an aircraft mechanic before I ever reached my first airbase and my first real airplane. I think each service takes a careful look at the probability of the skills each person will need in their career and choose carefully how much time to train them on each part of those skills. Navy submariner is very unlikely define himself in a firefight an Air Force aircraft mechanic might find himself in such a situation but it’s not too likely a marine truck driver is very likely in the Amount of time training those three people for that situation in my opinion should be significantly different.

Response by Lt Col John Culley made Jan 27 at 2020 2:57 PM

Lt Col John Culley — Mon, 27 Jan 2020 14:57:35 -0500

Why are so many members of the Army clueless when it comes to the proper use of air and space power? This was the reason the Air Force was established as a separate service in 1947 and the Space Force was established as a separate force in 2019 The army's fantasies about the infantryman and his rifle have caused American to lose counterinsurgency wars in Vietnam as well as Afghanistan and Iraq according to Army Lt. General Daniel P. Bolger's 2014 book entitled Why We Lost: A General's inside account of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.

Response by SFC Rollie Hubbard made Jan 27 at 2020 6:50 PM

SFC Rollie Hubbard — Mon, 27 Jan 2020 18:50:46 -0500

It was my understanding that you received weapons training in basic training now it seems that the air force is different that they receive NO TRAING in basic weapons use don't they have to qualify with any weapons or do they rely on the army/marines to bail them out?

Response by 1st Lt Royal Barnard made Jan 28 at 2020 5:40 PM

1st Lt Royal Barnard — Tue, 28 Jan 2020 17:40:51 -0500

Why don't all ground forces know how to fly airplanes and launch missiles and man ships? We all specialize and get along doing it. And yes..... we all got firearms training, but not to be sharpshooters.

Response by Sgt Lee Dutra made Jan 29 at 2020 12:09 AM

Sgt Lee Dutra — Wed, 29 Jan 2020 00:09:32 -0500

Don't know about now, but back in '61 we had weapons training then. Granted, it was with the M 1 carbine, but that was typically the weapon issued to behind the lines troops.

Response by Cpl Andrew Kotcher made Jan 29 at 2020 12:03 PM

Cpl Andrew Kotcher — Wed, 29 Jan 2020 12:03:24 -0500

i find it funny that a recent Air Force recruitment commercial showed Air force "infantry" out doing some patrol or raid. yet according to you and a few others moct airmen are clueless with basic marksmenship.

Response by Capt Al Parker made Jan 29 at 2020 2:25 PM

Capt Al Parker — Wed, 29 Jan 2020 14:25:26 -0500

Having spent my Air Force years other than basic training and OTS I wasn’t given rifle training as a radar tech, civil engineering officer (5525) and a Communication Electronics Enginer (3055).. Except when I worked in a Mobil Radar outfit (729 TCS). I even remember being assigned to a radar outfit in Alaska (710 ACWS) we had a fife rack with 4 M16s, which were removed because they were needed in Vietnam. We got no replacements, except the bow and arrow I stuck in the rack as a joke.
I didn’t join the Air Force to fight I joined to learn electronics.

Response by MSgt Larry Sims made Jan 29 at 2020 7:51 PM

MSgt Larry Sims — Wed, 29 Jan 2020 19:51:12 -0500

When I was in the Air Force, we did have augmentees who filled in in emergency situations. They were not well trained and where just an extra body to fill emergency positions. Everyone should at least be trained in basic weapons use.

Response by MSgt Michael Lane made Jan 30 at 2020 9:38 AM

MSgt Michael Lane — Thu, 30 Jan 2020 09:38:07 -0500

I am a believer in you either do sometime or you don’t not maybe something. As a jet engine mechanic, we were never trained in combat arms properly and we would be the last people you need to hand a weapon to.

Response by SSG Eric Blue made Jan 30 at 2020 5:03 PM

SSG Eric Blue — Thu, 30 Jan 2020 17:03:13 -0500

I could be wrong, but I think it's because the function of most Air Force personnel has nothing to do with handling a firearm of any kind. The only Airmen I've ever know to be the exception on that are Security Forces and JTACs (my artillery-related brethren). And maybe, just maybe, THAT is why I would often see them in PT uniform with an improperly slung M16A2 whenever I was deployed. Still love my Air Force, though. Every single day.

Response by SSG Jeff Forker made Jan 31 at 2020 5:37 PM

SSG Jeff Forker — Fri, 31 Jan 2020 17:37:02 -0500

I think that any AF prsnl heading to an AB or FB in a hostile and risky AO should do some predeployment training to get their infantry and wpns skills on par. But for any AF prsnl that never leave the CONUS that is not necessary.

Response by CPO James Soper made Feb 1 at 2020 12:19 PM

CPO James Soper — Sat, 01 Feb 2020 12:19:43 -0500

The Navy isn't much better at training most sailors in this either. If you don't stand a watch requiring a weapon or are on a security alert team you may never touch a weapon. I believe a service personnel should have to qualify with the standard issue weapons.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 1 at 2020 11:19 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 01 Feb 2020 23:19:21 -0500

That’s why it’s your job to train them when they need the training. It’s called as-needed for a reason. Most people don’t need it at home station or even at a large deployment base because you are the one that’s supposed to be on patrol and on the wall. USAF’s job is to be in the rear with the gear.

Response by Sgt John Norman made Feb 3 at 2020 11:38 AM

Sgt John Norman — Mon, 03 Feb 2020 11:38:48 -0500

You take care of your branch of service and the USAF will continue to do the outstanding job that they have been doing since 1947.

Response by LCpl Troy Gwyn made Feb 4 at 2020 6:56 AM

LCpl Troy Gwyn — Tue, 04 Feb 2020 06:56:40 -0500

The Chair Force may be part of DoD, but they aren't military.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 4 at 2020 11:31 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 04 Feb 2020 11:31:20 -0500

When I was Air Force in the 80s, it was a given that Airmen were non-combatant. I was a mechanic (AFSC 45255) My mission was to keep jets flying. My mission wasn't turning magazines, but turning wrenches and busting knuckles so the pilots can drop steal rain on the enemy.
When I was in Basic BMTS 3706, Flight 209 1983, we had a dry fire and wet fire and the M-16 I had was fitted for .22 not .223/5.56 on the day of the range, the instructer just wanted you to hit paper. No zero, no instruction on trigger pull or controlled breathing.
Since joining the Army National Guard, there is a major difference in the mission and mission requirements. I am having more fun in the Army than I did in the AF.

Response by Sgt Frank Staples made Feb 4 at 2020 11:45 PM

Sgt Frank Staples — Tue, 04 Feb 2020 23:45:03 -0500

News to me. I enlisted in the Air Force in 1966 and went through rifle training and qualified with the M-16. That Lackland sun was hot enough to melt the shine right off your boots!

Response by MSgt Michael Ashby made Feb 5 at 2020 1:47 AM

MSgt Michael Ashby — Wed, 05 Feb 2020 01:47:21 -0500

I spent 23 years in the Air Force as an Intelligence Analyst, and usually only had the opportunity to qualify with the M-16 about every 18 months. There were times when I had to qualify with a 9-MM and a Shotgun due to Temporary Duty Assignments, but the Air Force was never really comfortable with having every Airman on Base armed. The only time I had to carry a weapon outside a training environment was the year I went to Honduras in the early 1990's. Before traveling off the base, we would have to go by the Armory and check out a 9-MM for self-protection. Once we returned to base, the weapons went back to the Armory. I always enjoyed the days in class and on the range, making sure I could properly handle a weapon, if issued one.

Response by A1C Mike Simons made Feb 10 at 2020 9:28 AM

A1C Mike Simons — Mon, 10 Feb 2020 09:28:49 -0500

When I went through BMTS in 1980, we all went through M-16 training & target shooting. We were told everyone needed to learn weapon basics for the reason of wartime situations. Everyone needed to defend themselves, others & the base. Since I was going into Security Police, I thought (to myself) it would be prudent to get the marksmanship ribbon. Which I did.

Response by SPC George Edwards made Feb 23 at 2020 9:56 PM

SPC George Edwards — Sun, 23 Feb 2020 21:56:11 -0500

Nov 23, 1963. Kennedy was killed in Dallas. Speculation ran rapid on who did it and why. I was assigned to a Hawk missile battery near Frankfurt, Germany at the time. 7th Army called an alert and our unit (maybe 80 men) were sent up to the Fulda Gap to set up on a hilltop in the middle of the night. Now, most of us considered ourselves as more technicians than soldiers and our BC had even had an Airborne MSGT assigned to get us in line. During formation the next morning, the 1st Sgt advised us that if the Soviets and East Germans decided to attack, we would expend our missiles and then, might hold out for seven days as infantry. A real wake-up call.

Response by SSgt Carroll Straus made Mar 1 at 2020 2:25 AM

SSgt Carroll Straus — Sun, 01 Mar 2020 02:25:25 -0500

I was in the USAF from 1975 to 1981. Active reserve 81-82. Never fired a weapon. We were not riflemen. We were airmen.

Response by SSG Brian G. made Mar 1 at 2020 11:35 PM

SSG Brian G. — Sun, 01 Mar 2020 23:35:47 -0500

Back in the day, they used to. At least that is the story that was passed along from my pops who retired from the AF back in '84. As he told it, he saw his weapons twice a year unless there was a field problem and only had to qualify on them once a year.

I mean I get the mentality from higher ups but really, it is kind of stupid. EVERY person that serves in the military should at the very least be proficient with an M4/M16, M-203, M-60 and AT-4. These are basics. Relying on the fact that you are in the rear with the gear does not cut it if there is suddenly a force that pops up ala Vietnam on the Airbase and starts going through it. Best to be armed and prepared to deal with it rather than wait for Security, or the Army/Marines.

Response by CH (MAJ) Wesley Sullivan made Mar 2 at 2020 9:57 AM

CH (MAJ) Wesley Sullivan — Mon, 02 Mar 2020 09:57:49 -0500

I was an Air Force Air Traffic Controller in Vietnam. The only time I saw my weapon at Cam Rhan Bay was the once a week we were required to go to the Orderly Room to clean it. On my day off I flew as an "additional crew member." As such I flew thousands of miles without a weapon. My commander gave permission for the extra curricular flights, but would not let me check out my weapon. In the Army I served 16 years, including Desert Storm. Chaplains do not carry weapons and risk Court Martial if we're do.

Response by PO2 Gerry Tandberg made Mar 4 at 2020 12:03 PM

PO2 Gerry Tandberg — Wed, 04 Mar 2020 12:03:47 -0500

Ditto the Navy. Don’t expect any Navy personnel to be qualified on, or with any sidearm. That why the Navy has Marine’s. In the Navy your introduced to a weapon, but you don’t qualify on one. I was introduced to the M1 Grand in boot camp, fired 60 rounds on the Marine Corps A Range, shot among the top 10 out of about 350 that day, and never touched a weapon again until I separated from active duty. I’m an RSO, reloaded my own Ammo, and a recreation shooter. I’ve seen Navy personnel issued a sidearm for certain security purposes w/o knowing if they are qualified. Don’t let any Navy personnel touch a weapon until they are qualified on that weapon, because they did NOT have any training in boot camp for sure, and likely their MOS didn’t require any weapons training either.

Response by SrA Ramona Kenison made Mar 5 at 2020 4:33 AM

SrA Ramona Kenison — Thu, 05 Mar 2020 04:33:23 -0500

The AF does teach their recruits how to load and fire an M16. At least they did when I went through. And as far as hitting a target? I a mear female hit my target 98 out of 100. I wasn't brought up around gun so I had no prior experience.

Response by Amn Frederick Lear made Mar 6 at 2020 2:19 PM

Amn Frederick Lear — Fri, 06 Mar 2020 14:19:16 -0500

Same reason Army does not have to have a pilots license.

Response by MSgt Michael Madden made Mar 7 at 2020 1:35 PM

MSgt Michael Madden — Sat, 07 Mar 2020 13:35:46 -0500

The Air Force does have a few Special Ops units. I was assigned to one when i was in. But the average airman is not expected to be in combat.

Response by PO2 Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 7 at 2020 5:17 PM

PO2 Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 07 Mar 2020 17:17:35 -0500

Remember windage and elevation.

Response by SPC Bryan Gustafson made Mar 8 at 2020 4:27 PM

SPC Bryan Gustafson — Sun, 08 Mar 2020 16:27:27 -0400

Your experiences square very much with my own. I was active Army in the mid-1980s for 4 years and then later in 1997, I joined the California Air National Guard. We had familiarization fire once a year with the M-16 and record fire once every three. I am sure there are some things the Army doesn't do well but I was taught the skills of how to handle a weapon safel and fire it accurately. When were on the range, it was easy to tell who had been prior service Army and Marine Corps and who the Air Force guys were. Some of the Air Force guys were, it seemed, clueless as to which end of the weapon the live round would come out of.

Response by SrA Salvador Ruiz made Mar 9 at 2020 12:29 PM

SrA Salvador Ruiz — Mon, 09 Mar 2020 12:29:38 -0400

As a member of the Sabotage Alert Team, we were taught achieving high marks with the M-16 while stationed in Misawa Japan. This was a while ago so I don't know what goes on today.

Response by SSG Patrick O'Flaherty made Mar 10 at 2020 12:42 PM

SSG Patrick O'Flaherty — Tue, 10 Mar 2020 12:42:45 -0400

When the Air Force gets rid of its star rating for staying in a barracks then we should consider letting them near real weapons.

Response by TSgt Michael Williamson made Mar 15 at 2020 1:25 PM

TSgt Michael Williamson — Sun, 15 Mar 2020 13:25:37 -0400

We handled them a lot more in the 80s, especially engineers, aerial port, combat communications and similar units. However, few of the admin, supply (except port and other forward deployers) and flightline personnel should be where they need more than familiarization in case of emergency. As others have noted, if the fight comes that far in, there are worse problems, and we're not keeping the aircraft in the air, which is the mission.

Response by SMSgt John Lemon made Mar 22 at 2020 8:26 PM

SMSgt John Lemon — Sun, 22 Mar 2020 20:26:36 -0400

When I was in the Air Force, we went to M-16 training every three years.Some of the guys got their marksmanship ribbons and the rest of us qualified on the weapon. When we deployed we had M-16's in our armory in case the base was over run with hostiles. Most of the time we did our job which was loading cargo planes. We didn't worry about engaging the enemy. We had soldiers, marines, and SF for protection. It would have taken a serious attack for us to get to use our weapons.

Response by TSgt Christopher Whitfill made Apr 7 at 2020 10:41 PM

TSgt Christopher Whitfill — Tue, 07 Apr 2020 22:41:26 -0400

I joined the USAF about 9 months before 9/11, and I remember being told during training that I was supposed to be a technical expert in my career field (as a draftsman, surveyor, and construction inspector). During my career (over 15 years, sadly not more), I saw a dramatic shift from the top down. As Army and Marine units were put into combat roles (sometimes they weren't properly trained for, ie convoy operations), it became apparent that the long term support roles needed to be filled. Thus, base buildup and maintenance were transferred to an ill equipped AF (since very few Airmen had been trained for any type of combat operations, particularly outside the wire). I only deployed 3 times, but all were in support of another service. I never had all the equipment necessary. I never had the support expected (after all, I was AF, why weren't they supporting me rather than the Army/Marines). I am a huge supporter of every military member being proficient with their assigned weapon ( preferably all weapon systems they will be deployed with). But the question comes down to this...do we need everyone to be a rifleman, or do we need some to be specialists? After all, the AF was created in part because not every rifleman could fix an airplane. Just food for thought.

Response by SSgt Paul Millard made Apr 8 at 2020 10:16 AM

SSgt Paul Millard — Wed, 08 Apr 2020 10:16:27 -0400

It all comes to to how all the components are used in force projection Marines-lightweight multi mobile force that can change tactics as needed on the fly ( more decentralized command and more flexibility by platoon command level, i.e. do what it takes to get the job done. Navy - moderate scale national force projection with capability to independently mobilize to area of need relatively rapidly. Army- large scale force projection with much highly levels of Command and control structure heavy logistics and supply controls create a slower more highly planned deployment- the army provides overwhelming force capability. Air Force- Standoff support and force projection with immediate deployment capability. This means that the protections responsibility ( M4 carry permits) rely with other services when needed.
However I do agree that during basic, each Airmen should spend more that the one day at the range and should have to qualify to some standard. Back in my day we only spent half a day on the range shooting some beat up modified 16's ( I got marksmen award, easy since I was a hunter in my day)

Response by MSgt Joseph Holness made Apr 8 at 2020 10:54 AM

MSgt Joseph Holness — Wed, 08 Apr 2020 10:54:43 -0400

!!!ROTFLMBO!!! Being former Army, I've wondered that as well, especially in today's rapidly-changing roles & missions of the US Military that involve joint-branch missions and co-operations.

Response by SGT(P) Vincent Kuhlman made Apr 8 at 2020 12:48 PM

SGT(P) Vincent Kuhlman — Wed, 08 Apr 2020 12:48:25 -0400

Sadly the writer makes a valid point. I retired from the military in 09, after 20 years of a active duty in the Army. At present I'm a PVT contractor for the DOD. I work on bases overseas, Al-Udied AFB in Qatar is one of those bases I've worked at. It is guarded by Airman, most who have not touched a rifle since Basic. Let alone Qualified with one recently. But yet here, they are doing Gate duty. with 9 MM on their Hip, and M-4 slung across there shoulder. I go in and out gate all day multiple times as my security Escort job requires it. I've SEEN IT ALL! Magazines falling out of weapons, (not properly seated) Weapons falling apart, people Just flat out walking away from their post leaving their weapon leaned against the shack or IN the shack cause there shift (2 hours) was over, ad they were in a big hurry to get out of the heat. It's Just disgraceful. And when I go inside the visitors shack to bring people on the base IF I see a problem I mention it to the SGT on duty, I usually get the same answer. "He's/She's NOT MY soldier. Even though she/he is the SGT of the guard for those 2 post. Apparently the Air force doesn't believe in General Military authority for NCO's to make on the spot corrections. It;s just Flipping SAD!!....and of course being a contractor, I am powerless to do anything about it.
Makes me ashamed of being a former NCO.... one that doesn't want to correct issues! Especially those types.

Response by TSgt Ronald Weston made Apr 9 at 2020 12:13 AM

TSgt Ronald Weston — Thu, 09 Apr 2020 00:13:45 -0400

Combat Comm, Red Horse, Forward Air Control, Special Operations Airmen all train with their weapons and are tasked with their own defense and combat operations because they operate outside the big protected Air Bases. Because everyone only sees airplanes they forget the handful of Air Force personnel on the ground in the combat zones.

Response by CPT William Jones made Apr 9 at 2020 8:48 AM

CPT William Jones — Thu, 09 Apr 2020 08:48:50 -0400

The original plan was made when there front lines and a large distance between the fighting and the planes so no real issue. So I guess it is military is slow to change. If most airmen need a rifle the fit has hit the shan.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 9 at 2020 5:35 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 09 Apr 2020 17:35:53 -0400

I'll admit I was only at the range once every two years, but I was trained, and since we were a mobile unit and deployable, we had to at least qualify. I was reasonably proficient with both the M-16 and M-9.

Response by Sgt Donald Hensley made Apr 12 at 2020 9:05 AM

Sgt Donald Hensley — Sun, 12 Apr 2020 09:05:03 -0400

I was in the Air Force (1975-80). You are correct, most of us never were expected to carry guns. I wonder that the Navy members are not largely the same? We had weapons training for one or two days during basic; and when in Germany we were able to volunteer for training with a German weapon for one day. I wonder if the ignorance of the Air Force members with the weapons is as bad as you make out? I would not be proficient (as far as hitting targets) but I would know which way to point the weapon; how to hold it, load it and clear it; as I think most of other members. I would be surprised if they completely did away with weapons training in basic training for the Air Force?

Response by SSgt James Martin made Apr 12 at 2020 5:46 PM

SSgt James Martin — Sun, 12 Apr 2020 17:46:09 -0400

Back in 1965 when I went to basic training (Air Force) we were trained on the M-1, the M-16 and the 45 auto. You had to qualify with the M-16 or do the course over. While in VN I stood night guard duty because there not enough police or army personel available, everybody did what needed to be done. It was our lives on the line. I'm glad we were trained on these weapons and think all Air Force personnel should have this training.

Response by TSgt David Olson made Apr 13 at 2020 12:50 PM

TSgt David Olson — Mon, 13 Apr 2020 12:50:07 -0400

Having served in both the Army and the Air Force I’ll throw my two cents in. The Army viewed every member as having two MOS’s: my case I was 951(MP) but also a 111(rifleman). I could cite countless examples of where combat situations required cooks, clerk typists, medical personnel, payroll, etc to grab a weapon. The Battle of the Bulge, WWII, is a classic example of in which everyman grabbed an M-1 or M-2 or whatever was handy. The Air Force by it’s very nature is not relegated or expected to engage a ground enemy, exception are the Security Police. They are the closest airmen to riflemen the AF can field. As a training instructor (TI) basics I was made very aware of the AF attitude toward any sort of individual combat. In my mind this attitude went hand in glove with recruiting. In the Army we had our M-1 rifle racks in the middle of the barracks floor. In AF basic training the only time a basic recruit handles a rifle is for classroom orientation, dry fire, preparatory to the actual half day visit to the range. I remember qualifying with the pistol, along with a number of F-117 pilots. I had to qualify in order to carry my duty pistol, the pilots joked about qualifying with the pistol. Their attitude was, was the AF going to ground them from flying their F-117’s, if they couldn’t shoot a pistol. Moral is if you find yourself on a firing range with Air Force personnel, except SP’s and para rescue, get back 500 yards from the firing line.

Response by MSgt George Fillgrove made Apr 18 at 2020 2:56 AM

MSgt George Fillgrove — Sat, 18 Apr 2020 02:56:38 -0400

But I've heard the same stories zbout other services. My personal favorite was the Army private who I had to help. The hapless private jammed a cleaning rod down the wrong end of a barrel of a M-16 at Camp Bullis where I was going through my combat training. As I remember, the private was from Fort Sam Huston and was training for the expert medic badge.

The reality here is the word "qualification." Air Force airman "qualify" on a weapon in basic training. Then, depending on their AFSC or deployment status, they may re-qualify on the M-9/M-4/M-16/AR-15 annually. Airmen are also authorized once a year to sign up for requalification and are issued a weapon and rounds to return to the range. (At least that was the way it was up until the time I retired in 1994.)

Now, if you fire expert in any given year, it used to be that three years could pass before it was mandatory. You earned a ribbon instead of a badge and the ribbon was permanent. In other services, like the Army and Marines, I understand that the badges may not be permanent and might be updated annually during weapons qualification.

I started my Air Force career as a security specialist in the Security Police career field in 1977. I was basically a light infantryman skilled at airbase ground defense. Later on, I would serve 24 months overseas and then deploy three times. In the first three months of my service, I fired with the M-16 three times for qualification and then annually afterward. I also earned expert on this weapon. I fired and qualified on the M-60 and the S&W Model 15 Combat Masterpiece twice. Eventually, I would qualify and fire the M-9 and now own three of them.

Response by MSgt Michael Madden made Apr 20 at 2020 4:06 PM

MSgt Michael Madden — Mon, 20 Apr 2020 16:06:09 -0400

Most Airman will never see combat. Most of the AFSCs are not combat related. Now if you happen to get assigned to Hurlburt Field in Florida then your chances of combat duty increases.

Response by Jennifer Lee (Doerflinger) Hill made Apr 23 at 2020 10:09 PM

Jennifer Lee (Doerflinger) Hill — Thu, 23 Apr 2020 22:09:11 -0400

Actually, except for a few specific MOS, we DON'T expect to ever have to pick up a weapon. I was never trained in weapons. The small amount of marching we do, to give another example, is only useful in Basic Training & Tech School. If you were going to be an SP (I think they've changed the name since I was in), you'd be trained in that, but we were NEVER meant to have to defend ourselves.

Response by TSgt Michael Brandt made Apr 24 at 2020 7:14 PM

TSgt Michael Brandt — Fri, 24 Apr 2020 19:14:52 -0400

In SAC Everyone on base qualified with the M-16 yearly no matter what their job was S P’s qualified with all of our weapons twice a year but then again that was during the Cold War which was a totally different time

Response by PO2 John Driskill made May 8 at 2020 5:00 AM

PO2 John Driskill — Fri, 08 May 2020 05:00:39 -0400

Back in the old days when I was in the Navy, on ships the Marine detachment would instruct Navy personnel on ship how to fire the ship's armory small arms on the fantail of the ship. A fifty gallon drum on a rope was dragged behind the ship. We got to fire a magazine of ammo from a pistol and a rifle at it. If you stood a watch on ship you had to know how fire a weapon.

Response by CPT R Rosa made May 8 at 2020 3:08 PM

CPT R Rosa — Fri, 08 May 2020 15:08:18 -0400

No wonder the AF in iraq and afganistan, were in problems, the USAF should train more and more on cambat scenarios, after 911.

Response by Maj Gregory Jablunovsky made May 8 at 2020 3:23 PM

Maj Gregory Jablunovsky — Fri, 08 May 2020 15:23:28 -0400

I agree, airmen should be prepared to defend themselves. I had a scientist AFSC, assigned to labs and Air Staff...but I was also a competitive shooter. Damned if I would be caught unable to effectively return fire!

Response by SMSgt Scott Tiewski made May 8 at 2020 6:56 PM

SMSgt Scott Tiewski — Fri, 08 May 2020 18:56:05 -0400

So, in the same train of thought, every SF member should know basic aircraft maintenance tasks. Hey park that humvee and come help me refuel this aircraft, after all you are in Air Force.

Response by MSgt Philip Patterson made May 10 at 2020 12:04 AM

MSgt Philip Patterson — Sun, 10 May 2020 00:04:36 -0400

Some AF units, particularly Aerial Port operations are weapons qualified and quasi-self-supporting (think, austere tactical air fields) ...In fact these groups are the FedX of the military... Ever wonder where the blood, beans and bullets come from??...Ultimately, It’s within these rapid logistics lines that wars are fought and often decided (and in a previous ‘political era’ actually won!!). When you POSITIVELY, ABSOLUTELY need an Abrams M1 tank, helicopter gunships, MRE’s, rockets or other ordinance ‘OVERNIGHT’ (or can’t figure out how ‘stuff’ SUDDENLY gets there...) think, Mobil Aerial Port Units, and worldwide mid-air refueling legs, aka, Air Mobility Command better known as ‘AMC’...

Response by 1SG Ernest Stull made May 10 at 2020 9:56 PM

1SG Ernest Stull — Sun, 10 May 2020 21:56:38 -0400

When I was in Iraq in 08 I trained several teams of AF Airmen and women to be convey escorts on the MRAP and not all of them were security personnel. The team's I trained were professional and could handle any situation that was presented to them. I WAS and still am proud of them.

Response by SSG Strick Richardo made May 11 at 2020 1:31 AM

SSG Strick Richardo — Mon, 11 May 2020 01:31:50 -0400

you are absolutely correct.

Response by SSG Strick Richardo made May 11 at 2020 1:32 AM

SSG Strick Richardo — Mon, 11 May 2020 01:32:22 -0400

you are absolutely correct.

Response by TSgt Max Lugauer made May 11 at 2020 4:41 PM

TSgt Max Lugauer — Mon, 11 May 2020 16:41:59 -0400

I was in the Air Force from Aug 67 to Sept 87. We were not trained for combat, in basic we had a one-day dry fire and the next day to qualify on the M16. We had to qualify once a year until 1972. Even when I was in Viet Nam we did not have access to M16's they were kept locked up in conex's. I was stationed at Tan Son Nhut AB we had the 82nd Airborne for security. I volunteered for Augmentee duty for more training on the M16/38/12 gauge shotgun. a week of shooting and classroom. It helped due to the 82nd being pulled out and Vietnamese taking their place.

Response by Capt Henry Heater made May 11 at 2020 6:42 PM

Capt Henry Heater — Mon, 11 May 2020 18:42:40 -0400

Interesting question. I am a 1973 of the Air Force Academy. While there, I was required to qualify, and qualified each year expert, on the m16 and 38 pistol (a joke). I also carried an m1 for three years, probably an adoption of West Point tradition. My second summer we trained in air base security - this was the Vietnam era. However, once on active duty, I was never required to engage in annual arms qualification, let alone issued any firearms. If the flag ever went up we would have to depend on Army troops to defend us from invasion. The answer, perhaps, is that most Air Force bases would have been targeted by air with tactical nukes, or taken out by conventional bombing. Moreover, given the sometimes wasteful duplication of roles in our separate armed services, perhaps the AF better focuses on its more unique mission.

Response by SGT Joseph Dutton made May 11 at 2020 10:49 PM

SGT Joseph Dutton — Mon, 11 May 2020 22:49:40 -0400

The Navy kind of fits in the same scenario as the AF when it has the Marines. Navy & AF does maintain a riot force or if someone tries and breaches the base. When I was in the Navy I had to qualify on the 45 AUTO Pistol, 12 gauge Riot Shotgun & the M14 every 6 months just in case a Riot broke out on the ship or the ship was breached. But a little unknown fact. Did you know that there is a small Marine Detachment assigned to all military bases. Their fist mission is to secure and protect the base if the POTUS visits the base. Then if needed in other events then they are summoned.

Response by SP5 John Anderson made May 12 at 2020 12:17 PM

SP5 John Anderson — Tue, 12 May 2020 12:17:12 -0400

I served in Vietnam with some co.ponents of MACSOG. The Air Force personnel the we worked with were the only ones that had to specialize in all weapons. The regular Air Force were not as qualified on weapons except as an individual requirement for special duties as security (ie...Air Police ("AP").

Response by Maj Martin Smith made May 13 at 2020 7:16 AM

Maj Martin Smith — Wed, 13 May 2020 07:16:11 -0400

In August of '65 before shipping out I was told to report for small arms training at the now defunct Kincheloe AFB, MI. Expecting to be handed a .38 caliber revolver again as I had in OTS 20 months previously, I was surprised to see an M-16. 49 bullseyes out of 50 after 20 minutes training later they gave me a certificate saying I was qualified and sent me back to my office. Did not allow me to shoot fully automatic but showed us where the switch was. Came in handy.

Response by CPO Robert Turner made May 13 at 2020 11:29 AM

CPO Robert Turner — Wed, 13 May 2020 11:29:47 -0400

The same question should be asked of Fleet Officers in the Navy. I have seen the same ineptness on their part of not being able to adequately tear down an M-16 and properly clean the weapon. They did not know how to handle the weapons' on the firing line. The Seabee NEC Officers know how to shoot and take care of their weapons, Fleet Officers are lacking in this.
You ask the question, why the Air Force do not fully qualify all of their Airmen to be rifleman, why don't Marine infantry and Army Infantry know how to fly F-16s?? It's all about the culture for that particular military branch.

Response by Sgt Glen Barnes made May 13 at 2020 1:06 PM

Sgt Glen Barnes — Wed, 13 May 2020 13:06:31 -0400

I enlisted in 1977, got M-6 training and a marksman ribbon.. I was ready, just needed a weapon. )

Response by CMSgt Doug Ead made May 13 at 2020 3:48 PM

CMSgt Doug Ead — Wed, 13 May 2020 15:48:11 -0400

I was gonna n comm electronics and the medical field. I had to maintain my firearms qualifications for 25 years.

Response by LTC George Sucher made May 14 at 2020 3:42 PM

LTC George Sucher — Thu, 14 May 2020 15:42:39 -0400

As a combined force, there is only ONE Air Force, Army, Marine Corps and Navy. When I attended the Navy’s Jungle Survival Course as an Army Aviator in the Philippines, ALL of the service members that attended and trained together were taught skills that would increase their survival. Common practice for many if not all aviators at the time carried a side-arm (45 or 38) on their person and many added a rifle or stand-off weapon for the reasons that have already been cited... Further, there were on several occasions where I served in Vietnam that pilots (regardless of service branch) were required to take arm and defend the airfield against enemy aggression. To my knowledge, today’s Air Force Fighter Pilot carry a 9mm Beretta and a M4 Rifle. Bottom line, I support common weapons training for all aviation personnel.

Response by SSgt Walter Gabler made May 14 at 2020 8:26 PM

SSgt Walter Gabler — Thu, 14 May 2020 20:26:00 -0400

I don't know when you were in but I qualified as an expert marksman in my basic class. Before I went to Vietnam I attended combat survival school at Fort Sill, Ok. In Vietnam I had to qualify again with the M16. I was an Air Force Meteorologist.

Response by MSgt Keith Stover made May 14 at 2020 9:19 PM

MSgt Keith Stover — Thu, 14 May 2020 21:19:54 -0400

The Air Force use to have an Augmentee program when I was on Active Duty. The would supplement Security Police

Response by MSgt Jeff Brown made May 15 at 2020 7:41 PM

MSgt Jeff Brown — Fri, 15 May 2020 19:41:24 -0400

When I was in (72 - 94) I always had to qualify before I went on an overseas PCS (that was four times). I think I also qualified annually because I was NCOIC of a deployment-ready PERSCO team, but honestly I don't remember. I will say that I qualified as expert each time and proudly wore my SAEMR. I also probably could take apart, clean and reassemble an M-16 if I had to!

Response by MSgt Jeff Brown made May 15 at 2020 7:44 PM

MSgt Jeff Brown — Fri, 15 May 2020 19:44:14 -0400

When I as in (72-94) we had to qualify before each overseas PCS assignment (that was four times for me). I think I also had to qualify annually when I was NCOIC of a deployment-ready PERSCO team (I don't really recall - it was more than 25 years ago). But I did qualify as expert each time, and proudly wore my SAEMR. If I had to, I still probably could disassemble, clean and reassemble an M-16, though it might take a little longer than before.

Response by Amn Carl Daugherty made May 15 at 2020 11:31 PM

Amn Carl Daugherty — Fri, 15 May 2020 23:31:35 -0400

I was in the Air Force (Air Police) from '59 to '63.
AP training included qualification on all light weapons up to and including the 30-cal LMG
That included the M3, BAR, Mod '97, M1 Carbine and 1911.
We were also given Infantry Training, (including bayonet instruction) although not as extensive as the US Army received.
The other Air Force Skill Classifications received little if any of the above.
To answer the above, yes all personnel should have fundamental familiarization with the standard weapons of the Cadre. It's uncertain when non-fighting troops may be called to the defense of their units if extreme conditions demand them.

Response by TSgt Louis Nieves made May 16 at 2020 11:22 PM

TSgt Louis Nieves — Sat, 16 May 2020 23:22:18 -0400

I say amen as a airmen who served in nam we only qualified during basic

Response by Cpl Mark Oresko made May 17 at 2020 12:06 PM

Cpl Mark Oresko — Sun, 17 May 2020 12:06:37 -0400

Time, money, complacency.

Response by Maj Dale Smith made May 17 at 2020 6:08 PM

Maj Dale Smith — Sun, 17 May 2020 18:08:31 -0400

I was in SAC (Strategic Air Command) and all Air Force officers and enlisted members were qualified in small arms. Offficers had qualification in 9mm and/or 38 cal side arms. Enlisted were qualified in M16 rifles. This was outside of those that were in security forces or law enforcement. Depending on what your AFSC (MOS) was, you may not have a war time critical function, and so you were trained as a rifleman. Many of these jobs are now civilian contract jobs, however, we were all trained in firearms. Aircraft maintenance components would be guarded against being overrun by augmented clercks, gym managers and accountants all carrying rifles.

Response by CW3 Private RallyPoint Member made May 17 at 2020 7:36 PM

CW3 Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 17 May 2020 19:36:04 -0400

I went basic training at Ft Benning. We had an Air Force SF guy who was transitioning to the Army and he was not a great shooter. Having said that some of the best pistol shooters I know are Air Force. It's a different mentality. The Air Force exists to fly they seem to forget they were originally Army Air Forces.

Response by Sgt Lee Dutra made May 17 at 2020 8:20 PM

Sgt Lee Dutra — Sun, 17 May 2020 20:20:11 -0400

Back in :61 we received what I felt was adequate training with and on the M1 Carbine, but that was then amd things are different now.

Response by Maj James Harrison made May 18 at 2020 12:40 AM

Maj James Harrison — Mon, 18 May 2020 00:40:01 -0400

I was in the Ground Launched Cruise Missile, GLCM. Mobile nukes. I was qualified in: CAR 10, M92, M 60, All munitions ..slap flair s etc. M 203, and yes, a small hydrogen device. Major Jim

Response by MSgt Andrea Gutierrez made May 18 at 2020 4:13 AM

MSgt Andrea Gutierrez — Mon, 18 May 2020 04:13:19 -0400

I spent 22 years in the Air Force. I had 3 combat tours. I crossed from Air Intelligence to Medic. I used both skills down range. As a medic, I did not fly patients with a rifle. Very impractical. However, when not air evacing, I carried a rifle in the zone. At all times, I carried a side arm. I qualified with both and although I'm a bit rusty, I believe I can still shhot the ass off a gnat with my 45.

Response by TSgt Claude Everhart made May 18 at 2020 3:09 PM

TSgt Claude Everhart — Mon, 18 May 2020 15:09:34 -0400

Everyone belonging to an aerial port squadron is required to be qualified with a rifle ! I used to schedule the training for my squadron

Response by SFC Joseph Behmke made May 18 at 2020 11:31 PM

SFC Joseph Behmke — Mon, 18 May 2020 23:31:28 -0400

I think every person in the military should be taught basic rifle or pistol skills.

Response by A1C Kenneth White made May 19 at 2020 6:28 AM

A1C Kenneth White — Tue, 19 May 2020 06:28:59 -0400

All personnel of any branch should be familiar with the small arms at minimum that are in the armory of that facility, I was an AFSC 81152 and ABGD, we knew our stuff..

Response by Sgt Mike Jacobi made May 19 at 2020 9:22 PM

Sgt Mike Jacobi — Tue, 19 May 2020 21:22:28 -0400

Of course I’m old school but when I went through Lackland we qualified with both rifle and pistol. The Air Force doesn’t award a medal for marksmanship but I received a ribbon for small arms expert. Of course times may have changed since 1963.

Response by Capt Edward Hannan made May 20 at 2020 7:40 AM

Capt Edward Hannan — Wed, 20 May 2020 07:40:04 -0400

I feel that basic proficiency with a rifle or carbine should be mandatory for all service members. However, training AF or shipboard sailors to "fully qualified riflemen" would take too much time away from other training and duties and ultimately reduce the lethality of the entire armed forces. it is hard enough to train real riflemen with the limited availability of ammunition range time.

Response by SFC Michael Hasbun made May 20 at 2020 9:54 AM

SFC Michael Hasbun — Wed, 20 May 2020 09:54:43 -0400

If you wanted to be in the military, you shouldn't have joined the Air Force...

Response by Col John Madison made May 20 at 2020 12:05 PM

Col John Madison — Wed, 20 May 2020 12:05:22 -0400

When one considers the nature of many military operations over the past two decades, it certainly would not hurt to change the training paradigm. With the blue to green (USAF and USN) filling in for US Army in Iraq and Afghanistan, most expeditionary units that took on those deployments did do training to accomplish that mission. It woudn't hurt one bit to provide/mandate weapons. commo and combat casualty care to many AFSC's. If you're a drone operator out at Nellis AFB, who cares; but if you're going to fill in for Army or work with the Marines, absolutely it is needed.

Response by Sgt Mike Jacobi made May 22 at 2020 2:52 PM

Sgt Mike Jacobi — Fri, 22 May 2020 14:52:18 -0400

As a new slick sleeve Airman I qualified with both rifle, M14 and pistol Colt 1911 A1 on the Lackland range in 1963. In fact I have the ribbon they awarded us for good shooting. (The Air Force had no expert medal back then. We transitioned to the .38 Colt later on.

Response by SPC Albert Schafer made May 23 at 2020 9:05 AM

SPC Albert Schafer — Sat, 23 May 2020 09:05:14 -0400

Being in the Air Force is like "Military Lite". There are more civilians (never served) who know how to shoot and maintain arms they are presently serving in the Air Force today. ( remember, this is more tongue -in-cheek than fact)....

Response by Capt Richard Chason made May 23 at 2020 1:00 PM

Capt Richard Chason — Sat, 23 May 2020 13:00:45 -0400

My career in the USAF saw me not in Special Operations but in Special Projects and as such I had to be able to use many weapons. I started off with the M1 Garand in JROTC. In the early 1970's Enlisted Basic Training had me learn the M-14 and M-16. My duty with Air America had me learn the AR-7 survival rifle, S&W Models 10, 12, & 15 .38 revolver, Colt M1911A1, Laotian M1917 American Enfield, and M79 Grenade Launcher. I had to re-qualify with the M16 and the S&W Models 15 .38 revolver from time to time because I was a SP augmentee. In the early 1980's Officers Training School had me re-qualify with the S&W Models 15 .38 revolver. After that I did not touch a military weapon until Desert Storm where I again had to re-qualify with the S&W Models 15 .38 revolver. I was already in country prior to Desert Shield and did not ship with a weapon so I had to take what was available. If you were going to a place where you may be placed in harms way you were given training on either the M-16 or the M-9 semi-auto and shipped with a weapon or issued one in country.

I was medically retired in 1992 so many things are different from the USAF I was a part of.

Response by SMSgt John Miller made May 26 at 2020 9:26 AM

SMSgt John Miller — Tue, 26 May 2020 09:26:19 -0400

I served USAF from 1964 to 1984. Qualified in basic with .30 carbine, went thru Air Police (Security Police) and qualified with .38 Revolver. Cross trained to Inventory Management and for whatever reason qualified with M16 several times prior to 1977. Assigned to Red horse (Combat Engineers) 1977 to 1980. Qualified with M16, .38 Revolver, and M79 Grenade Launcher during that assignment. During Viet Nam Air Force personnel were qualified with and were initially issued M16's. In an attack on Tan Su Nut Air Base so many Air Force personnel shot each other resulting in the disarming of just about all Air Force personnel. While assigned to RAF Bentwaters, England 1965 to 1968, I was a Security Police augmentee and carried a .30 carbine during alerts guarding loaded out aircraft. During that three years one of our augmentees shot a rabbit while on post, and several times augmentees fired a shot into the clearing barrel during weapons turn in at the armory.
I totally agree that all military personnel have basic weapons training and proficiency training and if they can't behave properly and practice weapons safety they can be sent on their way

Response by 1stSgt Edward Jackson made May 28 at 2020 3:53 AM

1stSgt Edward Jackson — Thu, 28 May 2020 03:53:52 -0400

The fact is the USAF, just like the Navy and Coast Guard are mostly technicians. Few, with compared to the overall force need to qualify on any weapon. In the USAF, the groups that need to qualify on any firearm are the Security Police, Special Forces, and aircrew members. If deployed to a combat area the SPs are responsible for base defense (along with any Army or Marine forces that share the base). The need for SF to qualify should be obvious to anyone, and aircrew need to qualify because they might be in a survival situation behind enemy lines if they ever have to leave thier aircraft inflight or after a crash landing.
During the Vietnam War, all USAF personal had to qualify on the M-16A1 prior to deployment to Vietnam. Remember that during the Tet Offensive many air bases were attacked and Army and Marine units were tied up in thier own defensive or offensive operations.
I myself qualified on the M-16A1, M-1911A1, and the S&W .38 revolver. As an aircrew member, I needed the M-1911, and later the .38 as a survival weapon, and at one time had orders to Vietnam and qualified on the M-16 and M-1911. Those orders were later canceled, but I later deployed to Guam and after cross-training to a KC-135 Boom Operator deployed to SEA, and towards the end of my career to Desert Shield/Storm. During those years I maintained my qualification initially on the M-1911, then on the .38 every year.
Don't forget the USAF awards the small arms marksmanship ribbon to those qualified on any of the small arms used by USAF personnel. Some personnel also need to be qualified for the combat readiness medal.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marksmanship_ribbon#U.S._Air_Force
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combat_Readiness_Medal

Marksmanship_ribbon%23U.S._Air_Force

Response by SSgt Daniel d'Errico made Jun 9 at 2020 8:41 PM

SSgt Daniel d'Errico — Tue, 09 Jun 2020 20:41:20 -0400

Ssgt. Christ, hou're in the generation of USAF members that has less training in Combat Arms than I had in my generation (Vidtnam to the first Gulf War). Every one of my generation was trsined in the M-16 for enlisted and .38 pistol for officers (especially pilots and launch cotrol officers). Small arms training was an annual affair for everyone except maybe security police, Combat Controllers and Pararescue men. While I was overseas in Germany, we trained annually because we hsd a very small SP detachment for our main base (a Tactical Air Control Squadron), which meant we'd defend ourselves when the ballon went up. But the main reason USAF personnel aren't well trained in small arms is funding. Thanks to budget cuts, USAF had to decide what was really nesccessary, and what wasn't. Pilot (fighter and bomber types) were at the top of the nesccessary list. CCT, PJs, missile lauchers Security Police came next. All others were deemed secondary combatants. Henceforth, small arms training was just once a year thing for the 99% of officer and enlisted career fields. The TAC squadrons were split into Combat Crew qualified (officers and enlisted scope dopes and Non Combat Crew enlisted). As an enlisted maintenance technican, who would defend the radar site while we were deployed, I was not deemed Combat Crew. But I had to fight every and any enemy troop that came near our radar site. One thing USAF forgot, was we were open to air attack by the Warsaw Pact and they'd be using HARMs (Highspeed Anti Radiation Missiles) designed to destroy our radar and its operators. We had no Stinger missiles to defend ourselves either. Neither did our Security Police.

Response by Capt Craig McDaniel made Jun 18 at 2020 7:27 AM

Capt Craig McDaniel — Thu, 18 Jun 2020 07:27:29 -0400

My comments won’t add much to the debate, but my experience as a competitive rifle shooter since age 12 through college gave me confidence that should there have been a need, I would have been more than capable of handling a weapon. I was training to qualify for the Olympic team that never competed because of the U.S. boycott in 1980, so competence was not a problem; I wonder, however, where the hell I’d find a weapon on my USAF bases!

Response by GySgt Lawrence D. Pool made Jun 18 at 2020 10:57 AM

GySgt Lawrence D. Pool — Thu, 18 Jun 2020 10:57:08 -0400

Response by Sgt Dale Briggs made Jun 21 at 2020 6:12 PM

Sgt Dale Briggs — Sun, 21 Jun 2020 18:12:02 -0400

I’m old school here, but if your deployed you still have security responsibility for your section on the perimeter. So if you can’t reasonably handle your weapon your useless, it should be a requirement, because you never know. It’s not that hard, but if your AF at a FOB you’d better know how to use your weapon.

Response by SPC Vic Lusby made Jun 22 at 2020 5:08 AM

SPC Vic Lusby — Mon, 22 Jun 2020 05:08:25 -0400

Not sure what the hell happened here, I was an Electronic Warfare Tech during my Air Force Days, and still had to qualify with a M-16. In fact i shot expert. This is a basic military skill that everyone should need to know. If you do not know how to use a rifle you have a glorified hammer. I really hope our standards have not slipped this bad

Response by 1stSgt Thomas Barriner made Jun 22 at 2020 6:43 PM

1stSgt Thomas Barriner — Mon, 22 Jun 2020 18:43:51 -0400

In 1967 when I went to basic everyone received what I call an orientation on the M16. This included disassembly, cleaning, operation, and safe handling of the weapon. We then fired for qualification, and re-qualified annually for, I think, three more years when it was discontinued as a cost savings. Since I grew up hunting it was a piece of cake and qualified expert every time. The course of fire was bare bones, 10 rounds for practice and 60 to qualify at 100yds. When I got to Vietnam as an aircraft mechanic we received a pink card with a connex number on it where if needed we would present the card to be issued a rifle, but no ammo. We had an assigned gun position where we were to go and wait till someone came by and issued us two 20 round magazines. My immediate thought was, they want to get us killed, give me more ammo.

Response by Lt Col Richard Loewenhagen made Jun 22 at 2020 8:55 PM

Lt Col Richard Loewenhagen — Mon, 22 Jun 2020 20:55:59 -0400

Its the Commanding Officer's fault. I had thousands of aircraft and munitions maintenance people work for me over a 21 year career, and all of them were required to be M-16 qualified. We also trained in chem warfare suits monthly, and we trained buddy-care battlefield style. I realize I retired 20 years ago... has combat training left the Air Force?

Response by CMSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 26 at 2020 9:24 AM

CMSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 26 Jun 2020 09:24:53 -0400

When I deployed my troops to OIF and OEF, they were deployed with weapons and before deploying had to qualify with them. While in country, they carried them, slept with them, ate with them, etc. When I deployed for OEF, I deployed with a weapon which I had to qualify with and carry with me while deployed. I am retired Air National Guard.

Response by SFC Charles Temm made Jun 26 at 2020 3:38 PM

SFC Charles Temm — Fri, 26 Jun 2020 15:38:38 -0400

Most other services don't consider the majority of the AF part of the military for obvious reasons like this.

Worked w/AF security "troops" before and was not impressed but maybe they've improved some (I hope)

Response by MSgt James "Buck" Buchanan made Jun 27 at 2020 9:12 PM

MSgt James "Buck" Buchanan — Sat, 27 Jun 2020 21:12:52 -0400

There actually are two AF career fields I'm familiar with that do require further weapons familiarization and competency: tactical air controllers and weather. Virtually all TACP assignments are with the Army directing AF high flyers toward ground targets. AF weather provides all weather support for the Army. This includes assignments with both aviation and infantry units. This means not only being able to shoot but have the ability to prepare a defensive firing position, i.e., foxhole, read maps and tear down, move and reerect all of your scientific gear in the middle of the night when there is no light unless the moon is shining. Your point is well made and taken, however, by and large AF careers are meant to be performed hundreds to thousands of miles away from most ground fighting, the occasional terror attack or quick strike incursion/mortar attack aside. All of that being said, there are those in the rear echelons who do have a weapons aptitude and will gladly step into the line at the armory if needed.

Response by TSgt Andrew Harper made Jun 29 at 2020 10:35 PM

TSgt Andrew Harper — Mon, 29 Jun 2020 22:35:33 -0400

I think you are full of shit, you haven't been around very long or read your History. My career field AFSC 605/2T2 was trained in all weapons, tactics: from shotgun driver, SOS, CCT or whatever unit, you happened to be assigned to. Yes, I came in 1983-2004, ever hear of Airfield Defense School? We were the guys that put you on the plane, either at the DACG or Pax Terminal, and when we were fired upon, and no one was around, we guarded the airfield when no AS/AP/SP/SF were available, we did our own. The big Boy Scouts (Army) taught us how to fire those nice big toys, Rock On 1/506!
Anyway, shut your mouth until you get some experience. Another thing, where is the common sense? Do not fucking get me started.

Response by Sgt Thomas Doyle made Jun 30 at 2020 1:44 PM

Sgt Thomas Doyle — Tue, 30 Jun 2020 13:44:10 -0400

If you are in the Military and they train you to function in a Combat Crisis, you are possibly going to be in World of Confusion if the dung hits the fan. Get some personal training in firearms. Play war games on a computer. If you are being sent to a Country where your base might be attacked, plan on it. Air Bases of all branches are open to Commando type raids. You don't want to be in an active shooter or an enemy Come after you and all you can do is hide. have seen Marine Clerks check their equipment when they go on a break. Checking their equipment in case of attack. They had to be able to pack up and move out in 30 minutes, including file cabinets etc.
The Marines are a hard service. But they teach you," the more you sweat in practice, the less you bleed in a War " SEMPER FI "!

Response by MSG Robert Hyatt made Jul 1 at 2020 11:03 AM

MSG Robert Hyatt — Wed, 01 Jul 2020 11:03:59 -0400

Check out the original training for the original RED HORSE units prior to deployment to SE Asia. VIETNAM.

Response by SP5 Rich Goulet made Jul 1 at 2020 6:16 PM

SP5 Rich Goulet — Wed, 01 Jul 2020 18:16:33 -0400

Not sure how this relates. Our Honor Guard recently recruited an AF vet. He didn’t know one thing about the manual of arms. Man was that a surprise.

Today was his first veterans funeral. He did fine. Fast learner.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 2 at 2020 11:41 AM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 02 Jul 2020 11:41:49 -0400

I spent 20% of my USAF Career in both a Combat Communications Squadron and a Forward Air Control Flight (FACP). Qualified on a number of weapons to include M-16/A1, M-60, M-203, 9mm & .38. While the rank and file members had little exposure, we had plenty.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 2 at 2020 11:50 AM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 02 Jul 2020 11:50:47 -0400

While I don't pretend to be a Marine Rifleman or an Army 11B, I spent 20% of my 20+ years in Combat Communications and Forward Air Control Posts (FACP). M-16 Quals were a must and most of us had multiple quals that included 9mm/.38, M-60, and m-203. For better or worse, the rank & file Airman/Officer doesn't have the opportunity to train/qual beyond BMTS or Officer Training.

Response by CPL Joseph Elinger made Jul 3 at 2020 3:30 AM

CPL Joseph Elinger — Fri, 03 Jul 2020 03:30:01 -0400

There are many ways to fight

Response by SP6 Blendia Ellington made Jul 8 at 2020 9:22 PM

SP6 Blendia Ellington — Wed, 08 Jul 2020 21:22:52 -0400

Wow that's hard to take in

Response by Lt Col Richard Johnson made Jul 13 at 2020 3:29 PM

Lt Col Richard Johnson — Mon, 13 Jul 2020 15:29:43 -0400

Every member is trained to use the M-4 and M-9. Unfortunately, most of the training now is "Just in Time" training for deployments. There are a lot of Airmen who have a mastery of their service weapon. But again, when your training budget is slashed an easy cut comes to certain things, and weapons training becomes a "just in time" verses "master of skill."

Response by MSgt Nathan Krawitz made Jul 15 at 2020 10:28 PM

MSgt Nathan Krawitz — Wed, 15 Jul 2020 22:28:09 -0400

Lots of members, mostly Navy and Air Force, are not front line fighters. They are support. There is a requirement to have varying levels of familiarization and safety, but that's about it. You're there to fix things, not kill the enemy. If you are deployed in a hostile area, support personnel might require to be armed, which triggers additional requirements.

My time in the Navy, we only needed familiarization, not even close to being good. Can you safely load and unload? Can you aim and fire? Can you get rounds in the general direction? Good. If you are accurate enough, you might get a ribbon for Marksman or Sharpshooter, and if you're really good, it's an Expert medal.

My time in the Air Force Reserve meant infrequent qualification (mostly budget cuts). To meet Air Force minimum qualification, merely not being a danger to self isn't good enough. The equivalent of Navy Marksman is needed to qual. Air Force Expert ribbon is roughly the same as the Navy Expert medal.

The Army and Marines use your rifle and PT scores as part of total points for promotion. The Marines get up to 300 points each. I don't know about the Army. There is ample time for training and qualification.

Response by SSgt Andrew Urban made Jul 16 at 2020 10:37 AM

SSgt Andrew Urban — Thu, 16 Jul 2020 10:37:14 -0400

As a AF 'bus driver' if you will, in the early 2000's we were trained to perform combat convoy operations. In the early portion, we provided gun truck security in Iraq and Afghanistan. We ran the mission, we plotted the trip, reported to who we had to report to, manned the crew served weapons, and even drove. The training provided had several aspects of the mission shoved down our throats for 2 months straight from sniper instructors, SF personnel, folks that had returned recently and even other services. Constant reaction training was provided from scenarios experience in country. We spent weeks learning combat life saver techniques. We spent a few weeks learning from the Army's style of training to include some brief hand to hand.

Our training was so intense and so detailed it made the actual mission seem easy. (Don't get me wrong, it was no walk in the park!) We conquered the mission, we dominated what was thrown at us. Our U.S. civilians whom we would escort would beg for the AF over the Army all the time! Not to be anti Army in anyway, but their methods really made no sense. It wasn't that it was confusing or different, it simply was unsafe, unrealistic, and not well thought through.

For the Air Force to be combat trained beyond their job requirement, is maybe a bit much. If their specific job does require them to be combat ready then yes, prepare those folks.

When the Air Force did ramp up their basic training for a more combat involved training, I chuckled.
Can you imagine a combat finance office? "Sir, Sir,... sign here...." or "here is your latest LES" as their is weapons fire and explosions.

In another view, yes, there shooould be some more extensive training for the possibility of a installation take over.

Has there been anything wrong the way it has been done all this time so far?

Response by SP6 Peter Kreutzfeldt made Jul 20 at 2020 4:28 PM

SP6 Peter Kreutzfeldt — Mon, 20 Jul 2020 16:28:44 -0400

TET 68 Ton San Nut (Spl) airbase should have been reason enough for the Air Force to know what to do with a rifle or pistol. For the NVA it was like shooting fish in the water

Response by Sgt Kevin H. made Jul 24 at 2020 7:18 PM

Sgt Kevin H. — Fri, 24 Jul 2020 19:18:14 -0400

So do the other branches train cooks and office personnel the way they do infantry? Like regular weapons qualifications? I’ve always wondered the same....why USAF Troops never touch a weapon after bootcamp unless they’re Security.

Response by Sgt Thomas Ivanoff made Jul 27 at 2020 6:06 PM

Sgt Thomas Ivanoff — Mon, 27 Jul 2020 18:06:23 -0400

I was qualified as were all my fellow basic training members in 1972 with an m-16. We were given 10 rounds to train with then50 rounds to qualify. When I got to my final base, F E Warren I was allowed to qualify with a pistol. It was associated with my MOS and the control of top secret crypto materials. Yi did not carry a weapon while operating as a Missile Tech but we always had a security police airman with us while in the field. He carried an M-16. We carried tools. He guarded the silo topside, we repaired the nuclear missile in the silo. Now I think we have forgotten a very important group of airmen who hat were experts in riflemanship as well as jungle warfare and enemy evasion. Those special force Airmen were the ParaRescue. They operated in every environment there is and are respected by all branches of the service. They hung from a jungle buster with a rifle around their neck and a first aid kit with survival gear on his back. They are recognized for many heroic actions. I know one of those guys and can tell you he was a wonderful man humble and proud but haunted by memories from Vietnam. He was promoted and retired as a Warrant Officer from F E Warren in the late 1970's. He finished up his career as overseeing the helicopter maintenance group at Warren his name was Grover. He passed away a few years ago. He was liked by many of his brethren and respected by all. So when we discuss the Air Force and their usage and expertise of weapons, let's remember we have some of the very best riflemen in the US Military.

Response by SSG Paul Headlee made Jul 31 at 2020 2:34 PM

SSG Paul Headlee — Fri, 31 Jul 2020 14:34:12 -0400

Don't they all just jump in their jets and attack? Yes, everyone in every billet should be able to become a Rifleman (Riflelady?) if necessary. This is because while we can anticipate what could happen at any given moment we don't actually know until it has happened. You can postulate all you want but if there's some catastrophic, unforeseen event that alters the consistency of our force structure we'd better be ready to shift gears. This country has not had to fight a war for its general survival in quite some time. I think people lose sight of that and then we get somewhat compartmentalized. There are certainly other tasks that should be learned in addition to operating weapons.

Response by MSgt Joseph Haynes made Aug 1 at 2020 12:02 PM

MSgt Joseph Haynes — Sat, 01 Aug 2020 12:02:40 -0400

Sounds like you should have joined the Army or Marines.

Response by CAPT Lyle Brown made Aug 1 at 2020 1:00 PM

CAPT Lyle Brown — Sat, 01 Aug 2020 13:00:51 -0400

Remember, the Air Force is the "kinder, gentler Armed Service" ;)

Response by 1stSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 1 at 2020 3:15 PM

1stSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 01 Aug 2020 15:15:00 -0400

What? And get my nails dirty?
That was in jest!
For the record, I was in the army infantry for 6 years before going over to the Air Force. When I was in Iraq we needed to use our weapons and I was dismayed to see the lack of weapon discipline. With the current wars there really are no rear echelon areas any more, and I do think the air force should training ALL Airmen to handle weapons comfortably.

Response by A1C Norman Stuart made Aug 2 at 2020 11:00 AM

A1C Norman Stuart — Sun, 02 Aug 2020 11:00:55 -0400

I achieved expert marksman status in the Air Force during basic training in 1950. I was not aware this training was stopped.

Response by PO2 Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 3 at 2020 12:34 AM

PO2 Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 03 Aug 2020 00:34:10 -0400

That's not how or why the Air Force started out or is in their culture. When was the last time an Airbase actually got overran? Not saying it cant happen. Look at Afghanistan, where some of our soldiers were killed in office buildings by Afghan security forces. You the Air Force train more? Possibly never can go wrong. However, ive served in the Air Force and now im in the Navy. Neither one were ever meant to be frontline rifle or what not. If that is the case that why we an Army and Marines.

Response by LtCol Paul Bowen made Aug 3 at 2020 12:51 AM

LtCol Paul Bowen — Mon, 03 Aug 2020 00:51:16 -0400

Back in the 1990s the US AIR FORCE “Recruiting Slogan” was “AIR FORCE: A GREAT WAY OF LIFE”...and THEY MEANT IT!

Response by Sgt Ron Harris made Aug 3 at 2020 11:46 AM

Sgt Ron Harris — Mon, 03 Aug 2020 11:46:34 -0400

I was 42153 (AGE) back in the 60's. I qualified annually, M-16 and/or M-1 Garrand. In 'Nam, at Bien Hoa, our 1st CO,would allow us to sign out a M-16 & 10 rounds, to preform our NF-2 Lite-all maint. on the base perimeter, during 18:00-06:00 hrs. We had to turn the weapon & 10 rounds in every AM. After the 1st. CO left, our new CO stopped the practice. Then we went on the perimeter with a hammer and a flash light.

Response by SPC Kerry Good made Aug 3 at 2020 3:25 PM

SPC Kerry Good — Mon, 03 Aug 2020 15:25:47 -0400

If anyone wishes to be in our US Armed Forces can't work with firearms they should be deported to some other country! I'm an Enlisted Army Infantryman 1969 in Vietnam, Disabled, but still willing to fight all DOMESTIC & FOREIGN ENEMY! That would be MSM, Deep State, Democrat, Republican, Commie, Islamic, Anti-American SOB in my Nation!

Response by SSgt Rick Zambrana made Aug 4 at 2020 12:01 AM

SSgt Rick Zambrana — Tue, 04 Aug 2020 00:01:38 -0400

Who said that

Response by SFC Howard Holmes made Aug 4 at 2020 12:47 AM

SFC Howard Holmes — Tue, 04 Aug 2020 00:47:51 -0400

Remember, the Air Force is the only branch that sends its officers out to battle while the enlisted are more prone to staying back. There are of course exceptions, like load masters, and certain gunners, and those gunners are more of pray and spray, or so it used to be. The Air Force is also much wiser with how they spend money. so they have little reason to spend that much money to train marksmanship. Like the Navy, there's little point to teaching them small arms, and they have Shore Patrol and many times there are Marines on board. I believe watching a Sailor with some of the small arms would be even funnier than some of the Airmen. In Illinois, for Carry Conceal, if you were in the military they don't require you to take the first half of the course, it truly ought to be, if you were in the Marines, Army, Coast Guard, or certain MOSes in the AF, or a Navy Seal, you're exempt, but the rest need to take the full course.

Response by Sgt Mark F Jindrick made Aug 4 at 2020 6:52 PM

Sgt Mark F Jindrick — Tue, 04 Aug 2020 18:52:43 -0400

Basics in '70...on our live fire day..."gentlemen, the AF is almost out of money...so your practice rounds will be your qualifying rounds..."

Response by A1C John Muhic made Aug 5 at 2020 5:45 PM

A1C John Muhic — Wed, 05 Aug 2020 17:45:54 -0400

I went through basic training in 1961, and we spent a full week getting familiar with and firing the
M-1 Carbine. Many of us fired expert and also a lot of sharpshooters. Everyone had to qualify or you were set back in training. At my permanent base, all permanent party , except for Medics, had to qualify at the range every year.

Response by SSG Charlie Davis made Aug 6 at 2020 9:03 PM

SSG Charlie Davis — Thu, 06 Aug 2020 21:03:54 -0400

My last five years with the Honolulu Police Department was with the Crime Laboratory as the only firearm and tool mark examiner in the state. I would frequently be requested by local federal agencies to conduct examinations and identifications for them because of the fast turn around. On occasion, I would get requests from the Army Central Identification Laboratory - Hawaii (CIL-HI) to verify a serial number or restore a number of a firearm recovered from a battle site or air crash. On one occasion, I was brought six S&W short barrel revolvers in various condition of destruction which were recovered from an AC-130 Gunship that crashed in Laos during a mission in early 1970. All the excavated revolvers were covered in dirt and rust and all appeared to have been in a fire. After a lot of soaking in kerosene and careful cutting apart of the frames and cylinders with a dremel tool, the serial numbers were revealed and revolvers were identified to the flight manifest and to an individual. I told that story to tell this: Every single revolver was empty - never loaded. No cooked off cartridges in the cylinder - nothing. Each individual had also been issued 30 rounds of 38 special ball and six rounds of tracer. Just sayin' . . .

Response by SMSgt Gerald Goertz made Aug 7 at 2020 7:32 AM

SMSgt Gerald Goertz — Fri, 07 Aug 2020 07:32:55 -0400

As a retired SMSgt with 30 years under my belt I would have agreed with your statement when I first enlisted, but as time went on and the more overseas deployments came we were trained. I take offense to the Ssgt comments and can tell you pently of stories about the SPs. By the way I was a Marksman.

Response by SSgt Edmond Gaudelli made Aug 8 at 2020 7:40 PM

SSgt Edmond Gaudelli — Sat, 08 Aug 2020 19:40:06 -0400

During Desert Storm, we had CE assist us in providing air base ground defense. They were known as "augumentees".

Response by Cpl Bernard Bates made Aug 11 at 2020 11:10 PM

Cpl Bernard Bates — Tue, 11 Aug 2020 23:10:35 -0400

My neighbor had a son in the Air Force He joined right out of Hi-School. He got in a unit that I was told Elite, Forward Observers on the ground. He was Deployed to Iraq when the war to oust saddam was going on. In 2005, He received a severe head Injury as a forward Observer. He was put in a medical coma for over a year. He was finally sent home with a medical discharge. I seen him once in 2012 he was like a vegetable his eyes were open and he would jerk his head. As far as I know he is still in a state where he cant help himself. I remember the day he graduated I asked him what he was going to do. He said I am joining the Air Force. I said Good choice and wished him the best. I am a Marine Veteran and an Army Veteran. I am sticking up for the Air Force. I believe they still have some dangerous Jobs. Semper Fi.

Response by SFC Michael W. made Aug 17 at 2020 1:57 PM

SFC Michael W. — Mon, 17 Aug 2020 13:57:02 -0400

This is an old post, but I'll throw in my two cents. Combat HAS changed a lot from the past since Operation Desert Storm. It doesn't matter what branch you serve in...you can possibly find yourself in a hostile environment where the enemy is sending rounds at you from any directions. Air Force flies multiple aircrafts, but the personnel maintaining it are ON THE GROUND.

I can't ever remember the enemy asking me if I knew how to fire a weapon or what branch I serve in so he can decide whether or not to fire at us...

Even though the Air Force to this day doesn't seem to believe in weaps qualifications (Just like the ANG), higher command should be pushing this to ensure that every Airman is qualified. Too many believe in deploying into a "Green Zone" thinking that they are safe, which doesn't exist until you're at 30,000 feet flying away from there. The Airman should take upon themselves to learn how to fire and qualified with a M4, M16, M249 and the Army would train you down range because if under fire they're gonna wished they knew before it hits the fan...

Response by CW3 Dick McManus made Aug 28 at 2020 2:29 PM

CW3 Dick McManus — Fri, 28 Aug 2020 14:29:09 -0400

3, 324 architects and engineers more than 15,000 scientists, including 52 Nobel laureates and 63 recipients of the National Medal of Science, some 320 skilled commercial of military pilots (Pilots for 9/11 Truth), and some 58 elected public officials are saying that scientific irrefutably evidence proves that the collapse of the World Trade Center buildings were destroyed by explosives and incendiaries.

https://www.ae911truth.org/evidence/steel-sulfidation?fbclid=IwAR0R2AgSyhxzhYOtqpf9JgU_kbklbanVwkeAUk9yP_C0vlWfLgWGNEnNnnQ

Video classes Part 2, about the science of 9/11 truth
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IrogMzHaFtg&list=UUL-c_zvZ3lhlU7NU1ikxgmQ
(AE911truth.org,)
Part 3
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pOonEvmZphk&list=UUL-c_zvZ3lhlU7NU1ikxgmQ&index=13

Part 1
rhttps://http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AuhwtgMc9eM&list=UUL-c_zvZ3lhlU7NU1ikxgmQ&index=15

There is also a video of yellow colored steel dripping off the side of the south Twin Tower just before it collapsed. It is not aluminum metal because it is silver color as a liquid.
9/11 Whistleblower: Kevin Ryan former UL scientist
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=kevin+ryan++9%2F11&view=detail&mid=C54C4CE39E87D2ED79A2C54C4CE39E87D2ED79A2&FORM=VIRE&fbclid=IwAR1iZF8PwQQK9UXlmtOq0lFdBxvCK-82L2juolGGcqatD-gYXsIsZ2o7O-A

“But someone would have talked by now”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eOWRLoNOhRs&feature=youtu.be&fbclid=IwAR3ziEq6mBVhmZjSqAZmfK6u6T2PRvXAXQZ0zB6fajhFul0e6a2xvaqbCHI

The 9/11 Commission whistleblowers
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOBwfEWXxPY

9/11 Whistleblower: Michael Springmann
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ooj_KOoVmAI&feature=youtu.be&fbclid=IwAR1EpjU9sW3J5R9JtO4PYgYM5-ArljH-L3K0nRSgGVjNC8YLI9nvheP3vCU

9/11 Whistleblowers: William Rodriguez
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=irNqB5N0o30&fbclid=IwAR1l0AZ61pJrzBrVFhz1FKE2lDpc5LaL15kXtQD4tNhNEKJJya5VKA2G3-Y

The New Pearl Harbor revisited
https://www.facebook.com/sultan.abdallah70/videos/ [login to see] 08442/UzpfSTcxOTg1MDYwMjpWSzoxMTM0MzkyMDQ2NzIwNzIz/

Steel melts at 2,750 degree F. See the photo of yellow hot steel (2,192 F.) being removed from the WTC wreckage at http://www.911myths.com/html/wtc_molten_steel.html)

Fire Fighters for 9/11 truth
https://www.facebook.com/groups/ [login to see] 2870/

My book: The 9/11 Official Story is Total BS
66 pages
send me an email at [login to see] and I will reply with it attach for free.

or For sale at Amazon Kindle books

We are in a war on science.

Richard McManus
Chief Warrant Officer-3/counterintelligence special agent (more like an FBI agent than CIA officer) and combat paramedic/LPN, Vietnam US Army retired, BS psychology and nursing, Everett, WA, USA (near Seattle).

Steel Sulfidation | World Trade Center Building 7

In a New York Times article published in February 2002, James Glanz and Eric Lipton wrote: “Perhaps the deepest mystery uncovered in the investigation involves extremely thin bits of steel collected...from 7 World Trade Center.... The steel apparently melted away, but no fire in any of the building...

Response by SN Jeffrey White made Aug 31 at 2020 2:51 PM

SN Jeffrey White — Mon, 31 Aug 2020 14:51:43 -0400

The navy is the same way. Sailors are not trained to repel boarders or join shore parties. The navy uses the Marines for this purpose.

Response by PO1 Neil Brennan made Aug 31 at 2020 3:27 PM

PO1 Neil Brennan — Mon, 31 Aug 2020 15:27:26 -0400

We were having a fifties SyFy party. One of our regular "blooper experts" made much of the base guards wearing Army fatigues and not AP jumpers. I think this shakes his case. ;-)

Response by CW4 William Kessinger made Sep 1 at 2020 9:19 AM

CW4 William Kessinger — Tue, 01 Sep 2020 09:19:27 -0400

They are not geared for a ground combat force, only a reactive force for airbase security. I always hated going to an AF facility as they wanted me to unload and give up my sidearm to enter the AF Exchanges. (PX). This in a combat zone. Never did. Just hide it under my BDU blouse. We flew in BDU's in the early days in VN. The 38 wasn't much protection but when a way from un UH-1 and the M-60's it was a little security.
At least the Army trained me how to use both the AR and the handgun.

Response by LCpl Jeff Moore made Sep 1 at 2020 10:47 AM

LCpl Jeff Moore — Tue, 01 Sep 2020 10:47:13 -0400

Cause the airforce is more a corporation then a military branch. I know of one airman thst developed PtSD from the mear thought of being deployed

I agree ever preson in the airforce from. E-1 to the head general. Should be able and knowledgeable enough to pick up a m4 and defend themselves if needed. Especially with insider attacks. They also need to get use to living in tents without wifi and AC.

Response by MSgt Bedell Toro made Sep 2 at 2020 12:33 PM

MSgt Bedell Toro — Wed, 02 Sep 2020 12:33:33 -0400

I served in the US Marine Corps. It did no matter what your MOS was. You had to know and qualify with the M16. Its noit just the Air Force, so in the Navy they don't have to train or qualify with the rifle either in Boot Camp. I do believe that all the branches should train and annually qualify. Its part of being a military personnel, to have the proficiency of handling the most basic weapon of any armed forces.

Response by SSgt Michael Allen made Sep 2 at 2020 3:17 PM

SSgt Michael Allen — Wed, 02 Sep 2020 15:17:44 -0400

The Air Force is about flying and fixing aircraft period. Everything else is in support of that mission. Space Command is still about the same, but at higher altitudes.

Response by SrA James Cannon made Sep 5 at 2020 12:10 PM

SrA James Cannon — Sat, 05 Sep 2020 12:10:39 -0400

The Air Force has a few other gun toters besides SF. There is TACP, Combat Controllers, etc.

Response by SSG Samuel Kermon made Sep 5 at 2020 5:25 PM

SSG Samuel Kermon — Sat, 05 Sep 2020 17:25:15 -0400

I am of the school that says you must be ready to defend yourself. This nonsense of not being able to use a current personal defense weapon (M16, M4, or M9) is silly.

Response by SSgt Scott Ezra made Sep 5 at 2020 5:48 PM

SSgt Scott Ezra — Sat, 05 Sep 2020 17:48:36 -0400

Its just a bad idea for many reasons. It sounds good in a perfect scenario kind of way, but in real life it would never work out.
First, let's say that everyone in the USAF was qualified to use a service pistol or rifle. Where would all of this equipment be? Does every office have an armorer inside an armory just sitting there all day waiting for a scenario to dispense weapons? Does every service member have to have a service weapon on them at all times? Where do these weapons go when they are carrying out their actual duties? It would seem knowing how to minimally operate and clean a weapon would be of no use unless there was access to them.
Now let's get to the training. Do you really believe that just knowing how to properly load a weapon, clean it, and perhaps shoot a paper close by is enough training to engage a real person whether its a terrorist or active shooter? So, they would also have to be trained to be able to identify the actual threat, remember now that everyone in uniform is running around with a weapon, and engage the person without hitting anyone else nearby or behind.
There is just such a narrow possibility that the bad guys are going to be obvious to people that have no training other than the operation of the weapon.
So now we're training everybody on how to operate, clean, and shoot a weapon and also training everyone on target identification, different scenarios of shoot, dont shoot. Plus many more things.
Now you have to do all of this multiple times a year because those skills degrade quickly. There also has to be multiple armories all over the base with armorers ready to issue weapons and ammo in a chaotic situation, unless everyone is already armed. Couldnyou ever see anything wrong with that scenario?
Now what happens when a bunch of people can't qualify in those situations? Do we kick them out, hold them until they can, or just give them a weapon anyway?
There are so many scenarios where something goes really wrong here.
That is not even mentioning the cost of money and time that this would take away from their everyday duties.
Instead, we can have people that are qualified and do that job all of the time with the training and skills to accomplish that mission.

Response by Sgt Jude Eschete made Sep 5 at 2020 8:09 PM

Sgt Jude Eschete — Sat, 05 Sep 2020 20:09:00 -0400

If the Air Force is having to worry about ground combat for the average airman, we have *much* larger issues on hand.

Response by TSgt Bill Gornto made Sep 5 at 2020 8:51 PM

TSgt Bill Gornto — Sat, 05 Sep 2020 20:51:18 -0400

When j went to. Bootcamp were learned base defense week of field training, week of rifle training then qualifying ..the yearly, qualifications were still required when I left 22 years later

Response by SrA James Schroyer made Sep 5 at 2020 9:34 PM

SrA James Schroyer — Sat, 05 Sep 2020 21:34:09 -0400

I was in through the entire 90's. We had to be proficient.

Response by SSgt Robert Jorgensen made Sep 5 at 2020 10:49 PM

SSgt Robert Jorgensen — Sat, 05 Sep 2020 22:49:53 -0400

The airman is busy maintaining the aircraft the Army and Marines call for all the time. And the pilots really appreciate having an Airman that knows the aircraft they are being strapped into. Besides the Army and Marine guys need something to complain about other then our cushy beds, chow halls and food. But on another note, I was trained ona M16 in basic, I had to qualify with it and once upon a time I was even disqualified because the Army instructor could only count 35 hit out of 150, never mind the center of the target was gone, just saying!

Response by MSG Chuck Pewsey made Sep 6 at 2020 1:51 AM

MSG Chuck Pewsey — Sun, 06 Sep 2020 01:51:54 -0400

Years ago I worked with an Army major who had been in the Air Police (whatever it was called then) in Vietnam. If you wanted to set him off, hint the Army defended air bases!

Response by TSgt Ray Lewis made Sep 6 at 2020 3:01 AM

TSgt Ray Lewis — Sun, 06 Sep 2020 03:01:07 -0400

I was in the Air Force and my job was a Marksmanship Instructor. I trained a lot of Airmen on how to use a Carbine and a M-16 and a pistol.. Trained a lot of Security Members also. If you think it is easy to keep a plane flying. The mechanics have to go through a lot of training that most Security personal would have nightmares trying. That was why they have a Security Force to protect those that have a real job to do.

Response by PO2 Lon Hebert made Sep 6 at 2020 7:20 PM

PO2 Lon Hebert — Sun, 06 Sep 2020 19:20:55 -0400

when I was in the air force in 71 everyone had to be small arms qualified cause most of us were sent to Nam. I went to Danang before I went to Nam the air force sent me to travis for additional weapons training M-60, granade launcher, laws antitank weapon. glad I learned.

Response by SGT Greg Gold made Sep 6 at 2020 8:38 PM

SGT Greg Gold — Sun, 06 Sep 2020 20:38:58 -0400

You obviously haven't spent time with some of the Soldier's I've known. Even though every enlisted MOS in the Army is required to qualify annually, I feel safer when some of them aren't armed.

Response by MAJ Hugh Blanchard made Sep 6 at 2020 10:26 PM

MAJ Hugh Blanchard — Sun, 06 Sep 2020 22:26:18 -0400

The USAF Security Forces are very good. They are NOT ground maneuver forces, they are intended to protect USAF assets and places. But what they do, they do very well, as do the Army MP's.

Response by MSgt Don Dobbs made Sep 8 at 2020 6:07 PM

MSgt Don Dobbs — Tue, 08 Sep 2020 18:07:43 -0400

Today Airmen undergo weapons training as well as Air Base ground defense and chemical warfare training. Basic for Airmen has been lengthened to 8 weeks Airmen are issued M-16's (dummy weapons) in early training and spend an entire week in the field. No they are by no means infantry trained killers, but they are no longer clueless when faced with combat situations, and they do qualify with the M-16 live fire training.

Response by Amn Joseph H. made Sep 13 at 2020 2:29 AM

Amn Joseph H. — Sun, 13 Sep 2020 02:29:19 -0400

In 1963 we had to qualify with that carbine, they were old, but believe 30 caliber, and was explained to me that we would have to be trained to defend a flight line or maybe do counter-insurgency? And of course until 1947 we were the Army:) Thought the range almost not worth the time, except to scare the shit out of those unfamiliar with weapons:) It was my impression we were all suppose to know how to balance a load in any aircraft. Weapons I never thought of as anything but tools, like aircraft. When on my 17 birthday joining was sure the military would have me taught whatever they wanted me to know:) Did notice the ground pounders, especially Marines kept everything but shotgun and 45 away from AF Police:) At Offutt AFB sites they were using that AR-15, thought it 30 cal not 223, was a superior rifle, the M-16 so not much. My favorite rifle was my uncles 30-06 Springfield I , he also had a German 8mm, my brother and who eventually served were taken to a junkyard to shoot car doors with both, Mauser hurt my arm:) Ran into a few people that thought all of us should be William Tell, but most realized that would have made our armed forces pretty small:) Think the AF thought of us all as specialist, still believe that.

Response by Sgt John Ayres made Sep 14 at 2020 11:51 AM

Sgt John Ayres — Mon, 14 Sep 2020 11:51:28 -0400

When I served during Vietnam in the USAF we were required to qualify every year. When I got overseas to Nakon Phanow we were all assigned an M-16 rifle. We did not carry, but we were ualified. I don't know how they do it now.

Response by SSgt Ted Laplante made Oct 8 at 2020 1:15 AM

SSgt Ted Laplante — Thu, 08 Oct 2020 01:15:50 -0400

I was in the Air Force in 66 in basic we had to fire the m1 carbine 30 cal. and according to our DI the new M16. I was a crew chief on jets . We were told that even if we went to VN we still wouldn’t have a gun . Not even a side arm. I thought that to be total fuckin bullshit.

Response by SSG Lynn Skocdopole made Oct 8 at 2020 9:34 AM

SSG Lynn Skocdopole — Thu, 08 Oct 2020 09:34:26 -0400

oh no! Let's just call in the Marines to guard our base and flight line! Seems so much more cost effective. That way we can safely be loading the bombs, etc. on our big important planes...sigh. dripping with sarcasm at this point. Really on a more sincere note why do we waste .223 ammo on zeroing for AF types??!! Not cost effective. DoD has been issuing the 22LR magazine to fit in a modified .223 magazine for training safety. All non-combat MOS should train with the .22LR rounds for weapon familiarity only. Possibly less friendly fire mishaps that way. After all congress is always looking for some cheap way to get the 'job' done anyway.

Response by SSgt Patricia Boyer/Rossi made Oct 9 at 2020 7:57 PM

SSgt Patricia Boyer/Rossi — Fri, 09 Oct 2020 19:57:35 -0400

Man to man combat should be last resort.

Response by SSgt Roger Parish made Oct 10 at 2020 2:39 PM

SSgt Roger Parish — Sat, 10 Oct 2020 14:39:27 -0400

I had to qualify on the M1A1 carbine when I was in basic training (1963) and every year thereafter. Don't they do that anymore?

Response by Maj Dale Smith made Oct 10 at 2020 7:26 PM

Maj Dale Smith — Sat, 10 Oct 2020 19:26:21 -0400

The Air Force may have radically changed in the past 25 years, but when I was in SAC, we, as aircrew members and officers had to be qualified in .38 and 9mm sidearms. Security forces were qualified in M-16 operations and those who had AFSCs (MOS) that did not translate to a warfighting code (think clerks, food prep, accounting & finance, gym staff, band members etc) were augmented into the security force and had to qualify on the M-16.

Response by Maj Dale Smith made Oct 11 at 2020 1:38 AM

Maj Dale Smith — Sun, 11 Oct 2020 01:38:26 -0400

Not sure why my original response isn't here so we will try again. As an aircrew member, officer and SAC senior Command Post Controller, I was required to be qualified on both a 0.38 cal revolver and 9mm semi-auto pistol and did so on an annual basis. I also fired expert in both of them. Army ROTC awarded me an expert marksman on a 200M range with iron sites on an M-14. Enlisted troops in the Air Force who have non-wartime skills (gym personnel, clerks, accounting & finance, computer data enty etc) are qualified annually on a rifle. I retired from the Air Force 25 years ago, and this may have changed, but these troops were augmented into Air Force security forces using M-16 and M-4 rifles. As far as I know, anyone receiving flight pay was qualified on some sort of weapon, FACs, Prime beef (Combat Civil engineers), Law Enforcement, Security Forces, PJs, Command Post Controllers, and anyone who worked or delt with nuclear weapons. BTW, it was an Air Force member that was in the last Olympic Games in the biatholon, which required cross country skiing and bolt action small arms rifle skills (0.22 cal).

Response by Sgt Frank Staples made Oct 11 at 2020 12:13 PM

Sgt Frank Staples — Sun, 11 Oct 2020 12:13:22 -0400

When I was in...in 1966...if I remember correctly we had to qualify every two years...I qualified at Lackland and at Pope AFB. I'm not aware that this has changed in our current Air Force.

Response by Amn Ronald Nicholson made Oct 11 at 2020 6:58 PM

Amn Ronald Nicholson — Sun, 11 Oct 2020 18:58:41 -0400

When did they change it? I was in the USAF back in 1962 til 1966 and we had to qualify. I was later placed in the A combat defense unit during the Cuban Crisis and we switch over from The M1 Carbine to the AR15. I was later transferred to Base Police but my unit were shipped to Nam.

Response by SSgt Kevin Beckley made Oct 11 at 2020 9:18 PM

SSgt Kevin Beckley — Sun, 11 Oct 2020 21:18:24 -0400

When I was in I think it depended on what you worked on. The unit I was with we had to be M16 and pistol proficient as a crew chief. Sad thing about it is that you only saw the weapons once a year. The Security police ran the firing range and the instructors were ex army. So we received a little more knowledge than other airmen.

Response by SFC James Welch made Oct 12 at 2020 8:44 AM

SFC James Welch — Mon, 12 Oct 2020 08:44:09 -0400

The Marines gave it right, everyone a Rifleman first!

Response by CPT John Gray made Oct 12 at 2020 6:46 PM

CPT John Gray — Mon, 12 Oct 2020 18:46:42 -0400

I joined the army to be an aircraft mechanic and an aviator, because I wanted to be above all that stuff; that is to say on that one day in Vietnam when we got shot down and my infantry training from basic and AIT came flooding back to me! And I was glad it did, on that special day I fired my .38, my M-14, my M-60 and picked up a Purple Heart! I agree with you, any one who joins the military should be weapons qualified!

Response by SSgt Anthony Hellerstedt made Oct 13 at 2020 4:51 AM

SSgt Anthony Hellerstedt — Tue, 13 Oct 2020 04:51:40 -0400

SSgt Christ, since you were in the Air Force, you obviously are aware of the Air Force mission and how it differs from the sister branches. Or do you actually not know the difference? Every Airman has to qualify with the M4 at least once a year and more often leading up to a deployment. The Air Force is not a ground fighting force primarily. And that's ok! It doesn't need to emphasize weapons tactics or marksmanship like the Army or Marines. Having said that, I do agree Airman would benefit from more exposure to firearms, but I see it as a supplement, not a necessity as a well-functioning Airman. Also, don't place the blame on the Airmen for not knowing how to operate a rifle. Again, they get exposure at BMT and then only once a year after that, if they aren't in SF or a SpecOps job. Be patient with those fellow Airmen and maybe offer to train them after hours or have lunch with them and share your knowledge.

Response by MSgt Cesar Delgado made Oct 13 at 2020 11:05 AM

MSgt Cesar Delgado — Tue, 13 Oct 2020 11:05:45 -0400

As an old training manager, the real issues are resources, time and money. These are highly limited in any company, so you have to base your decisions on analysis of data. You have to take into account two documents, risk analysis and training analysis before spending any money. If the risk of an Air Force base getting attacked was high and the duties of that airmen included defending the base than you could justify the expense of training Air Force Personnel to a high degree of competency. However, the opposite is true, so as a training manager, I would recommend the money be spent in areas that were critical to the completion of the airman's duties. Yes, there are exceptions for airmen; Pjs and security forces need a high level of competency because their duties require it. Otherwise, I see no justification for using millions of training dollars on a task that has a low level of risk. So, again, we stay combat ready by using resources, time and money wisely and focusing on the duties of the Airman.

Response by CPT Lawrence Cichelli made Oct 13 at 2020 12:52 PM

CPT Lawrence Cichelli — Tue, 13 Oct 2020 12:52:36 -0400

I agree whole heartedly with you on this. Even in the Army, some only get very little training if any. When I first joined an Army Reserve Band, some asked me why we have to qualify with our rifles. I gave them a history lesson about what happened to the 28th ID band in the Battle of the Bulge. They got the point and never questioned it again.

Response by SMSgt Tea Elle made Oct 13 at 2020 4:13 PM

SMSgt Tea Elle — Tue, 13 Oct 2020 16:13:41 -0400

Having spent some time working with sister service members and in joint environments, I recognize that not all understand how we all fit together in this thing for "war" on a global perspective. BLUF: the Army is a ground/land fighting force. Soldiers are primarily Infantry first and MOS second. The AF is just what our name implies, we own the sky. Airmen are career field (AFSC) focused first. Defense training is secondary. That's why the most hated statement from an Airmen is "that's not my job." An Army unit will put a soldier where he's needed for the moment. The AF invests good money in AFSC training for Airmen so we only send the career fields that are needed, no extras, no floaters. There is a college degree program for every AFSC in the Air Force. Arming. Because the AF is specific on who does what, we are not trained for patrols. We are trained to defend our space, if you will. We have a professional Security Force that defends the base and will go out on patrols (looking for work

Response by MSgt James Slawson made Oct 14 at 2020 12:18 AM

MSgt James Slawson — Wed, 14 Oct 2020 00:18:13 -0400

All Air Force members are sent through a basic ground defense course and taught basic ground tactics. The Security Forces are the more advanced trained war fighters and trained to Defend the Air Base.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 14 at 2020 7:01 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 14 Oct 2020 19:01:55 -0400

As a comm troop, I need you to reset the base boundary router and reset the secure AFNET tunnel while not dropping any communications links for the base secure links.

Your expectation for comm troops to be infantry is laughable. Different jobs require different intelligence and mental requirements.

Response by SPC Marvin Darling made Oct 15 at 2020 9:49 PM

SPC Marvin Darling — Thu, 15 Oct 2020 21:49:51 -0400

The Air Force began it's service as The Army Air Corps...If you wanted to fly you joined the Army then became a pilot or gunner or what have you. At that point in time it was Army basic training then assignment just like current Army training. The Marine Corps was once an appendage of the Navy. The branches have since separated for purposes of more specified training and easement of command. The Government felt it was best to send orders out more directly to the Air, Sea and ground units if they were split.

Response by SrA Sheila Holmes made Oct 16 at 2020 10:04 AM

SrA Sheila Holmes — Fri, 16 Oct 2020 10:04:18 -0400

There are enough positive and compelling responses to your condescending question, so I’ll just state this: we joined for intelligence warfare -not to be Marines or Army infantry in hand-to-hand combat. The goal of the branches is completely different. Maybe take some time to appreciate the differences between the skillsets of all the branches instead of trying to make them all into your own.

Response by SSgt Ricardo Lugo made Oct 16 at 2020 11:31 PM

SSgt Ricardo Lugo — Fri, 16 Oct 2020 23:31:43 -0400

During my tour of duty all Air force members; including Air national guard have to qualify in the different weapons basic arms training doctrine war fare. That includes going to the weapons qualification range to be arms combat ready. Every year all members have to actualize and qualify in weapons management and firing techniques. And I am from the Gulf War Era. God Bless America and with a humble proud spirit; we hold the record of Air Supremacy (Air Force warriors of the air).

Response by MSgt Roger Bon made Oct 17 at 2020 3:04 AM

MSgt Roger Bon — Sat, 17 Oct 2020 03:04:43 -0400

To require Airmen to fulfill combat security duties two things would be affected"
1. Additional airmen would e required to man the aircraft and aircraft component maintenance and upkeep. The distraction combat duties would segregate all systems being maintained.
During my early years in the Air Force when wages and benefits were below a livable standard I had to work a second civiliAn job which paid more than my military pay, therefore my dedication was focused on the higher paying position. I made rank slower but my over all income was higher.

Focus on military technical equipment such as the complex aircraft and related systems would be degregated with the interruption of having to fill combat security duties.

Response by SSgt Russell Stevens made Oct 18 at 2020 5:03 PM

SSgt Russell Stevens — Sun, 18 Oct 2020 17:03:53 -0400

In the Air Force I was one of the combat ready forces. In the time I was on active duty there were only a few combat AFSCs and I was assigned to one of them. When I didn't have to qualify as often as the Army or Marines, I still went to a civilian range and got in practice with a weapon far superior to the M16, namely the AR15 I custom built for myself. That experience came in handy as the weapon the Air Force issued me for Desert Shield/Desert Storm proved to be defective.

Response by Capt Matt Mixon made Nov 10 at 2020 3:11 PM

Capt Matt Mixon — Tue, 10 Nov 2020 15:11:37 -0500

I see your argument however don’t know if it matters.

Just imagine the pandemonium if an order was made for every Airman to grab a rifle at a state side base. Few would know where the armory is located.

On that note...imagine how many times you could shave and grow your beard and shave again before they find enough gas masks for everyone to wear. Just sayin.

Response by CMSgt William Hutchinson made Nov 14 at 2020 1:55 PM

CMSgt William Hutchinson — Sat, 14 Nov 2020 13:55:46 -0500

I joined the Air Force in March 1962. As part of our basic training we were required to qualify with the M-1 Garrand rifle. In second phase we had to again qualify with the M-1. That included tear it down, clean it and out it back together. I was TDY to Vietnam and had to qualify with the M-16 before I left. When PCs to Vietnam in 1966 and again had to qualify with the M-16 and because I was a Medic also had to qualify with a 38 pistol. I could shoot 98 out of a hundred with the M-16.

Response by Lt Col Jim Bemis made Nov 15 at 2020 10:44 AM

Lt Col Jim Bemis — Sun, 15 Nov 2020 10:44:57 -0500

Yes, it is true that most airmen are not weapons qualified, and need not be. On the other hand, I do have some personal observations and experiences to mention. The first is that, the last I knew, as part of a special operations wing, there is a security forces group that specializes in bare bones base defense in overseas deployed locations. The second is that, in the course of my own career, I was qualified on the .38 revolver, the M16, the 9mm pistol, and the M4. I also got familiarization training with the GAU-5A, and the AK47. If course, these were all associated with either an overseas assignment, or a war zone deployment. So, whether I was any good or not, and whether most airmen get such training or not, it does sometimes happens.

Response by MSgt Kevin Carr made Nov 17 at 2020 3:55 PM

MSgt Kevin Carr — Tue, 17 Nov 2020 15:55:19 -0500

I believe they all should be. Even though I was POL, at one point there were FARP teams (forward arming and refueling points) it was just us and aircraft maintenance. We were responsible for our own defense. We all had to at least be qualified on use of M4/M16. The Army learned a hard lesson during the early days of Desert Storm. Some members of a transportation unit got separated from the main convoy and came under attack and some were captured, they didn’t know how to use their weapons.

Response by Lt Col Warren Domke made Nov 17 at 2020 10:13 PM

Lt Col Warren Domke — Tue, 17 Nov 2020 22:13:20 -0500

When I went to basic training at Lackland in 1960 the weapon we were expected to qualify on was the M1 carbine. Not a bad weapon but I had trouble qualifying with it. (Later I learned the problem was my dominant eye is my left eye and I am right handed.) As an officer several years later I had to qualify on the .38 revolver, which was easier because I naturally sighted with my left eye. Before going to Vietnam I qualified with the M16. While my tour did not involve combat, I prepared myself for the "what if" circumstances by becoming very familiar with both my .38 and my M16. I always traveled armed when we were going by road. I hoped I would never need that preparation, and--fortunately--I never did. Ground combat was never part of my specialty--public affairs--but I was determined I would defend myself if attacked. Thankfully I never needed that preparation.

Response by MSgt Mason Manner made Nov 18 at 2020 5:26 PM

MSgt Mason Manner — Wed, 18 Nov 2020 17:26:13 -0500

As a member that searved 33 years I'm a firm believer that the AF needs to adopt army bct as the model I retired in 08 and got tired of that's not my job I don't know don't want to learn ECT

Response by SSgt Frank Lanford made Dec 2 at 2020 3:38 PM

SSgt Frank Lanford — Wed, 02 Dec 2020 15:38:51 -0500

I am an OLD School SP, but my Son JUST went through BMT and the Security Forces Academy this year, and I was shocked to hear that Basic Trainees are currently issued a dummy M-4 to keep, carry and care for, throughout BMT, they also now have to certify with actual 5.56 ammo, and are required to get a passing score on their weapon before graduating from BMT, he got a lot more weapons training in the Security Forces Academy as expected, but the NEW weapons policy for regular Basic Trainees was REALLY good to hear about !!!! GO AIR FORCE !!!!!

Response by Sgt Mark F Jindrick made Dec 4 at 2020 1:48 AM

Sgt Mark F Jindrick — Fri, 04 Dec 2020 01:48:06 -0500

As an ex AF medic I can assure you that weapons training would come in handy. The AF has a bad habit of putting you in situations where such training would be helpful...ie..the med 'patchup' teams ( if they even still exist) from when I was in, in the early 70's...fwiw..when in basics, our range NCO's told us that because the AF was almost out of money, our practice rounds would be our qualifying rounds...I has hunted since I was 9 or so so I had somewhat of a leg up on most of the guys, but some had only seen pictures of the M16...not a confidence builder for me if TSHTF.
..

Response by Sgt Ed Beal made Dec 4 at 2020 12:41 PM

Sgt Ed Beal — Fri, 04 Dec 2020 12:41:26 -0500

I was in many moons ago and my AFSC (MOS? For others) had a security clearance that did not allow me to be in a hostile area? Let me tell you I was pissed when we trained with 22’s as my dad had an ar15 back then and I was hoping to learn what it took to create a m16. So disappointing... it was not until president Regan was elected that our unit ever even saw a firearm or a real m16 except on the AP’s and SP’s. After that we actually got to go to the range (I loved it) but most hated it and almost none could handle a 1911. That was at our base and many other commands did not have the war time training skills project.

I expected that when I enlisted and even though I could not be in a forward area I would loved additional training regularly the seals and rangers we worked with were awesome, I even learned a few things and I grew up shooting NRA small bore and trap shooting

Response by TSgt Robert Moore made Dec 9 at 2020 8:10 PM

TSgt Robert Moore — Wed, 09 Dec 2020 20:10:33 -0500

It bothers me to see this crap about the Air Force. I am retired after 20 years in the Air Force. And I was forced to learn the M-16 inside and out. EVERY Year I was in the Air Force-I had to qualify on the M-16 and a 9mm hand gun and be very proficient with both. I could field strip an M-16 and put it back together.

I retired 24+ years ago.

Response by SrA Daniel Frady made Dec 16 at 2020 9:24 AM

SrA Daniel Frady — Wed, 16 Dec 2020 09:24:35 -0500

For this very reason I was glad not all of the Air Force personnel carry.

Response by SMSgt Ed Turney made Dec 21 at 2020 10:32 PM

SMSgt Ed Turney — Mon, 21 Dec 2020 22:32:48 -0500

I agree it is outrageous and is exactly why i trained myself to as many weapons I could get ahold of. My grandson is now a SSgt in the USAF and I trained him on the civilian equivalentcivilian persons of the m-4 and the beretta 92 and a SIG P-320. My philosophy is ya gotta look out for yourself cause no one is gonna do it for you.

Response by SP5 James Elmore made Dec 21 at 2020 11:41 PM

SP5 James Elmore — Mon, 21 Dec 2020 23:41:50 -0500

My take is that putting a weapon in the hands of individuals who don’t fire a weapon routinely is a recipe for disaster. Keeping them qualified would be costly. However, I think quick reaction teams of those who could be spared in urgent situations could be trained and kept qualified. These teams could respond in an emergency.

Response by SSgt Tony Dibartolo made Dec 25 at 2020 9:36 PM

SSgt Tony Dibartolo — Fri, 25 Dec 2020 21:36:07 -0500

I can't reply for the new af but when I was in I q'd as expert out of basic and afterwards also this was with an m-16, the only reason I did not q with the m-9 was that our range was not good enough!

Response by SrA Alan Dirk Scott made Dec 26 at 2020 7:42 PM

SrA Alan Dirk Scott — Sat, 26 Dec 2020 19:42:37 -0500

I was Air Force during Vietnam. I had to qualify with an M-16, PT, Combat Training. Why in the world would not every branch of the service have to do this?

Response by SSgt Daniel d'Errico made Jan 21 at 2021 8:48 PM

SSgt Daniel d'Errico — Thu, 21 Jan 2021 20:48:08 -0500

During the Vietnam War, many non-security policemen were pulled from other AFSCs to augment SF. They were trained in the use of .38s, M-16s, M-60s and 60 to 84mm mortars (usually for illumination). Base defense was their main objective. But it didn't end in Vietnam/SEA. Units like Tactical Air Control (mobile radar units) had to be able to defend themselves. Why? Small SF detachments. So along with my AFSC (AGE) , I was selected to be trained on the M-60 (of which I already was qualified on) and the M-79 40mm grenade launcher. But like everything else there were goofball who wanted to play Rambo with two or more weapons. Therefore when my time was up in TAC AIR, no one else was trained to replace me.

Response by Col Tri Trinh made Jan 21 at 2021 11:19 PM

Col Tri Trinh — Thu, 21 Jan 2021 23:19:09 -0500

Most AF personnel never have the need to use or carry a weapon. If deploying into a combat zone, definitely just in time training for proficiency.

Response by SSgt Paul Mulwitz made Jan 23 at 2021 3:19 AM

SSgt Paul Mulwitz — Sat, 23 Jan 2021 03:19:11 -0500

For the most part the only Air Force members that see a combat zone are air crews. Even the people who maintain and arm the combat aircraft are usually stationed a long way from enemy soldiers. In my own case I spent 8 years in the regular AF and never touched a government weapon except in basic training. My first permanent station was in NY where I worked in the military pay office - a base level job. After that I was assigned to SAC HQ where nobody but police had any use for weapons. There were some officer details that required they strap on a pistol for courier duty but enlisted people don't do that. My last permanent station was in Washington DC. Again there were no weapons for any AF people there.

Response by MSgt Kenneth Horst made Jan 23 at 2021 12:25 PM

MSgt Kenneth Horst — Sat, 23 Jan 2021 12:25:01 -0500

You have to remember, the original placement of air bases was far from the front lines. If the enemy comes knocking on the front door of an air base, then you have a serious problem.

Response by SSgt Larry Orsborn made Jan 24 at 2021 2:12 PM

SSgt Larry Orsborn — Sun, 24 Jan 2021 14:12:05 -0500

I went in the Air Force in 1966. We had a couple days training during basic and we qualified with M-16’s. Then while in Germany I qualified again with M-1 (antique).

Response by SGT Josh Johnson made Jan 25 at 2021 2:53 PM

SGT Josh Johnson — Mon, 25 Jan 2021 14:53:47 -0500

The Air Force is one of our most expensive assets. It needs people of exceptional skill and intelligence, to keep everything running. The main fighting force of the Air Force is in the sky. We don't usually place our airbases and airfields where there is any likelihood of enemy interference.
Example: when I was in Iraq in 2003, the majority of our airmen were stationed in, took off from, and landed, in Kuwait or Saudi Arabia; there were airfields (that we took control of), which our airmen would land in, on occasion (supply, maintenance, fuel, but usually not extended grounding). Those are considered joint forces based, meaning that the Army (or Marines) were in control of and secured the base. When enemy engagements happened, the airmen would either get in the air, or hunker down. It was our job to protect them (and every other asset on basecamp).
The airmen that my unit was protecting, at various times, had weapons specialists, on board, as well as mechanics and pilots, as flight crew. The weapons specialist that I was privy to talk with, new about nearly every weapon system, had an M4, and a pistol, but much preferred his 50 Caliber machine gun (side door mounted). The weapons specialists seemed to take as much pride in knowing as many weapons systems as possible (much like us ground forces). He beat me, every time, when disassembling and reassembling the 50 Cal. He came very close to my time on the M4. His ability to break down, clean, and reassemble the 9mm, was better than even my platoon sergeant.
There are (few and far between) some airmen that can and do train with ground based weapons systems. However, if they have to use them, it is a VERY bad day.
It's much more important that they know how to get their aircraft in the air, and keep it there.

Response by Capt Mark Miller made Jan 26 at 2021 12:29 AM

Capt Mark Miller — Tue, 26 Jan 2021 00:29:37 -0500

The USAF is run by Pilots. To them, if it ain't flying, it ain't sh-t. Former USAF Security Police when we were the Bastards of the USAF. Now, thanks to the War On Terror, and the various Sand Boxes, I believe the Security Forces AFSC has more personnel than any other. I agree that everyone in the USAF needs to be taught the Warrior Spirit and maid to realize that there are no real Front Lines anymore, especially overseas you are always a target. Former Captain and Senior Special Agent in ICE. Nothing wrong with being taught some combat skills even as a 702.

Response by SSgt Rick Hines made Jan 26 at 2021 1:01 PM

SSgt Rick Hines — Tue, 26 Jan 2021 13:01:19 -0500

I believe that additional weapons training should be optional on AF or Joint installations. Going to Elite weapons training schools like Front Sight or Front Line should be optional for military members and should count as "extra curricular" achievements for those up for promotion.

Response by SSgt Ricardo Lugo made Jan 26 at 2021 8:07 PM

SSgt Ricardo Lugo — Tue, 26 Jan 2021 20:07:39 -0500

I was an Air Force Security Force during desert shield and storm. During my military tour all member of the Air Force had to qualify in basic combat weapons every year; to maintain there military position. I don't know if this has change during the passing time. But I differ that this has change; since all components of the Arm Forces are govern by a vision that's called; "Total Force Vision". DOD directives mandate that all members of the Arm Forces has to be combat ready 24/7. We still hold a record globally; are Total Force Vision has been successful from generation to generation. I recommend you to study more about are Total Force Concept; its very interest and how it has been so powerful in the national defense and global reach. So God help us to keep being the top Arm Forces of the world. Home of the Brave / In God we trust.

Response by MSgt Bill Miller made Jan 27 at 2021 11:56 AM

MSgt Bill Miller — Wed, 27 Jan 2021 11:56:11 -0500

I retired out of the “Brown” AF in 08; RED HORSE Airborne Flight Superintendent. Because of our mission package, we had to be as good as, or better than, the USA/USMC elements we worked with in the Airfield Seizure mission. This included every “Infantry Skill” in the book, from small unit tactics to global secure communications. That being said, there are very few situations where the average Blue Suiter will ever pick up a weapon, unless a sister service Commander directs it. Having IT personnel constantly carry around an unloaded M-4 and one magazine for eight months on Bagram AB was simply uncalled for. If the possibility of ground attack is present, then by all means train them to standard and arm them. AFQC prior to deployment does not even come close. It is situational, and requires the CoC to have a realistic perspective on the mission and objectives PRIOR to deployment.

Response by TSgt George Rodriguez made Jan 28 at 2021 9:23 PM

TSgt George Rodriguez — Thu, 28 Jan 2021 21:23:01 -0500

In the 20 years that I served in the Air Force we were sent to the gun range on base to qualify. I fired expert each year. While in Germany we had a gun range off the compound that we qualified at. This was in the mid 60's and we used the M1 carbine. Later we switched to the M14 then to the M16.

Response by SSgt Paul Millard made Jan 29 at 2021 7:52 AM

SSgt Paul Millard — Fri, 29 Jan 2021 07:52:52 -0500

Same reason Army doesn't need to know how to load a nuke onto a B52. Each branch has its assigned area of responsibility in conflicts. If it came to to a case of being overrun most AF have the basic skill to point and shoot at an enemy. Lastly, if the Army is overrun and needs AF personnel to pick up an M16, we are probably to too busy launching Nukes

Response by MSgt John Sharpe made Feb 8 at 2021 8:30 PM

MSgt John Sharpe — Mon, 08 Feb 2021 20:30:31 -0500

I served in Vietnam in the Air Force. I was a combat security and worked only during nighttime. Before I went to Vietnam, I was trained at Camp Bullis to be the infantry of the Air Force and was the second group to be trained this way. Now there are two units stationed at Fort Bragg that are trained as combat security forces. Every Air Force personnel should have been trained and qualified on the M- 16 in basic training. That is how it was in the old days of Air Force basic training. I don't know about today's training.

Response by TSgt Ken Vandevoort made Feb 17 at 2021 8:15 PM

TSgt Ken Vandevoort — Wed, 17 Feb 2021 20:15:05 -0500

Things must have changed. We qualified every year. When I was a ground radio operator at an overseas site, we had our own weapon and 125 rounds. If something happened, we were our own and only defense.

Response by SPC Steve Mason made Feb 19 at 2021 3:45 PM

SPC Steve Mason — Fri, 19 Feb 2021 15:45:03 -0500

This reminds me of the clerk/typist/translator in Saving Private Ryan. Although it was Army personnel.
Capt Miller: DId you fire the weapon in basic training?
Cpl Upum: Yes Sir
Capt Miller: Then grab your gear ......

Response by MSgt Mason Manner made Feb 19 at 2021 5:34 PM

MSgt Mason Manner — Fri, 19 Feb 2021 17:34:04 -0500

I was a CE IMA FOR 25YEARS(8AD)FOR THE MAJORITY OF MY CAREER I MAINTAINED MY M9 M16 QUALIFICATION ONE YEAR WHILE ASSIGNED TO LANGLEY WE WENT TO THE CG RANGE WHERE A FEMALE AIRMAN PURPOSELY FAILED QUALIFICATION THE FOLLOWING DAY AS I ENTERED THE BASE WHO DO YOU THINK I SAW ON THE GATE?WHAT A DANGEROUS JOKE

Response by CPT Carolyn Andrews made Feb 21 at 2021 12:19 PM

CPT Carolyn Andrews — Sun, 21 Feb 2021 12:19:35 -0500

If your plan goes down you need to be able to defend yourself and UR crew

Response by CPT Carolyn Andrews made Feb 21 at 2021 12:20 PM

CPT Carolyn Andrews — Sun, 21 Feb 2021 12:20:23 -0500

Meant to put plane not plan.

Response by SSG Jim Kissane made Feb 21 at 2021 7:53 PM

SSG Jim Kissane — Sun, 21 Feb 2021 19:53:32 -0500

If you're crew and lose your aircraft (mechanical, enemy fire), it still is necessary to be competent in handling combat arms to find your way to safety

Response by A1C Riley Sanders made Feb 22 at 2021 9:45 AM

A1C Riley Sanders — Mon, 22 Feb 2021 09:45:36 -0500

What are my thoughts ?
I joined the Air Force in 1963 mainly because they are a non-combatant military service, Combat is for the Army and Marines, However in times of War that scenario changes especially if you are headed to a Country at war , most certainly should be given an extended course in weapons , that being said I agree with the above writer, I thought weapons training was a part of Basic training ? in those day's I thought the training was pretty good , I trained on several weapons including the old M-1 and just before shipping to Vietnam we were given an extended course in weapons, If the Air Force has slacked off with weapons training they need to rethink and re engage in this course especially with the times we are in , I feel the Air Force should be called last but be ready should they be called.

Response by Sgt Pete Kondrosky made Feb 22 at 2021 1:02 PM

Sgt Pete Kondrosky — Mon, 22 Feb 2021 13:02:58 -0500

Myself in USAF boot camp (aka BMT) 12/1964-3/1965..
Briefly..
3/1965-7/1965 tech school, then PCS' (7/1965-10/1967) to McChord AFB, WA..then PCS to Udorn, Thailand, 10/1967-10/1968, then my DD-214.
During my/our BMT (again..12/1964-3/1965), we fired the M-1, wood stock carbine...a VERY nice weapon. To my knowledge..an airman couldn't pass boot camp unless he DID qualify/pass rifle range.
I know women didn't fire back then, because my wife was also USAF, BMT 1966, and she told me so.
Once a troop was PCS, they STILL had to qualify/pass rifle training/firing...once a year as I recall.
Overseas...no 'qualifying'...only the 'real thing' if and when it happened'.

Bottom line...
I know USAF life has REALLY changed, and in MY opinion...NOT all for the GOOD. ..for one thing FAR too much PC crap.
As far as NO more rifle range/qualifying in boot camp, and PCS thereafter...MY questions would be, as another poster questioned...
- WHY...NO rifle qualifying in BMT, and yearly after PCS?
- What happened to troop readiness?
- What the Hell has HAPPENED to the USAF?

I have a LOT more questions regarding the USAF (today), but not for this forum.

Pete

Response by Capt Paul Valentine made Feb 22 at 2021 2:22 PM

Capt Paul Valentine — Mon, 22 Feb 2021 14:22:51 -0500

As an enlisted military policeman (1950 to (1958) I can agree with the argument that every airman should qualify with a rifle at lease once a year. Later (1967), as an officer in Vietnam, I was shot at - but was not allowed a weapon to return fire. That was sad. Fortunately, the army and marines drove the Viet Cong off the base. Now, I believe that every American citizen should qualify with a rifle. (provided they are physically and mentally able). Atomic bombs are for a different war than a take-over of American cities such as Washington D.C. experienced on Jan 6, 2021. If they were qualified with a weapon, their attitude gun ownership would also change.

Response by FN Charlie Spivey made Feb 23 at 2021 9:55 AM

FN Charlie Spivey — Tue, 23 Feb 2021 09:55:50 -0500

In the Coast Guard, if you are on a Shore unit, you qualify regularly, or supposed to. Usually at the Nearest Army Base, When I was at Cape Cod Canal, it was Ft. Devons. Until I got Deployed to Vietnam, it was with the Colt Model 1911 .45 and M1 Garand. On the way to Nam, I was introduced to the Mattel special ( M16 ). Although the CG is NOT under the DoD, it does maintain a military prescience. Aboard ship you are constantly running drills and once a year you get to spend two weeks in sunny GITMO and run through the wringer by the Navy. Hopefully you get the big "E" across the board. Shore units ( Lifeboat Stations and such ) they usually run something called "Operation Webfoot". The goal of the aggressors is to sabotage the station. Our goal was to make sure they didn't. Not a good feeling to go down to the boats in the morning and find a mock up up a bundle of Dynamite and a note that says, "BOOM !!!!". I have heard that they used Navy Seals for that, but not real sure of that. I am of a mind that they were just Navy Divers, but possibly CG divers for that matter. Web Foot, GITMO, Longest two weeks of my life. In Vietnam, we operated under ComWesPac 7th Fleet.

Response by TSgt Tommy Amparano made Feb 23 at 2021 5:30 PM

TSgt Tommy Amparano — Tue, 23 Feb 2021 17:30:03 -0500

Good question and my short answer is that is it is not an effective use of resources. When I first went in, in the early 90s, we had our basic training instruction on the M-16. After that it was may once a year then every 3 years. Since I was in medical I was considered a non-combatant anyway. As much as I loved firing and had my own personal guns, I didn't really see the point in the Air Force only having us go every three years. Now if I was in Security Forces, I would want some range time at least monthly. I mean either justify it and have us get really trained or make us familiar with the weapon in case of an extreme situation. That is pretty much the route AF leadership went. I think our regular jobs were demanding enough and some are extremely technical, but I would have given the effort to be proficient if ordered to. I just never was. Oh and I am not saying the Army doesn't have some extremely difficult MOS's either.

Response by Sgt Chester Knott made Feb 23 at 2021 11:44 PM

Sgt Chester Knott — Tue, 23 Feb 2021 23:44:37 -0500

I too believe that all members of the forces, with the exception of medical personnel (non combatants) should at least know how to fire the M16 or what it is now days they are using (M16 when I was in Security Forces also) and then if the medical person wants to be qualified, then they ask to be. But if not mistaken, if you are in medical you work under the red cross.

Response by LCpl Richard Lally made Feb 24 at 2021 6:26 PM

LCpl Richard Lally — Wed, 24 Feb 2021 18:26:22 -0500

It is because of the Korean War. Only infantry had weapons training. Cooks, Admin personnel and any other MOS were not required to be range quailified

Response by SGM Joel Cook made Feb 24 at 2021 9:12 PM

SGM Joel Cook — Wed, 24 Feb 2021 21:12:01 -0500

As a whole every Air Force person that was on my Joint TO&E at Balat Air Base in Iraq was not qualified on their personal weapon. Did not know how to properly load nor clear those weapons let alone fire at a target and hit it. When I first experienced the problems of transiting a checkpoint where weapons were required to be cleared we regularly had at least one AF negligent discharge. My OIC was an AF 0-6 and he had at least three NDs I know about. He and I had a meeting to figure out a solution to prevent this from happening because no mater how many times proper clearing procedures were taught ND still occurred regularly. Finally we had to enforce a policy that the senior Army, Navy, or USMC NCO in each vehicle had to clear every weapon in the vehicle. After we started this technique we only had one ND in the remaining nine months in Iraq. That person received a field grade Art 15 because the newly arrived CSM in charge of the post said NDs will no longer be tolerated and the automatic punishment would be Field Grade Art 15 or Courts Marshal if the Art 15 was refused. ND still occasionally occurred but at a very reduced rate compared to earlier in the deployment. AF Senior NCOs told us when we asked them that they had not fired their weapon for record in several years because it was not required. Nor did higher level leaders believe it was important to prepare AF personnel to defend themselves prior to the deployment even though it was stated that part of our mission was convoy operations to other posts to perform sight surveys for equipment upgrades and refurbishment of worn out systems. In my opinion the Air Force as a hole is broken when it come to weapons.

Response by A1C Eugene Young made Feb 24 at 2021 10:17 PM

A1C Eugene Young — Wed, 24 Feb 2021 22:17:25 -0500

I ENLISTED AFTER THE KOREAN WAR BEGAN 1950. I already knew how toaim and fire a rifle. I A agree that Airman should train with arms . But that was then and Now is Now ! Lighten up!

Response by TSgt John Burres made Feb 25 at 2021 7:23 AM

TSgt John Burres — Thu, 25 Feb 2021 07:23:48 -0500

My initial training was as an Army troop back during the Viet Nam War. After my service was up and a ten year break I returned to the ANG for an additional 22 years. My last and best job there was as a CATM Instructor. I also was shooting service rifle competition for the Guard (M-14). I saw many, many airmen come through my classes that were incompetent even after several remedial classes, and have always felt that those folks shouldn't be in service. The Conflicts we have fought in since WW II should have taught us that Air Force units will be deployed to areas where it is possible for an enemy to infiltrate and attack, and I have stressed that ALL personnel IMHO ought to be proficient in the use of weapons. Not a popular opinion w/ most commanders as it means more training time and $$'s spent on only a possibility.

Response by SrA George Gomez made Feb 25 at 2021 4:15 PM

SrA George Gomez — Thu, 25 Feb 2021 16:15:35 -0500

I was a Airman in the late 70's, we fired the M 16 only once during Basic and had to qualify if we went Overseas. Essentially we were the weapons, I was a weapons loader for the F-4 E fighters at Osan Airbase ROK. Loading bombs and missiles so the pilots could do their job. Besides the Air Force personnel we had both the Marines and Army stationed there so we did not need to carry weapons. It maybe different now with our conflicts overseas, I don't see any reason why Airman should not be qualified to shoot a rifle if the need arises. That being said, there are people in all branches that should not be armed due to personal issues.

Response by SSgt Brian Burch made Feb 26 at 2021 11:54 AM

SSgt Brian Burch — Fri, 26 Feb 2021 11:54:40 -0500

I was a mechanic with the 20th SOS in Vietnam. Had virtually no trigger time before deployment. When I got to BMT, I searched out a team member and asked if he would teach me the ins and outs of the M14 & M16. After a few days of instruction I went to the range and blazed through about 1000 rounds per weapon per week. One thing we had plenty of was ammo. Can in handy during a few attacks on the camp. Recently I bought a couple of Ruger mini-14s, a mini-30 for myself, a pair of .40 Glocks, a LCR .22 magnum. a LCR .22LR and taught my wife how to handle them all. We both have CWPs. We mostly shoot the 10/22s and LCR .22LR. Saving the other stuff for "a time like this".

Response by SSgt Brian Burch made Feb 26 at 2021 1:47 PM

SSgt Brian Burch — Fri, 26 Feb 2021 13:47:10 -0500

I learned how to shoot while in Vietnam. We had plenty of ammunition. I had a daily range trip with the M14 & M16. Came in handy on many occasions when the North attacked the camp. The SF guys showed me everything I needed to know to help defend the compound. When I got home I never messed with firearms for 40+ years. I decided my wife I needed a CWP. I bought a pair of .40 Glocks and 2 x Walmart 10/22s. I picked up 2 Mini-14s and 1x Mini-30 (for myself). Recently I bought LCR in .22 magnum and a LCR in .22LR. With all that's going on and the threats being made towards white people especially I believe it's necessary to be prepared. I am not and have never been a racist. My hope is things will settle down so I and everyone else can finish in peace.

Response by Sgt Larry Like made Feb 26 at 2021 2:18 PM

Sgt Larry Like — Fri, 26 Feb 2021 14:18:02 -0500

I was in the air force from 1966 to 1970and we had to qualify with the M1 in boot camp. I qualified
expert, out of boot I qualified with M 16. I was in the 803 CES squadron. I agree with you we needed better training. I don't want to have to depend on the army for everything. .Who knows maybe one of us would pull there ass out of the fire.

Response by SSgt Brian Burch made Feb 26 at 2021 3:23 PM

SSgt Brian Burch — Fri, 26 Feb 2021 15:23:48 -0500

Everyone try to remain calm in these difficult days. I recall having to fight through the hippies at SF airport.

Response by TSgt Lewis Gallton made Feb 26 at 2021 6:00 PM

TSgt Lewis Gallton — Fri, 26 Feb 2021 18:00:00 -0500

I came into the AF in July 71, I was assigned as a Combat cook and placed in Prime Ribs. This was a rapid deployment team, had to have bags packed 24 hours a day, also had to qualify on the M-16. Received my expert marksmanship during this time. I can rember having races to see who could tear down there weapon, clean it and put it back together. I did this for 13 years and then was transferred to Electronic Countermeasure on the B-52. Never seen the M-16 again for my last 7 years of service. Did however carried classified from the communications department to the shop and was trained on the 9Mm.

Response by PO1 RIchard Petty made Feb 27 at 2021 4:24 PM

PO1 RIchard Petty — Sat, 27 Feb 2021 16:24:20 -0500

I agree that all personnel that are in the military be trained annually on weapons that will be used at what duty station that are assigned to in CONUS or OCONUS. Even if your job is might be considered non-combatant should still be able to shoot a gun and defend your self.

Response by SSgt Michael Bowen made Feb 28 at 2021 4:31 PM

SSgt Michael Bowen — Sun, 28 Feb 2021 16:31:09 -0500

Seeing as how their last line of defense is going to be themselves I have to agree they should know how to at least shoot proficiently . for their own defense .

Response by Cpl Kent Mitchell made Feb 28 at 2021 6:27 PM

Cpl Kent Mitchell — Sun, 28 Feb 2021 18:27:19 -0500

It scares me to imagine all those guys carrying weapons in the streets. I know a former Air Police guy who probably agrees.

Response by A1C Leland Pollitt made Mar 1 at 2021 11:02 AM

A1C Leland Pollitt — Mon, 01 Mar 2021 11:02:18 -0500

When I became Perm. Party after finishing Tech School and Instructor Training at Lowry AFB in 1955, Were trained on M1 Garand, M1 Carbine, M3 Grease Gun and 45 Colt ACP. This was in response to Army no longer offering protection. I also had training while in the US Army Reserve at FT Knox. Grew up handling Weapons as a child in a Hunting House Hole. Needless to say I didn't have a problem zeroing in my weapon

Response by A1C Leland Pollitt made Mar 1 at 2021 11:07 AM

A1C Leland Pollitt — Mon, 01 Mar 2021 11:07:25 -0500

When I was assigned to Lowry AFB in 1955 after Tech and Instructor training we were required to qualify on M1 Garand, M1 Carbine M3 Grease Gun and 45 Colt ACP. Having grown up with Hunting weapons I didn"t have a problem zeroing in my Weapon.I had also qualified with the Garand at FT Knox in the Army Reserve prior to AF Duty

Response by CMSgt William Tompson made Mar 3 at 2021 7:16 AM

CMSgt William Tompson — Wed, 03 Mar 2021 07:16:47 -0500

Don't know if your still interested but I was at Plleiku RVN 67-68. At the time I was an E-4 57150.

Response by CPL Jason Northedge made Mar 3 at 2021 7:21 PM

CPL Jason Northedge — Wed, 03 Mar 2021 19:21:36 -0500

SP's are qualified in small arms. They were deployed with us (army MP's) to central America. But like you said they were very under trained and looked like scared deer in headlights. Some missions required us to substitute MPs in for them. I guess it is what it is.

Response by MSgt Clinton Craddock made Mar 7 at 2021 11:36 PM

MSgt Clinton Craddock — Sun, 07 Mar 2021 23:36:48 -0500

My two cents. I was stationed in two different units that deployed me to Vietnam. In both cases we were required to qualify on the M-16 and actually deployed with them. But upon arrival, the weapons and ammo were taken away and locked up.

And during one attack on the base we were instructed to get out of our vans and hunker down behind the sandbag walls. Then the whatever force searching for the sappers damn near shit at us. Only thing that saved our asses was our vehement cursing at the idiots who were going to shoot at us.

After that I and my crew NEVER trusted ANY security force that was supposed to protect us.

Response by A1C Burt Vanasse made Mar 8 at 2021 6:00 AM

A1C Burt Vanasse — Mon, 08 Mar 2021 06:00:27 -0500

I was disappointed with my air force training in the 60,s

Response by SFC Melvin Brandenburg made Mar 8 at 2021 6:02 AM

SFC Melvin Brandenburg — Mon, 08 Mar 2021 06:02:15 -0500

Unlike the air force everyone in the army is a soldier first.

Response by MSgt John Riley made Mar 8 at 2021 12:59 PM

MSgt John Riley — Mon, 08 Mar 2021 12:59:24 -0500

I agree with only one comment. Kimpo

Response by LtCol Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 12 at 2021 10:48 PM

LtCol Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 12 Mar 2021 22:48:40 -0500

Oh, but they can direct a A-10 Warthog on your @$$ better than you can shoot!

Response by Sgt John Leavor made Mar 13 at 2021 4:16 AM

Sgt John Leavor — Sat, 13 Mar 2021 04:16:06 -0500

I don't know if things have changed, when I went through basic in 68, we had to qualify with the m16. When I went to Nam, we were given augmentee training on other weapons, 50 cal, 60 cal, grenade launchers, grenades, and 38s. If the base was attacked we were a back up to the Army and Marines.

Response by Maj Martin Smith made Apr 14 at 2021 11:41 AM

Maj Martin Smith — Wed, 14 Apr 2021 11:41:30 -0400

In August of '65 I had to qualify on the M-16 before going to Vietnam. Only other weapon I used in the AF before that was a S&W .38 revolver in OTS.

Response by SSgt Richard DeChiara made Apr 14 at 2021 6:00 PM

SSgt Richard DeChiara — Wed, 14 Apr 2021 18:00:09 -0400

I too, was Security Forces (Security Police-Security Specialist) when I was serving. We had a Security Augmentee support group. They had their primary AFSC, but would be weapon trained and certified to assist us in the event we need them. The majority of Air Force personnel do not receive weapons training after Basic. Does a Cook or Doctor need to be trained on weapons? Probably not, especially if enough other groups are. There might be exceptions for AF Personnel stationed in hostile war zones. I've been out for some time, so I'm not sure about recent changes, if any.

Response by PO2 Kenneth Barker made Apr 14 at 2021 8:57 PM

PO2 Kenneth Barker — Wed, 14 Apr 2021 20:57:55 -0400

I believe EVERYONE should have at least a basic gun knowledge. Who knows when he/she may need to defend ones self? Or family?

Response by SSG George Duncan made Apr 14 at 2021 9:48 PM

SSG George Duncan — Wed, 14 Apr 2021 21:48:04 -0400

because/i think/that if the other get to where you'll are we have all ready lost so become VC

Response by MSgt Gary Hinkelman made Apr 15 at 2021 12:34 PM

MSgt Gary Hinkelman — Thu, 15 Apr 2021 12:34:53 -0400

Garrett,
You have the right to your opinion, but if I was still on active duty, I'd take offense. I think most people do not realize that the USAF's mission is different than Army or Marines. We rely upon other branches and the USAF SF to protect us when needed. You need me crewing my fighter jet, more than carrying a gun. Again, it is your job to defend my multimillion-dollar fighter jet and my ass too. All along while I am preparing our pilots to drop bombs and blow stuff up with the aircraft.

Yes, when overseas I have carried a gun during my time crewing my jets. However, that is not a normal SOP for most USAF bases. If ever needed, I can promise you that most USAF members will take up a gun and defend.

I think you are expecting USAF members to be as skilled as you are and that is not fair to them. Also, the USAF does not normally allow members to practice using the M16 whenever they want. I know if I would have had that option, I would have done it (cause it's fun).

What can you do to give other members the chance to improve their skills?

Response by SSgt Tony Wilson Sr made Apr 16 at 2021 4:53 AM

SSgt Tony Wilson Sr — Fri, 16 Apr 2021 04:53:02 -0400

I was an 811X2 in the AF for 7 yrs, Law Enforcement Specialist. Went to initial combat (Base Protection) at Camp Bullis in San Antonio TX. Was assigned to TAC and did joint exercises with Army and SOF. Training for me was with .38 revolver, M16A1, M60 (Pig) and M2 (MA Duece). We learned infantry tactics, small unit tactics, fire and maneuver skills so WE have our "Shit" together. I got out in '84.

Response by LTC Kenneth Black made Apr 16 at 2021 9:12 AM

LTC Kenneth Black — Fri, 16 Apr 2021 09:12:42 -0400

I was a photo technician in Thailand in 1975 and was pulled to be a "security police augmentee" to help protect the base. They gave us about 2 weeks training in weapons, flares, crew served weapons, etc. It was woefully inadequate, but I had grown up with guns, so I was not uncomfortable performing that duty, even when we had the occasional probing of the perimeter by communist forces. At one point, we were surrounded by 5,000 Chinese Army forces for about a week. Had they actually attacked, with only around 300 security forces and about 250 Marines on the base, we were toast if it weren't for the close air support that kept them at bay. I totally agree with you, airmen should be riflemen too.

Response by CWO3 Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 16 at 2021 10:02 AM

CWO3 Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 16 Apr 2021 10:02:31 -0400

Not essential for all Airmen, based on their mission. Hotel Security has their back besides.

Response by SSG Samuel Kermon made Apr 16 at 2021 11:04 AM

SSG Samuel Kermon — Fri, 16 Apr 2021 11:04:25 -0400

You are trying to teach and that is laudable. When I want toboot camp I didn't know much about tge M16 but my instructors had to teach me. Don't give up or get angry. Just keep swinging away.

Response by Capt Rob Carty made Apr 16 at 2021 11:25 AM

Capt Rob Carty — Fri, 16 Apr 2021 11:25:43 -0400

As an Air Force JAG in the 90s (a lawyer, for crying out loud), I had to qualify on the M-9 to be eligible for mobility status. Have things changed??

(Also, good job, RallyPoint, with suggesting this post to me six years later.

Response by CPO Dale Dietzman made Apr 16 at 2021 11:27 AM

CPO Dale Dietzman — Fri, 16 Apr 2021 11:27:21 -0400

CPO here, long out of the Reserves, after a total of 26 1/2, 8 1/2 being Active Duty. My very first PCS orders were to the "Naval Air Facility, Cam Ranh Bay, Republic of Vietnam" where, though independent, we were still technically a tenant command of Cam Ranh Bay AF Base. We were in their outermost perimeter, across the (shared) runways. Before being deployed to the (very hot) War Zone, even if in a somewhat "cooler' area, besides having to go through SERE School, [in case of needing to evade capture, or being a POW] we spent a week at Camp Pendleton, with a few Coasties mixed in, who were going too. We had to qualify with the M-16, the .45 pistol, and at least fire the 50 caliber machine gun. To give us confidence in what fire you can lay down, we did night firing, on static vehicle targets, 20 men at a time, with magazines of "all tracers". We lit up California's night sky! Upon arrival, as part of my 'check in' I had to repeat the "qualification" on M-16, .45, and 50 cal, to be issued my "gun card". When standing armed watches, at night, by duty section, your "gun card" was used to check out an M-16, a bet of pouches with magazines, preloaded, and a (primitive) "starlight scope". I can't speak for how the AF treated security, but just before I arrived, they had had one major ammo dump "blown away" by the VC/NVA, no matter how "protected" our area was supposed to be. We were drawing "hazardous duty pay" for a reason. In later years, I never had to qualify with personal weapons UNTIL I pulled a three months rotation of "Security Police" duty at NAS Key West, as a PO1. Just before leaving AD. My 'going away present", though they didn't KNOW I was not "reuping" again. Same-oh-same-oh, without the 50 cal machine gun, but WITH the 12 gauge "riot" shotgun. Which you had to shoot 'from the hip'. Others were blowing holes in the coral, or cutting the tops out of mangrove trees. Old country boy here, I cut all three "man" targets in half, at the belt buckle line. Even 'Guns", who ran the range, was impressed. So I saw both sides. Yes, most of the time the AF isn't "up close and personal" with an enemy using those kinds of weapons. The Navy is usually more concerned about torpedoes and such, than 7.62 or 5.56 ammo. BUT that said, EVERY rule has it's exceptions. Having a cadre of select individuals, who have rotated thru Security Duty, TDY, in their career, like I went to SP duty (and it most definitely wasn't Shore Patrol, LOL) would likely be a good, pro-active policy for the AF. And those who shouldn't be carrying a weapon, ever, won't be in that group. But you never know what "the next war" will bring. Being ready for contingencies that HAVE arisen, in the past, prevents "PPP".

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 16 at 2021 2:32 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 16 Apr 2021 14:32:00 -0400

I completely agree with you. A Warfighter is a Warfighter. I believe that these Warfighters must have a more than basic knowledge of small arms (to include the M16/M4 rifles) and be proficiently qualified to use them. Some of the answers I read give me the impression that such skills are beneath the Air Force and they have no time for it with statements such as the Army or Marines are tasked with facility security. Anywhere I’ve been to, regardless if I’m in the rear or forward deployed in theater, there has been an accessible training range. In the end we are all responsible for our own lives and even Airmen have the right to the knowledge that may save their them. In just over half a century the US Air Force has fallen far away from its roots in the Army Air Corps and The US Army. Unit Commanders should have the facilities and materials to train their personnel in firearm proficiency.

Response by SSG Edward Tilton made Apr 16 at 2021 4:07 PM

SSG Edward Tilton — Fri, 16 Apr 2021 16:07:17 -0400

A shame, they have the best uniforms, They didn’t have a clue in Vietnam. I guess it is tradition. I remember in Korea in 1964 the entire 7th Infantry Division would do a five mile rifle and pack every Wednesday evening after chow. When you got used to it, it became easy

Response by SSG Edward Tilton made Apr 16 at 2021 4:09 PM

SSG Edward Tilton — Fri, 16 Apr 2021 16:09:46 -0400

what will they do if they are overrun or there are turncoats. They need to be able to perform basic soldiers er tasks

Response by SN Greg Scott made Apr 18 at 2021 12:18 AM

SN Greg Scott — Sun, 18 Apr 2021 00:18:49 -0400

The Navy is the same way as the Air Force. Although we dont prioritize rifle training becasue its not the mission of the sailors, we are all trained in the Colt .45 cal 1911 in boot camp and some in the shotgun once we get to the fleet. But mostly we are trained in our specific job ratings along with our assigned shipboard battle stations during any combat at sea.

Response by SPC Bill Ratajczak made Apr 18 at 2021 10:38 AM

SPC Bill Ratajczak — Sun, 18 Apr 2021 10:38:38 -0400

Fly boys and firearms? Sounds like a unlikely and slightly dangerous combination. There would a rash of blue on blue incidents. Lol

Response by CPT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 18 at 2021 5:44 PM

CPT(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 18 Apr 2021 17:44:00 -0400

I feel like this is a trap...but I’ll answer anyway. Because they basically work at an airport.

Response by SrA Daniel Loving made Apr 19 at 2021 12:43 AM

SrA Daniel Loving — Mon, 19 Apr 2021 00:43:13 -0400

When I was in the AF our mission was then the world is now. When I went through basic we received one day with m16 for familiarization and one day on the range. There was never any direct instruction on weapons or the finer details of shooting. Like SMSgt Merich said the AF has always used an assigned detatchment.

Response by LCDR Mike Morrissey made Apr 19 at 2021 5:29 AM

LCDR Mike Morrissey — Mon, 19 Apr 2021 05:29:19 -0400

Having been a ship’s weapons officer, an NAG on PBRs in Vietnam, and Ops Officer, Nuke Weaps Security amongst other opportunities to express my manhood with everything from a .38 to M79, Ma Deuce, the mini, and 3”/50s, the Navy requirement for being qualed on a particular weapon is determined by the billet assigned. A certain type of shipboard response team is required to qual with specific weapons. Then there are the CBs, PhibCBs, ACU, IUW, of course SpecWar and the list goes on. However there is no requirement for every sailor to stay qual’d with any particular weapon. If one considers a ship with hundreds (thousands for the biggies) of sailors who serve in billets ranging from papers, to engines, to electronics, weapons (mostly much bigger than any .50 cal—think missiles ) and cooking to summarize a few, and also wants all required to stay current with a .45, 9MM, or the rifle of the day, that person just isn’t in touch with reality.

On the other hand there was an NBC Whitepaper Report (decades ago) which looked at the training of the DOD reserve components and NG units. One particular part of the report showed Navy Reserve units having the w/e drills of “firearms training”. The training was all about finding some place to shoot and borrowing weapons from somebody’s armory. A grand time was had by all. Everyone got to shoot. However nearly all never did the other more important part of the training—breaking down, servicing the weapon and learning how to effectively use the type weapon in hand. That NBC report did a lot of good. The hammer came down throughout the Naval Reserve (and the other components) and funding and other assets slowly started to bring us back into battery.

It’s one thing to know how to load a clip, slip it into the weapon, chamber a round, point the weapon and pull the trigger, it’s entirely a different thing to include its proper maintenance and drilling in its effective use. The latter takes time and energy. Time and energy away from mission essential specific training and fulfilling the plethora of requirements for advancement for a sailor.

Any sailor who wants to learn about a weapon can find ways to do so. But, if anyone thinks sailors (enlisted/officer) on bases and ships should walk around with pistols and holsters or have easy access to them, there are funny farms waiting.

The above addresses Navy stuff because that’s what I know. However my father and father in law were both WWII and Korea aircrews. Both were gunners who thought easy access was dangerous and only billet requirements should determine access and use of small arms. They and I well knew the incidents of accidental discharges resulting in fatalities or disabling injuries when small arms are not tightly controlled.

Response by PO3 Adam Stoflet made Apr 19 at 2021 1:12 PM

PO3 Adam Stoflet — Mon, 19 Apr 2021 13:12:50 -0400

Allow me to share my opinion from the Navy, when we went to boot camp all we did was the 9mm and the shotgun, no rifle though. Then once I got out to the Fleet I was told by one of my supervisors that because of my rate as Damage Controlman that basically we would never need that type of training. I was kinda surprised but I looked for my own rationalization and came up with this idea, That my job of fire fighting, CBRN, flooding and other bits of repair to the ship where gonna happen when others where fighting. So while other people where doing the war fighting I would be having to put out the fires, fixing the holes, helping with first aid, keeping the ship afloat while they where dealing with the threat.

A prime example was when my ship was doing anti-pirate opps while the VBSS (Visit Board Search & Seizure) team was out doing the inspection I was on the flight deck team helping refuel the helicopter that was providing air support.

So I would put it like this, while other Airman are the fighting force, other would have to engage in support of them, like loading bombs on planes, fueling fighters jets, sitting in radar control rooms directing air traffic, relaying critical info etc.

I hope this helps or at lest explains how some people got there.

Not everyone one can fight, but they can support the fight in their own way.

Response by SSgt James Farlow made Apr 19 at 2021 5:16 PM

SSgt James Farlow — Mon, 19 Apr 2021 17:16:19 -0400

USAF was not always a force with members unqualified on weapons. During my Basic Training during October - December 1954 (11 weeks) all trainees were required to qualify on the M1 Carbine which was the USAF weapon of choice. I qualified at the Sharpshooter level with the M1 Carbine. After Basic Training I didn't see a carbine again until I was assigned to Incirlik AFB in Turkey. I worked at the HF radio transmitter site which was located near one end of the runway. That location was equipped with one loaded M1 Carbine for defensive purposes (vastly under-gunned, I know). Later during my tour every man assigned to the site was issued an M1 Carbine for defensive purposes. Those days are obviously long gone in USAF. I just wanted to remind everyone that there once was a time in USAF when we at least knew what an M1 Carbine was.

Response by SSgt Robert Van Buhler III made Apr 19 at 2021 5:32 PM

SSgt Robert Van Buhler III — Mon, 19 Apr 2021 17:32:38 -0400

When I went through basic training we had to qualify, and I had to requalify a couple years later, but the USAF was then lax about qualifying on an M-16, not to mention 5BX qualifications. Basically there were not enough M-16s to go around. I was on a squadron competitive rifle team for a while and we used M-1 carbines. As far as PT qualification, shame on the Air Force. When they did start testing my great memory was fat Staff Sergeants with 12 or more years of service waddling along the road desperately trying to get ready for testing. I would say there were far too few opportunities to shoot in the Air Force, and far too little encouragement to keep in shape. They were not to good on keeping track of vaccinations and dental exams. You pretty much had to be proactive in all regards.

Response by TSgt David Olson made Apr 20 at 2021 2:44 PM

TSgt David Olson — Tue, 20 Apr 2021 14:44:22 -0400

I seem to remember a similar question a year or so back. I responded then and I’ll do so now. I started my military career in the Army. During eight weeks of basic training, one week was devoted to the rifle range. The Army considered all members as riflemen regardless of their primary speciality. Some years later I was in the Air National guard as a security police NCO. I had to qualify with both my .38 caliber revolver and M-16 twice a year. Most other members of the tactical fighter unit went out, reluctantly once a year, to shoot their M-16s. A few years later I was in the AF Reserve as an IMA, assigned to an AD security forces squadron. I had to qualify twice a year with my 9 mm Beretta and rifle. One day I was qualifying with the 9mm along side a number of F-117 pilots. That was a kick. Some were good, some awful, but like one told me, was the AF going to ground him because he couldn’t fire a handgun? Obviously not, considering all the training required to fly the F-117. Moral of the story, stand well back if you are on a AF firing range, except for security forces.

Response by Sgt Russ Brayton made Apr 21 at 2021 8:52 AM

Sgt Russ Brayton — Wed, 21 Apr 2021 08:52:41 -0400

That’s why the Marines call it the Chair Force.

Response by Sgt James Mcfall made Apr 21 at 2021 11:54 AM

Sgt James Mcfall — Wed, 21 Apr 2021 11:54:56 -0400

1000% agree with you!! 66-70 3225 weap. Control sys tech F-106. 77-93 army aviation electronics and armament plt sgt. It was a blast qualifing with the 16, 203 x rifle and granade launcher, m60 and shooting the 20mm vulcan 40 mm chunker and mini gun in turret of the helos.

Response by SrA Steven Morgan made Apr 26 at 2021 12:34 AM

SrA Steven Morgan — Mon, 26 Apr 2021 00:34:00 -0400

Honestly, I’d say you come off sounding like an elitist tool.
YOU are expected to be the base defense component of the Air Force. There was a time when your AFSC was divided into two separate and distinct specialties; security or law enforcement.
Due to my AFSC, I was qualified on several weapons, but I was by no means an expert on any of them. That’s what we had your often Jagoff brethren harassing us at every twist and turn out of boredom even though they saw us every day. I could walk right up and touch a “special weapon” and/or move it to another location while you could be shot for pushing past our guards.
So while your buddies controlled out perimeter, WE controlled access to the weapons.
I’d highly suggest you pour yourself a nice cup of STFU and stop acting like you have anywhere near the level of training as the average Army infantryman or Marine. You don’t, despite what your command has told you.

Response by PO1 David Shepardson made Apr 26 at 2021 9:49 AM

PO1 David Shepardson — Mon, 26 Apr 2021 09:49:23 -0400

When I went to Navy boot camp we were instructed on range, some of the recruts never held a gun, us "farmboys' thought they would be the first killed if in a combat situation. This also amplifies why civilian firearm ownership is important. I bet that many in a combat situation can be glad they had prior military access to firearms.

Response by SFC Joe Ortega made Apr 29 at 2021 11:23 PM

SFC Joe Ortega — Thu, 29 Apr 2021 23:23:33 -0400

They are not a combat force! They have SPs to protect their bases and are usually far away from the FEBA/Actual combat zone.

Response by Lt Col Leo Shockley made May 3 at 2021 7:01 PM

Lt Col Leo Shockley — Mon, 03 May 2021 19:01:33 -0400

I think some of it has to do with lack of funding. They don’t want to pens the money to make us ready. Ever heard of just in time training??

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made May 21 at 2021 10:31 AM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 21 May 2021 10:31:37 -0400

Before I retired, my unit was required to qualify every two years But we were a mobile unit. But we were only trained for base defense. I qualified with both the M-16 and the 9MM.

Response by SrA Daniel Frady made May 21 at 2021 8:50 PM

SrA Daniel Frady — Fri, 21 May 2021 20:50:14 -0400

Rest in peace men.

Response by MSgt Mason Manner made May 22 at 2021 4:43 PM

MSgt Mason Manner — Sat, 22 May 2021 16:43:19 -0400

NO one talks about it BUT CESq is the PRIMARY BACKUP for SFSq ALL MEMBERS OF SFS and CES and SERVICES should have to SUCCESSFULLY complete AIRBASE GROUND DEFENSE COURSE when those members are being PAID WHAT THEY ARE the answer of THAT'S NOT MY JOB IS ABSOLUTELY BULLSHIT!

Response by Lt Col David Myers made May 22 at 2021 8:26 PM

Lt Col David Myers — Sat, 22 May 2021 20:26:35 -0400

To my knowledge everyone still must qualify with a rifle or sidearm (depending on rank and AFSC). When I was active duty, all the medics had to qualify with an M-16 so that we could protect our patients. I qualified expert on the M-16 and M-9 Beretta.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made May 22 at 2021 11:52 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 22 May 2021 23:52:11 -0400

All Airmen qualify on the M-16 at Basic Training. Only Airmen in direct combat fields re-qualify annually, because frankly, there is 0 applicability of rifle or pistol qualification for most of our jobs. Airmen who deploy must qualify pre-deployment on any weapons they are expected to be proficient in for that deployment. Otherwise, a C-130 crew chief in Arizona, or an intelligence analyst in Georgia, or an RPA pilot in Nevada don't have much need for rifle/pistol quals.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made May 23 at 2021 8:38 AM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 23 May 2021 08:38:21 -0400

If you were to run across half the people in army geospatial or signal int, you'd quickly hope they weren't issued m4 with live rounds. They're video game, anime, and manga kids. The trope that all the army are these combat trained hardened troops, well it just isn't accurate. I've personally seen a junior enlisted shoot himself in the ankle with the m4 and numerous clearing barrel fails.

When Dick Marcinko stood up st6, they had a negligent discharge from a team member into the back of another. Nobody is immune to fking up and no branch is all battle hardened infantry or sof. For that matter, the agency is mostly paper pushing types who don't have any interest or inclination to using a firearm in action either.

I was born on a chair force base. They really did have weekend sand volleyball and barbecues.

Response by SPC Chris Ison made May 23 at 2021 8:18 PM

SPC Chris Ison — Sun, 23 May 2021 20:18:10 -0400

I have seen this in the Army with non infantry types, MI, Signal, and believe it or not Tankers.

Response by SGT Scott Henderson made May 24 at 2021 2:13 PM

SGT Scott Henderson — Mon, 24 May 2021 14:13:08 -0400

This gems like the type of question a marine would ask

Response by SSgt Ed Harmon made May 24 at 2021 3:58 PM

SSgt Ed Harmon — Mon, 24 May 2021 15:58:28 -0400

When I went through basic training at Lackland AFB in 1968, we were trained in the use of the M-16.
If I remember correctly, 58 out of 60 in the center target at 100 yds earned you the expert marksman badge.

Response by SMSgt John Lemon made May 24 at 2021 9:50 PM

SMSgt John Lemon — Mon, 24 May 2021 21:50:52 -0400

I agree. I was a Port Dawg and we only qualified on the M-16 every three years. When I was in Kuwait we had an armory where our weapons were kept. If the base came under attack we would have to find the key to the armory, check out the weapons, issue the ammo, and pray that we could hit the broadside of a barn door.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made May 24 at 2021 10:26 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 24 May 2021 22:26:18 -0400

My wife, retired USAF Officer, and ER/ICU nurse ALWAYS qualified with her weapon every year. She actually had to qualify with her weapon as part of her pre-deployment process because she took her weapon with her too. Although the hospital was on a military installation there are still insider threats and the long-shot possibility of the base being attacked or overrun. So, I am not sure as to the validity of this statement above.

Response by LtCol Robert Quinter made May 26 at 2021 8:24 AM

LtCol Robert Quinter — Wed, 26 May 2021 08:24:19 -0400

I'm not Air Force, but I would think some basic principles apply. As an aviator experienced in command of aviation units, I did not attempt to keep my people qualified as infantry, however, I did expect them to be capable of defending themselves and our positions if necessary. Your unit is responsible for security, but that doesn't mean you are the only people responsible for security. Your CO should be coordinating with his seniors and other units to determine normal and extreme responsibilities and other COs should ensure their people are prepared to fulfill those responsibilities. If other units identify weaknesses in their capabilities to fulfill security requirements, your "experts" should be available for assistance in addressing those weaknesses. My wife is not an infantryman, but she is capable of responding to extreme situation safely if required.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made May 26 at 2021 12:27 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Wed, 26 May 2021 12:27:00 -0400

The AF is smart enough to set up operations far from the enemy. Now I still think they should qualify on weapons for the random chance they have to defend themselves. If we are in another world war, everyone is at risk.

Response by SMSgt Robert Anderson made May 26 at 2021 7:23 PM

SMSgt Robert Anderson — Wed, 26 May 2021 19:23:40 -0400

I joined the AF in 1959 and we went to the range, I think,three times in seven years. When I got my orders to Thailand, in 1968, I went to Aberline(sp) Texas for three days to get indoctrinated in the M-16. When I got to Udorn the first sergeant gave me a card with a number on it. If the base was overrun (never happened) I had to go to the OR and there was a conex outside to pick up my weapon. We didn’t even get combat pay! Imagine that?

Response by Sgt Michael Sechrist made May 26 at 2021 10:58 PM

Sgt Michael Sechrist — Wed, 26 May 2021 22:58:22 -0400

How much of a clue do you have with regards to minuteman missile operations?

Response by 1stSgt Ronald Sheps made May 27 at 2021 6:11 AM

1stSgt Ronald Sheps — Thu, 27 May 2021 06:11:00 -0400

What a stunningly prejudiced post capturing the inferiority complex of the all the ground forces in the world. The Air Force doesn’t have the mental capability to handle an M4 so they fix fighter jets instead. Each man and woman serves in their best capacity. For some that is pointing a fire stick. For others it is launching things into space. But I will confess I cannot generate as much condescension (have someone look up the word for you) as the OP did and for that I am humbled.

Response by 1stSgt Ronald Sheps made May 27 at 2021 6:17 AM

1stSgt Ronald Sheps — Thu, 27 May 2021 06:17:17 -0400

Every person serves as a part of a greater team. I am ironically confused by the argument that people who repair and/or fly fighter jets all too often struggle with and fail to grasp the complexities of the M16 platform. Yeah, we should all be trained on what every person on the team does, but that is the extent of it. I have enough faith that if I can help control the skies, there are others who have it all covered on the ground.

Response by TSgt Robert Wayne made May 27 at 2021 1:47 PM

TSgt Robert Wayne — Thu, 27 May 2021 13:47:25 -0400

I along with many other airmen have said often that we send our officers to battle. Air Force sends the fighter jets, bombers and cargo to the war zones. Most of the air crews are officers. The rest of us remain on the ground and wait to receive returning aircraft only to prepare them for the next flight. Although as a firefighter I have been trained on the M-16 and the .38 revolver. We rarely had a need to carry one. The pilots and crew are trained in case they crash behind enemy lines. Just in case they survive the crash they might be able to protect themselves from capture.

Response by SMSgt Private RallyPoint Member made May 28 at 2021 9:06 AM

SMSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 28 May 2021 09:06:01 -0400

After my active duty Air Force (70 - 74), I did 28 years in the Air National Guard. I was in a RED HORSE unit and there, everyone was proficient with weapons. Having the task of constructing an airfield and billets, RH units were self-contained insofar as security, medical, services and other areas. Admittedly on active duty, I was not so proficient but I was in SAC and doing tasks relative to keeping missile Launch Control Facilities online.

Response by LCpl Jeff Moore made May 28 at 2021 9:50 AM

LCpl Jeff Moore — Fri, 28 May 2021 09:50:21 -0400

Cause the airforce has a corporate identity vs a warrior military one. I regularly see e3 call their staff ncos by their first names. I seen their members tell their command they refuse tdy orders or they don't want to transfer to a new base and such.

Response by SMSgt Gerald Goertz made May 29 at 2021 8:48 AM

SMSgt Gerald Goertz — Sat, 29 May 2021 08:48:42 -0400

I think you are out of touch. Kinda of funny that I had to requalify every couple of years on the M-16/M-4 and got Marksmen. We have deployed people in my unit to many places that you needed your weapon to include some of the first Truck Convoys in Iraq.

Response by PO1 Don Rowan made May 29 at 2021 11:23 AM

PO1 Don Rowan — Sat, 29 May 2021 11:23:25 -0400

SSgt I have to agree with you. I grew up handling weapons and can't think of a single reason why I would not want to be capable of defending anywhere in the military

Response by SSgt Russell Stevens made May 30 at 2021 12:38 PM

SSgt Russell Stevens — Sun, 30 May 2021 12:38:08 -0400

In the Air Force I was fully trained on the M16 rifle. I think I know the reason for your statement that the Air Force is not fully trained in its use. The truth is when I was deployed for Desert Shield/Storm with an M16 I was not allowed to test fire it before being deployed, nor was I allowed to sight it in. What I found out to my horror is that particular weapon was missing parts, thus leaving me in the position of having nothing more than a fragile, lightweight club. When my congressman (former Air Force pilot) visited the AOR, I made it a point to show him the weapon. Long story short, my chain of command from immediate supervisor all the way to Wing Commander were replaced before I was allowed to return to home station.

The point I'm trying to make is Air Force doesn't train all members in the use of weapons because the Air Force doesn't have, or didn't have, enough operational weapons to go around.

Response by Sgt Dale Briggs made May 30 at 2021 6:33 PM

Sgt Dale Briggs — Sun, 30 May 2021 18:33:12 -0400

If your at a FOB your armed, you’d better know how to safely use it if necessary. It’s part of being in the military regardless of your branch or primary MOS, if your in imminent danger you need to be able to protect your position and use your weapon properly. I’m an old dude, but if there’s an attack would I assume that everyone has a designated place to be? Can’t sit in your hooch teeth chattering. My sons AF attached to Army and he’s as well trained at the guys in the 10th, he deployed fully armed.

Response by SPC July Macias made May 30 at 2021 8:16 PM

SPC July Macias — Sun, 30 May 2021 20:16:09 -0400

To be fair; weapons training in the Army is kind of a joke too. Trigger discipline and weapons safety is on point. But most Army personnel know very little about the M16/M4. As an E4, I found my superiors dismissive towards me when I explain to them how a BFA works or what causes rifles to malfunction. Often times, they simply said the M16 is "always unreliable." It still frustrates me to think that professional Army NCO's know nothing about their own rifles.

Response by SPC Jeff Anderson made May 31 at 2021 9:50 AM

SPC Jeff Anderson — Mon, 31 May 2021 09:50:22 -0400

I being a former combat vet agree on having all military branches learn and be taught tactical weaponry… Even with the drawdowns and cutbacks throughout the military…. The word military says it all, everyone needs to be taught on a weapon first before sitting at a desk for 8-10 hours a day… What happens when the lone gunmen comes in and no one knows what to do or you are in the back 40 on the battlefield…
I’ve seen what passing people up on the battlefield because higher ups say they are no threat anymore can do… It just isn’t smart to not be trained on our weapons and it wouldn’t hurt to be trained on a vast majority of other weapons once or twice a year to get everyone out of offices as they will be glad to get out and see other people again from other places… Just my thoughts and thank you and God bless on this Memorial Day to our past and present troops….

Response by SGT Wayne Grindstaff made Jun 1 at 2021 4:37 PM

SGT Wayne Grindstaff — Tue, 01 Jun 2021 16:37:24 -0400

Very interesting I never knew that. So if your not SF in the Air Force you are just like a civilian relying on the police to protect you. Even our mechanics had a 50 on their track, and their small arms, and used them to effect when they had too. The Air Force trusts their troops to handle bombs and missiles, work on jet engines. Why not also teach them to protect themselves?

Response by Sgt Benjamin Whittier made Jun 4 at 2021 5:41 AM

Sgt Benjamin Whittier — Fri, 04 Jun 2021 05:41:46 -0400

The cringe factor of this photo.

Response by PFC Stephen Trynosky made Jun 11 at 2021 11:00 AM

PFC Stephen Trynosky — Fri, 11 Jun 2021 11:00:20 -0400

When Mr. Victor Charles came to visit places like Tan Son Nhut and Bien Hoa among others in scenic South Viet-nam, , it would have seemed to have been a good idea for Airmen to have some small arms training. The final banzai attack on Iwo Jima decimated the Army Air Forces troops, unarmed, in their tents, hacked to pieces. So, there are lessons we learn in wars, the hard, very hard, way which we then feel free to forget next time around. My old man, a maintenance Sgt in England during WW 2 routinely re-qualified with the M-1 Carbine and 1911A-1 pistol he also mounted guard routinely. In addition he had a working knowledge of the Quad .50 BMG just in case. So, maybe spending a few days familiarizing yourself then re qualifying at least every year is called "being Prepared", just in case.

Response by CWO4 William Romska made Jun 17 at 2021 8:00 PM

CWO4 William Romska — Thu, 17 Jun 2021 20:00:31 -0400

Hey I was in the Coast Guard and we did annual weapons qualifications every year of the 33 years I served.

Guess the AF just depends on someone else protecting them.

Common sense says train them, the cost is minimal.

Response by 1LT James Rosebrough made Jul 11 at 2021 12:09 PM

1LT James Rosebrough — Sun, 11 Jul 2021 12:09:03 -0400

Always been so. Remember that until 1947, there was no separate Air Force, just the Army Air Corps!

Response by SSgt James Brasier made Jul 15 at 2021 9:39 PM

SSgt James Brasier — Thu, 15 Jul 2021 21:39:06 -0400

During desert storm, I had an M-16, but all ammunition was stored on the other side of the base. USAF apparently thought too many of us would shoot each other in the foot, as opposed to actually caring about duty, responsibility, etc. so, it doesn't surprise me that this would be an issue today...

Response by Sgt Gene Stanton made Jul 16 at 2021 3:25 PM

Sgt Gene Stanton — Fri, 16 Jul 2021 15:25:42 -0400

When I was in the AirForce (1971 - 1976) I had to qualify with an M-16 twice. I don't know if that changed, but being in the Air Force Communications Service we were never in any combat situations. However, we did have a night where we were ordered to arm ourselves and authorized to use deadly force due to a terrorist group's threat to attack our site in Spain.

Response by MSgt Seth Trent made Jul 17 at 2021 11:52 PM

MSgt Seth Trent — Sat, 17 Jul 2021 23:52:47 -0400

I was required to qualify on both M4 and .45, semi annually

Response by 1SG Patrick Sims made Jul 25 at 2021 12:43 PM

1SG Patrick Sims — Sun, 25 Jul 2021 12:43:16 -0400

Everyone in the US military---regardless of their branch--should be familiar with the weapons available, and qualify with them at least once a year.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 25 at 2021 10:54 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 25 Jul 2021 22:54:53 -0400

The USAF’s job is to operate aircraft. The Army and Marines are the primary ground combat personnel. We receive training if our deployment or duty requires it. “Skilled Technicians”.

Response by SPC Robert Bobo made Jul 29 at 2021 6:13 PM

SPC Robert Bobo — Thu, 29 Jul 2021 18:13:53 -0400

Yep, doesn't make since, everyone should qualify with at least a Rifle annually

Response by LTC Donell Kelly made Jul 31 at 2021 2:28 PM

LTC Donell Kelly — Sat, 31 Jul 2021 14:28:00 -0400

As a now retired member of the Army Nurse Corps, I can honestly say that in our AMEDD basic training in 1971 @ Camp Bullis, the only people more terrified than we were, were the range monitors assigned to stand both behind us & next to us. Their exemplary jobs, were to keep us from killing anything down range except the target w/a 9 mm weapon…or maybe it was a .45. In today’s Army, it is foolish beyond belief to not have AMEDD personnel successfully trained in both side arm & long gun proficiency. To not do so = personnel unable to defend themselves &/or their patients.

Response by PO2 Steven Michaeli made Aug 1 at 2021 8:01 AM

PO2 Steven Michaeli — Sun, 01 Aug 2021 08:01:39 -0400

When I was in the USAF, we had to qualify in basic. A couple years later that stopped. Then it was .22 conversation M16s. I was lucky, for several years I was an armed escort so I qualified on several weapons each year

Response by TSgt Don Dollinger made Aug 12 at 2021 10:16 PM

TSgt Don Dollinger — Thu, 12 Aug 2021 22:16:46 -0400

Other branches of the military are infantry first and comprise much of the fighting force. This is not the case with the Air Force. Air Power comes in, kicks ass, and gets out. The Air Frames are not required to to be maintained in the AOR thus the majority of the Air Force is not required in the AOR but safer areas out-of-country. I spent many years as NCOIC of deployments and any AF personnel deploying required to be M-16 proficient at a minimum and were issued weapon upon deployment. Our officers do the fighting, our enlisted maintain the weapon, the majority of AF personnel are down range with the Air Frames. AF personnel are usually not in a position to have to protect a location or assets but if it comes to that, they will be upto the task.

Response by SFC William Linnell made Aug 23 at 2021 8:54 AM

SFC William Linnell — Mon, 23 Aug 2021 08:54:52 -0400

The first I was aware of this was in training to be a Combat Adviser. We had a mixed bag of Navy, AF and Army. The AF and Navy couldn't shoot for jack. I agree with you whole heartedly. As huge as AF bases are, you SF guys will not be able to cover it all with enough firepower. It's a failure in Leadership.

After coming back from Afghanistan, I was back at the school house training more advisers. They still couldn't shoot for shit but they followed instructions way better then the Army National Guard and active duty Army.

Response by CPO Arthur Weinberger made Sep 1 at 2021 8:04 PM

CPO Arthur Weinberger — Wed, 01 Sep 2021 20:04:17 -0400

I wish all services would require service members to be proficient with all aspects of small arms.
Self defense and physical fitness should be part of all branches. Unfortunately the above is not.SSG I concur completely. have a great year.

Response by SSgt Ray Bebee made Sep 1 at 2021 9:29 PM

SSgt Ray Bebee — Wed, 01 Sep 2021 21:29:23 -0400

Why do the army, navy and marines have combat airplanes and helicopters? Why don't they leave the flying to the Air Force? Then the navy can have their boats and the army and marines can protect the Air bases and do combat.

Response by Maj Martin Smith made Sep 2 at 2021 12:01 PM

Maj Martin Smith — Thu, 02 Sep 2021 12:01:27 -0400

In August of '65 before going to Vietnam I had to qualify on a M-16. I was at the now defunct Kincheloe AFB, MI. First time I had an AF weapon in my hands since OTS .38 revolver qualifying in November of '63. Something changed obviously.

Response by Cpl Germaine Diehl made Sep 5 at 2021 10:54 AM

Cpl Germaine Diehl — Sun, 05 Sep 2021 10:54:23 -0400

Same. Everyone should have and be able to use a weaponon our home front for protection. We have to stop being close minded and nieve that it is not necessary. I’m a marine and I even grew up using weapons. But I guess my parents were special thinkers like me. Out of the freakin BOX people.

Response by Cpl Germaine Diehl made Sep 5 at 2021 10:55 AM

Cpl Germaine Diehl — Sun, 05 Sep 2021 10:55:54 -0400

My daughter is officer in Air Force and she was raised like myself with using weapons. She knows we need them.

Response by SMSgt Jeff Kyle made Sep 5 at 2021 11:12 PM

SMSgt Jeff Kyle — Sun, 05 Sep 2021 23:12:08 -0400

I started out in the Marine Corps. I went through all the training including my MOS training: 6113, CH-53A/D helicopter mechanic. I also trained up the become a plane captain and a Crew Chief. I wasn’t the best shooter by far but I qualified as every Marine was required. Every Marine is a rifleman, that is true. Every Marine is not a 0311 Infantry. Two separate MOS’s doing completely different jobs. I got out after four years. Civilian light sucks, period. I hated being one and tried to get back into the Marines. Didn’t happen. Instead I joined the Air Force. I went direct duty to my first Air Force assignment as a HH-53B/C crew chief. Please note the difference between my spelling of the words crew and chief. In the Marines, Crew Chief was a title. We wore gold Aircrew wings and we flew and worked on our assigned helicopters exclusively. In the Air Force, crew chief is a job. The differences were minor as far as the job went. Rotor heads, engines, hydraulics, airframe, etc. there was no differences between the services. The difference was the culture. We were Marines. When we ran out of helicopters, they issued us a rifle and we headed for whatever and wherever we were needed. I was a corporal (E-4). I was an NCO. I would have been totally lost if I had to lead Marines in ground combat. The Air Force confused the heck out of me. I can honestly say I never fully figured out everything about being an Airman. I served in the Air Force for 21 years and retired as a SMSgt.

At some point in war, the enemy can be expected to do the unexpected. They attack at your weakest point. They people on the flight line, in the back shops, in all the various shops and offices would be lost in ground combat. Yes, we have Security Forces. I battalion of enemy troops would put a hurt locker on an Air Force Base. SF Airman posted on the perimeter of a base are going fight. They are warriors in every sense of the word. They are also a finite resource. Use up all you SF repelling an attack, who’s going to fill in those positions on the perimeter?

I’ve said it before and I’ll repeat it: training an Airman on the basics of infantry combat during basic training is a force multiplier. Without this training, the enemy will have a target rich environment. And I’m not talking about places like Afghanistan where the enemy is fighting a gorilla war. I’m talking about places like Korea.

Anyway, that’s my opinion, hopefully I made a bit of sense.

Response by SSgt Steven Imlay made Sep 5 at 2021 11:40 PM

SSgt Steven Imlay — Sun, 05 Sep 2021 23:40:21 -0400

I don't know how it is now but when I went in everybody got some training on the M-16 and had to fire it at the range. After that if you weren't in sec police or law enforcement it was unlikely you would ever touch one again. As an instructor we did train CES on weapons and included them in air base ground defense as back up. Now all of that may have changed but we were told when I went into security police that we would no longer have the army to protect our bases. We would have to do it ourselves. That was the 1970s and 80s.

Response by SMSgt Bob Wilson made Sep 6 at 2021 12:48 AM

SMSgt Bob Wilson — Mon, 06 Sep 2021 00:48:53 -0400

This argument again. Get real, get a new topic. In 2025 Nike will be making a footwear for all services. It will be called "Space Jerks".

Response by SSgt James Martin made Sep 10 at 2021 9:00 PM

SSgt James Martin — Fri, 10 Sep 2021 21:00:04 -0400

I was trained as a aircraft electrician. I qualified expert on the m1, the m16 and the 38 pistol as part of my advanced training prior to going to Vietnam, 1967/68. I was required to carry rifle and pistol on the flight line. I had to use them a number of times. I never met anyone who couldn't use these weapons. I agree all in the military should have some cross training.

Response by AB Roger Zauner made Sep 13 at 2021 5:45 PM

AB Roger Zauner — Mon, 13 Sep 2021 17:45:14 -0400

xxx

Response by PO3 Edward Ludwig made Sep 17 at 2021 9:11 AM

PO3 Edward Ludwig — Fri, 17 Sep 2021 09:11:36 -0400

I was in the 934th TAC US Air Force we had firearm training & qualified with the M 16 at the firing range shooting in all positions

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 25 at 2021 1:51 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 25 Sep 2021 13:51:58 -0400

I understand what you mean. There have been a number of publications about airbase defense doctrine and ID (Integrated Defense) in particular. The ID concept is a page right out of the Army and Marine Corps playbooks: every Airman is responsible for defending the airbase, not just SF, not the Army, not the Marine Corps, unless of course it’s a joint base (which it likely would be, and in that case Soldiers and Marines are responsible for base defense as well). The Air Force has done a lot of chest beating in recent years about fighting in contested battle space, and basing on hostile turf. Yet, when it comes to actually mentally and physically preparing Airmen to survive and function in a true contested battlefield environment, it doesn’t really pan out. There’s still far too many Airmen who aren’t in fighting shape, and wouldn’t know how to handle a weapon if the S hit the fan. I understand in investing in our Airmen to be the best mechanic, pilot, port dawg, loggie, etc. but I also believe that they need to be given the tools and training to survive in a contested environment long enough to do their primary job. Even just one week of combat training per year (small unit tactics, rifle range, TCCC) would be an improvement, especially in light of this great war that’s supposedly on the horizon. But alas, the Air Force won’t change things until they have to, (i.e. people start getting killed.

Response by SPC Harold Decoteau made Sep 26 at 2021 8:36 PM

SPC Harold Decoteau — Sun, 26 Sep 2021 20:36:16 -0400

It wouldn't hurt!

Response by SSgt Ian Arnold made Sep 26 at 2021 10:24 PM

SSgt Ian Arnold — Sun, 26 Sep 2021 22:24:16 -0400

Apparently things have changed. I worked in Ammo and carried an M-16 during exercises and certainly during Desert Storm. I’ve been out for 28 years and don’t understand why it changed.

Response by Sgt Anthony Leverington made Sep 29 at 2021 6:12 AM

Sgt Anthony Leverington — Wed, 29 Sep 2021 06:12:28 -0400

I don't know how things are these days and I can't speak for other bases but when I was active (1985-1989), we had to requalify every year with the M-16. Our range wasn't long enough to place the targets 1,000 yards away so, they compensated by having us shoot from 100 yards away at a silhouette that was 1/10th normal size. All hits had to be within the center mass area to qualify for expert. I grew up shooting much larger caliber rifles so, hitting the target with an M-16 was a breeze. Additional training included field stripping, cleaning and reassembly. It may have had something to do with the fact that our base was the 1st SOW. I was in the 834th AGS attached to the 20th SOS. In addition to our M-16 training and qualification, my unit had to go through special training to be able to service and maintain the helicopters while hot (loaded) guns were installed.

Response by PO1 Don Uhrig made Oct 27 at 2021 7:37 PM

PO1 Don Uhrig — Wed, 27 Oct 2021 19:37:42 -0400

Easy answer: Money. Ammunition costs a lot of money.

Response by SSgt Paul Mulwitz made Oct 28 at 2021 1:11 AM

SSgt Paul Mulwitz — Thu, 28 Oct 2021 01:11:06 -0400

While it makes sense for members of USA, USN, USMC to be well trained to use small arms the USAF is a different sort of service. I served 8 years in the regular Air Force and never touched a weapon after basic training. However, I did spend three years in the nuclear war planning business and two years in the aerial reconnaissance business (actually space based reconnaissance). All of my time was spent on large bases or working out of the Pentagon. I never got farther from home (in CT) than Omaha. Only about one percent of Air Force personnel ever get in the same country with combat. Those people do get additional small arms training but rarely employ small arms since they are protected by Army or Marine personnel. Air crew members all carry small arms but their real experience in combat comes from their use of the much more powerful weapons they fly.

Response by 1SG James Kelly made Oct 28 at 2021 1:13 PM

1SG James Kelly — Thu, 28 Oct 2021 13:13:42 -0400

Why don't all members of the Air Force have to be fully qualified to be a rifleman in case of hostile events?

Have you looked at them?
5 years USAF 65-70
18 years USA 71-88

Response by 1SG James Kelly made Oct 28 at 2021 1:15 PM

1SG James Kelly — Thu, 28 Oct 2021 13:15:15 -0400

Why don't all members of the Air Force have to be fully qualified to be a rifleman in case of hostile events?
Have you looked at them?

USAF 65-70
USA 71-88

Response by SSgt Jt Toten made Oct 28 at 2021 3:05 PM

SSgt Jt Toten — Thu, 28 Oct 2021 15:05:34 -0400

The amount of time the AF spends on training their techs to ensure the aircraft don’t fall out of the sky is more valuable than trying to lug a M-4 or M-9 around with you while working on the aircraft. Air Force has a different skill sets than the other branches and ground combat isn’t one of them. That’s why they have their special forces parts to ensure everyone else can do their job. Can’t spend millions on training one to send him off to his death on the front line.

Response by Sgt Mark Coghlan made Oct 29 at 2021 11:01 AM

Sgt Mark Coghlan — Fri, 29 Oct 2021 11:01:54 -0400

AF veteran here. I thought I went through M-16 training in Basic and then again in Tech School and received a Marksmanship Ribbon, but I guess I could've hallucinated the experience.

Response by Capt James Stewart made Oct 29 at 2021 5:54 PM

Capt James Stewart — Fri, 29 Oct 2021 17:54:37 -0400

Can't say that I understand much of this post. Enlisted, my primary job was ACW Radar tech, except for one tour at 25th NORAD, I was always an SP augmentee. Had to qualify on M-16 in basic and at every station. As an officer, I had to qualify with the .38 before every PCS - and since I needed a rifle during my first overseas tour as an officer, I insisted on qualifying with the M-16 prior to my second overseas tour as well. So what's this about folks not qualifying?

Response by Sgt Jim Recchia made Oct 30 at 2021 4:11 PM

Sgt Jim Recchia — Sat, 30 Oct 2021 16:11:20 -0400

I was a cook and I had to qualify every base I went to and before I went to Korea. This was in the mid 80's. At Hill I even went through M60 training.
Did they stop requiring everyone to qualify since that time?

Response by Sgt Fredric Garms made Nov 17 at 2021 7:47 AM

Sgt Fredric Garms — Wed, 17 Nov 2021 07:47:10 -0500

The only armed forces organization where everyone is trained as a “ Rifleman” is the the “United States Marine Corps. They specialize in the “Rifleman”. Nobody can equal that. 246 years of training people to kill with a rifle and bayonet cannot be equaled ANYWHERE.

Response by 1stSgt Ronald Sheps made Dec 22 at 2021 5:05 PM

1stSgt Ronald Sheps — Wed, 22 Dec 2021 17:05:03 -0500

Not everyone has the skills required to be a successful rifleman, but many have other skills valuable to maintaining a fighting force. There is no value judgement, just where do you fit in to the overall abilities of our forces. Now if you want to talk to me about the M16/M4 and the @$!*% shoulder burns I have from over 30 years of service after being born left handed, that is a whole 'nuther story! But each man and woman serves a purpose, and it can in fact be valuable without getting to carry a rifle.

Response by SSG James Stodola made Dec 23 at 2021 11:00 AM

SSG James Stodola — Thu, 23 Dec 2021 11:00:14 -0500

Short answer, they should, without question. I started in my career in the Air Force as a Security Forces member, security police when I started, and was an instructor in CATM. I have seen many different ways to really screw up a qualification class / annual requirement session. The SMSGT is correct in that most AFSC's don't carry or handle weapons in their daily duties, it they who are the annual qualifiers I speak of, and honestly should be quarterly at the very least. I spent 6 years in the AF and then migrated to the Army as an MP, and many other things, and even in my many MOS's in the Army, I was always carrying a weapon of some sort, so the comparison is a bit off in a way, but accurate that the AF was not meant to be a ground defense force overall. In the Army if a base or FOB in a combat area is overrun, everyone will have a weapon in their hands. Our cooks were the primary support in such a case and were trained on crew served weapons, i.e. M-60's, M249's, and even Ma Deuce, the M2 Browning 50 caliber, so therein shows some differences in mission requirements. While in CATM I experienced the things SSG Christ has mentioned, and more. I think in the AF the annual personnel are just not interested in firearms training or firearms at all maybe, and when they have to return for their qualification time, it almost like you are starting at square one with them, every single time. I don't wish to sound harsh in that respect as I said some of them are simple not interested in this duty / requirement. So having seen tow sides of the house I do agree that all service members should be required to be more familiar and more proficient in weapons marksmanship, but that won't
change any time soon. Additional note; In the Army as well as what is saw in the AF, all members are instructors so to speak. You always train your teams members and they in turn train others as in the new guys, or maybe those who are weak in a certain task. This was true in the AF, I just saw it more in the Army on an overall basis.

Response by Capt Al Young made Dec 23 at 2021 6:37 PM

Capt Al Young — Thu, 23 Dec 2021 18:37:15 -0500

I served when SP was divided into Law Enforcement and Security. Security had responsibility for flight line and missiles.

Law Enforcement (white hats) had normal police functions plus Air Base Defince.

I had one base commander say we were his QRF team along with the SAT team.

Every Airman had M16 training during basic but only a few AFSC’s had annual qualification requirement.

LE on the other had had to qualify with M16 and .38 cal revolver. We also got shotgun familiarization and M79 / 203. Those headed to VN received M60 claymore, hand grenadine and demolition training. Most also got 1911 .45 cal.

The AF doctrine at my time 72-76 was since the 52’s were in Tiland only minimal stateside type security was necessarily. The TI Rangers and other combat units were detailed to protect all was good.

In county AB had SF and Army protection with SF LE inside the gate doing normal police functions and augmented any disturbances.

Everything changed after 911. SECURITY FORCES combined the two groups and equiped them for a front line combat role.

My understanding is all AF members receive proper weapons training and depending on assignment and location,, the equipment necessary.

Response by A1C Constance Lynne Clark made Dec 24 at 2021 11:51 PM

A1C Constance Lynne Clark — Fri, 24 Dec 2021 23:51:56 -0500

I would’ve loved training after having received an expert marksmanship ribbon! I wondered why I hadn’t been offered that! As a matter of fact, after the first time I was taken out to shoot, one guy and I had to go to a different range to shoot again. I asked why. The guy said because I shot like an expert and they needed to find out if that was correct!
After my score was checked the second time I asked, “how did I do?”
I was excited to appear an expert shooting an M-16. But thereafter I was never trained in anything about guns!

Response by SSgt Daniel d'Errico made Dec 25 at 2021 6:14 PM

SSgt Daniel d'Errico — Sat, 25 Dec 2021 18:14:49 -0500

USAF doesn't keep enough arms on hand at its bases to arm everyone stationed there. USAF SF usually don't number more than 400 personnel to cover three shifts a day, protect the base quarters, the flightline and very sensitive areas. Annual weapons training is conducted f I r tho a e career fields that be deemed as augments for security of the base. Career fields such as Combat Controllers, Pararescue and such, who will be in combat situations are prone to need small arms daily. Also thanks to the powers that be, their budget constraints won't allow USAF enough small arms/ammo, to arms all USAF personnel.

Response by SGT Stephen Jaffe made Dec 26 at 2021 10:41 PM

SGT Stephen Jaffe — Sun, 26 Dec 2021 22:41:18 -0500

If you are in the military, you should be trained and qualified in the current small arms inventory. If you deploy to a combat zone, our foe does not care if you are a clerk, cook, or infantry. All they know is that you are the enemy and they plan to kill you. Matter of fact training on the various AK variants would be advisable. I was in the Army Security Agency 1965-1968. I never was trained on an M16. Only on the M14. Lucky I never needed one in 'Nam.

Response by Col Jim Pfaff made Dec 28 at 2021 4:28 AM

Col Jim Pfaff — Tue, 28 Dec 2021 04:28:41 -0500

And you're not qualified to work on the Avionics systems on an F-16. This is outrageous!

Response by LCDR Jerry Maurer made Dec 29 at 2021 7:04 PM

LCDR Jerry Maurer — Wed, 29 Dec 2021 19:04:56 -0500

I was enlisted infantry and got a commission in the navy. It was quite a surprise how the navy doesn't qualify sailors. Topside watch standers are carrying loaded 45s and shotguns and have never qualified anything. I agree that there should be a standard all military should be required to meet. But it isn't that way.

Response by Sgt Jeffrey Weisman made Dec 31 at 2021 7:17 AM

Sgt Jeffrey Weisman — Fri, 31 Dec 2021 07:17:25 -0500

SSgt Christ.
I agree with u...well 2 a point! I was at Minot then Torrejon as a Medic & EMT. I asked that question way back when in '73! The powers that B were trying Medics 2 parachute 2 downed F4 pilots, treat their wounds and get them out of dodge! In HS I was on tRifle team so when I went 2 Live fire in basic the firing line Sgt told e that I should b an SP with my abilities!! I told him that I would need 2 protect my patient!
He could NOT believe that I got 100 out of 100! He asked my TI if I could b brought back the next day 4 a 'Special' circumstance situation on the firing line? Ti said Ok. The next day the TI brought back the entire flight nobody was on the firing line but ME! I GOT 97 out of 100! On a crappies M16 than the day b4, the firing line Sgt and my TI both tried hard 2 push me in2 the SPs I said Nope! But I think ALL MEDICS NEED 2 B PROFICIENT with a Glock and whatever Rifle that the AF is using at the time so the Medics can Protect themselves & their patient/s!

Response by LTJG Kevin Matthews made Jan 11 at 2022 11:47 AM

LTJG Kevin Matthews — Tue, 11 Jan 2022 11:47:05 -0500

I think it's important for ALL members of the armed forces to be familiar with at LEAST the standard battle rifle we use. They should know how to load/unload it, safe it, aim and fire it, and perform immediate action should it jam. I do not expect an airman or sailor to be able to perform a movement to contact or conduct a hasty ambush. If someone in a traditionally non-combat field gets deployed, they should then be trained on the skills they may need while in country. That includes more combat training as well as first aid.

Response by SSgt Charles Wheatley made Feb 1 at 2022 10:45 PM

SSgt Charles Wheatley — Tue, 01 Feb 2022 22:45:04 -0500

Your assumption is quite incorrect and kind of childish. In 1965 I was to be drafted. when I was told my number was up, I enlisted in the the Air Force to avoid the Army. The last year of my tour of duty I received Orders for Vietnam. I was sent to California for 2 days of M16 Training. Being a farm boy from Kentucky, I had plenty of experience using a weapon. I qualified as Marksman at the end of that training. We each had a purpose in the mission. I was an Air Traffic Controller. The Army and Moraines had another. Ummmmm, That's why I joined the USAF.

Response by SPC Robert McElreath made Feb 2 at 2022 3:17 AM

SPC Robert McElreath — Wed, 02 Feb 2022 03:17:07 -0500

If people listened to me EVERYONE would be weapons qualified, like the Israelis. Minimum service, during which everyone would learn to shoot, move and communicate. There would be fewer women who don't know how to respond to an emergency and yes, everyone in uniform should be able to defend their immediate area. Sgt Mack M-14 Expert 1st Class M-60 Gunner

Response by LCpl Troy Gwyn made Feb 2 at 2022 5:00 AM

LCpl Troy Gwyn — Wed, 02 Feb 2022 05:00:36 -0500

It's not like the Chair Force is true military. And don't even bring up the talking squirrels of Space Force.

Response by SSgt James Guy made Feb 3 at 2022 12:02 PM

SSgt James Guy — Thu, 03 Feb 2022 12:02:16 -0500

I was in the Air Force 66 to 72 in Communications. In Japan and in the states, we were protexted by the Security Police. I had to qualify on an M16 every year. When I got to my base in Vietnam, imwas assigned to the Reserve Defense which is the last line kf defense if being over run. This is an augmentee position and being an Augie Doggie, I went thru weapons training on M16, M60, pop flares, M79 and grenades. Not everyone had that training. When I got back to the States I was in SAC and was assigned to the alert team as the communications member. I understand that all members are now bettwer trained in weapons and self defense. Now women are trained as well whereas in my time women were not trained in weaponry.

Response by SrA Shawn Wood made Feb 3 at 2022 7:13 PM

SrA Shawn Wood — Thu, 03 Feb 2022 19:13:59 -0500

I deployed to Operation Desert

Response by Lt Col Paul Gacke made Feb 4 at 2022 8:30 AM

Lt Col Paul Gacke — Fri, 04 Feb 2022 08:30:44 -0500

If you look at primary missions, you’ll notice that the AFSCs or MOSs are very different. I do support fitness standards as well as war fighting skills for all military but to ask those in the AF to spend their day doing what the infantry, artillery, missile, and tank units do is like asking those same MOSs to fly B-2, F-22, C-17, and a whole variety of other aircraft. It would also be the same as having those MOSs repair, maintain, inspect, and launch and recover all of these same aircraft. To say that that you spend your day differently than most airman is an understatement but don’t you dare challenge the reason they belong in the military just like you. If you are a ground troop in a fire fight, keep that in mind when you call for close air support.

Response by MSgt Keith Morreira made Feb 4 at 2022 10:16 PM

MSgt Keith Morreira — Fri, 04 Feb 2022 22:16:40 -0500

They do, just with different levels of qualification requirements.

Some career fields every 6 month, some once a year, some just before deployment

Response by Maj Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 5 at 2022 6:09 PM

Maj Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 05 Feb 2022 18:09:01 -0500

You should spell out Security Forces…especially when asking questions across services. The AF has SF and those outside of the AF may be misled.

Response by SSgt James Carter made Feb 6 at 2022 11:00 AM

SSgt James Carter — Sun, 06 Feb 2022 11:00:36 -0500

Right, and every Doctor of Optometry should also be a general surgeon because you never know when they might need to resection a bowel. Unlike the Army or Marines, mostt airforce and navy personnel will never be in direct contact with opposing front line forces. But the small segment that may/will be are properly trained; you just don't see a lot of them.

Response by 1SG Ernest Stull made Feb 7 at 2022 8:20 AM

1SG Ernest Stull — Mon, 07 Feb 2022 08:20:02 -0500

Most of the Forward AF Bases are just carved out roads for your quick insertion and are not intended for permanent Ops. These areas are usually set up by SF and AF Operators. Most Rear area AFB, only need internal security and the host country provides outer perimeter security. However, I beg to differ with you about AF personnel not being able to shoot move and communicate. When I was in IRAQ in 08. I trained AF and several other units in the Operations of the MRAP and the squads of AF personnel were not only highly motivated they could shoot really good. So always never judge a book by its cover it might Suprise you.

Response by SGT Wayne Grindstaff made Feb 7 at 2022 7:04 PM

SGT Wayne Grindstaff — Mon, 07 Feb 2022 19:04:25 -0500

I look at things a bit different. I think all Military should have a rudimentary knowledge of the small arms in use. Likewise children should have some knowledge of firearms for no other reason than safety. Like my Dad taught me when I was young my Sons were taught young and even my young Granddaughters will be taught when the time is right. JMO

Response by Cpl Randy Owen made Feb 8 at 2022 12:25 PM

Cpl Randy Owen — Tue, 08 Feb 2022 12:25:36 -0500

Growing up we saw Air Force pickups parked at the Circle K all the time with a gun rack in the window. They were actually security for the various missile silos around southern Arizona. Everyone in the military has a job, some use weapons as their tool, some use a wrench, some use a potato peeler.

Response by SSgt Duane Nankaku made Feb 16 at 2022 10:00 PM

SSgt Duane Nankaku — Wed, 16 Feb 2022 22:00:10 -0500

I was aircrafts maintenance and then I switched to Ops. I have no idea how to shoot a gun and that is why I joined the airforce because I don't want to know. I want to just have a job where I used my brain and thats it. If I wanted to shoot people I could've stayed in Detroit. If it comes down to airforce personnel having to use guns, we've already lost the fight lol.

Response by SrA Terence McNamara made Feb 26 at 2022 4:56 PM

SrA Terence McNamara — Sat, 26 Feb 2022 16:56:54 -0500

I was in SAC from 1963 to 1966, and the only time I got fire a rifle was in basic training. We were using WW2 M2 carbines. I scored a 93 at 100 yards. I was brought up with firing a 22 rifle. I never got to fire a gun again in the Airforce. Our annual qualification was only none on paper. Our gate guards were all AF police. Ted McNamara

Response by Sgt John Hicks made Mar 11 at 2022 2:12 PM

Sgt John Hicks — Fri, 11 Mar 2022 14:12:33 -0500

The Air Force is a combat force. I was an SP (now SF) in the air force. One of the duties of SP/LE/SF if is Air Base Ground Defense (ABGD) our duties were to protect the base, so the rest of the base could do their jobs. Like maintain aircraft readiness, so that the base can defend it's self from the air. Not sure if it still exist, but we also had an agmenty force (sure it's spelled wrong) which was comprised of individuals who were qualified to carry an M-16 and would assist our unit if needed. Things at a base would have to be pretty dire for those people to call to action. Today's SF are well equipped and trained to handle any situation that may occur on or around a military installation that they are assigned to.

Response by MSG Dennis Lane made Mar 19 at 2022 8:48 PM

MSG Dennis Lane — Sat, 19 Mar 2022 20:48:22 -0400

I was assigned to an ROTC detachment at a university in a city where there was also a Navy Reserve detachment. Since I had a rifle range for university and ROTC use, I was asked to host an M16 qualification event for Navy personnel from E5 to O4. I asked the coordinator this same question: "why are these people not already qualified?" He said, "Well, we figure if the enemy can withstand our 16-inch guns and then walk across the ocean to attack us, we're pretty much screwed anyway."
But of course, that was tongue in cheek. He saw the value in having his people qualified in the basic combat rifle, and took action to see it done. They all qualified.

Response by Lt Col Michael Hills made Mar 21 at 2022 2:38 PM

Lt Col Michael Hills — Mon, 21 Mar 2022 14:38:15 -0400

A missing element in the conversation is the incredibly inadequate training of most of the Air Force. When I entered the Air Force in 1986, we touched a weapon exactly once...and that was an m16 modified to fire 22 rounds that jammed every other shot and trained to clear the weapon? No. We raised our hand so range personnel could do it for us. Officer training school in 1995 wasn't much better though we did fire the m9 as well. Add to that only qualifying when deployment is coming and you have your answer. I totally agree most communications types are pretty challenged but it's not on them, proficiency requires training regularly and I recall numerous times in my career when we were given a reduced amount of ammo due to shortages due to budget...you want proficiency, it has a cost.

Response by SSgt Randall Morrow made Mar 21 at 2022 9:08 PM

SSgt Randall Morrow — Mon, 21 Mar 2022 21:08:39 -0400

IF you remember when you went through BASIC you had to go to the range and shoot an M-16! I was trained, as a part of my job, to be a part of a 44 man mobility team. I don't know if they still to that, BUT I know that all Security Forces personnel still go through "Camp Bullis"! Many forget but we do have a contingency that many Airman are assigned as AUGMENTS to the SF and assist at the gates and other areas to provide support while the MAIN SF personnel can provide the main force of the assault and attract teams when and where needed. Todays' Security Forces (Security Police in my day) have branched out into a larger part of the Security Forces and are trained (in more detail) in the protection of the bases and aircraft.

Response by PO1 George White made Mar 21 at 2022 10:03 PM

PO1 George White — Mon, 21 Mar 2022 22:03:53 -0400

Fly your planes, shoot people on the ground, bomb them, and ferry ground fighters to where they need to be, and don't worry about being a gunman yourself. I was in the USN for a career and had training, but under no circumstances was I ever expected to use it unless there was an emergency, and bubba I mean a real emergency. Not much call for an expert rifleman out on the seas bouncing around on ships.
GW

Response by SGT Michael Wells III made Mar 23 at 2022 12:56 AM

SGT Michael Wells III — Wed, 23 Mar 2022 00:56:58 -0400

Don't worry my corporate friend. The Army's got you covered.

Response by SrA Mark Branch made Mar 23 at 2022 1:26 PM

SrA Mark Branch — Wed, 23 Mar 2022 13:26:01 -0400

I totally agree. I was in the AF Security Police back in the early 1980s stationed at Castle AFB, CA (SAC). I was on a 4 man fire team qualified with the M16, M60, and M203. We constantly ran exercises to ensure we could defend all the B52s and other priority weapons. I believe that basic training should train all airmen more with Air Base Ground Defense to be ready to be augmented if needed.

Response by A1C Medrick "Rick" DeVaney made Mar 23 at 2022 3:37 PM

A1C Medrick "Rick" DeVaney — Wed, 23 Mar 2022 15:37:18 -0400

I Was In The USAF Just Before We No Longer Used Rubber Bands,, But We DID Have To Qualify On The Range... All Of Us....
If One Didn't Qualify, He Had To Keep Returning To The Range & Practicing Until He DID Qualify...... Then We Had To Learn, In Russian, To Say "Put Your Hands DOWN, This Is a FUK Up"...

Response by MSG Thomas Currie made Mar 23 at 2022 3:59 PM

MSG Thomas Currie — Wed, 23 Mar 2022 15:59:54 -0400

If the enemy "comes knocking on your doorstep" everyone else is going to rely on you and other security force personnel (who hopefully have completed Air Base Ground Defense training).

It wouldn't really help much if the Air Force bothered training everyone enough to qualify with a weapon because no air base has enough individual weapons to pass around or enough qualified leaders to organize any sort of credible ground defense.

I can't speak for the Marines where "Every Marine a rifleman" has long been their slogan; but I can absolutely say that the Army does not actually qualify EVERY soldier going through Basic Training. The Army comes very close -- every soldier at least fires the service rifle, almost all "qualify" although a few are granted a waiver if they are unable to qualify after several attempts. On the other hand, I have seen several instances of fully "qualified" US Army soldiers making exactly the same mistakes you described. Most soldiers who are not in a combat MOS and not in a Combat unit are likely to see their assigned individual weapon only a few times each year (mostly just cleaning it for inspection) and only fire it one day each year (if that!) Trust me when I say that the typical finance or supply unit would have little more defensive capability than your airmen (or whatever gender-neutral term the Air Force has invented to use).

My point is that simply qualifying with a rifle during initial entry training accomplishes very little, if anything, towards a defensive capability once those personnel arrive at a deployed unit. To create a defensive capability requires more than just weapons qualification (and, yes, you are right that the Army and Marine Corps do cover those topics in initial training) and it also requires continued training in both weapons and tactics for soldiers and leaders on a regular basis throughout their service. Consider how often your security detachment trains on defensive skills; are you really all that confident in the skills of every member of your unit and the people who will be directing you?

Basically the Air Force assumes that they will put air bases in reasonably safe locations or that they will have Army units assigned to protect the air base. So far those assumptions have worked.

Response by CW3 James Ives made Mar 23 at 2022 11:29 PM

CW3 James Ives — Wed, 23 Mar 2022 23:29:47 -0400

Couldn't agree more.

Response by SP5 James Elmore made Mar 24 at 2022 5:52 PM

SP5 James Elmore — Thu, 24 Mar 2022 17:52:14 -0400

Except for certain groups in the AF, not much need. Besides, firefights can occur at any time and what airman wakes up before noon. The maid hasn't even come in yet.

Response by MAJ Steve Daugherty made Mar 24 at 2022 10:21 PM

MAJ Steve Daugherty — Thu, 24 Mar 2022 22:21:37 -0400

While I can see good reasons why an airman’s training might necessarily be different. I still think every service member should be familiar with the standard personal weapons of our armed forces . Shoot, I think every American should know how to use a firearm safely and properly. I think most Ukrainians would agree.

Response by SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 26 at 2022 5:08 AM

SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 26 Mar 2022 05:08:52 -0400

Garrett don't hold your breathe. I just returned from my 3rd combat tour and we would occasionally visit the joint air force & local military base. 1 day I drove up to the gate & was literally asked was that an m4 I had & why did I have it. The Security forces had to call up to a Col to grant us clearance to come on the fob with weapons. Then when we got to billeting we were asked if we had weapons & were told to go to the arms room to turn them in before getting billeting. I dropped off some SF (special forces) and they were carrying their m17 on their hips. The security forces were called on them 5 times in the 3 hours they were on the fob.

Sry but the air force isn't military mind set branch for combat outside of security forces & pilots. Everyone else is just support for them. And from my experience living next to an AF base & traveling to a few overseas, it holds true.

Since we're "out" of Iraq & afghan. Air force bases should go back to being far from engagement areas like they use to be. Hundreds of miles far away from front lines. So there shouldn't be any real concern of worrying about a base being over run. Even in Iraq & afghan when I was there we had only 1 fob breached & they didn't make 100 ft onto the fob cause of our qrf teams were always ready. The rest of the time we were well secure. Plus everyone in the army @ least always carried their weapon with ammo.

Response by Sgt Joseph Cavalari made Mar 26 at 2022 6:34 PM

Sgt Joseph Cavalari — Sat, 26 Mar 2022 18:34:35 -0400

Air Force bases of operations are never within range of enemy combat troops so they have no need for strong ground force security... These facilities are always fenced in to keep your random suicide idiot from easily penetrating and the ingress-egress points, gates, are always maned with troops who are fully capable in the use of combat weapons... For forward operations, they should rent troops from the Army to defend their positions, personnel, and equipment... The size of the Army contingent would be dependent on an assessment by the Army as to how many soldiers would be necessary to defend and hold against the enemy...

Response by LTC Brett Weeks made Mar 26 at 2022 9:37 PM

LTC Brett Weeks — Sat, 26 Mar 2022 21:37:07 -0400

Because they are more valuable doing the things they do best- flying planes, maintaining planes, arming planes, etc. We don’t need them to be part-time soldiers, part-time airmen, and good at neither.

Response by COL John R Coe made Mar 27 at 2022 12:53 PM

COL John R Coe — Sun, 27 Mar 2022 12:53:26 -0400

Point well taken.

Response by COL John R Coe made Mar 27 at 2022 12:54 PM

COL John R Coe — Sun, 27 Mar 2022 12:54:53 -0400

Sounds like the men you were training needed your instruction.

Response by MSgt Jeff Bailey made Mar 27 at 2022 6:57 PM

MSgt Jeff Bailey — Sun, 27 Mar 2022 18:57:34 -0400

CONOPS. For the vast majority of AF they don't expect to places bases/troops anywhere near frontlines where such a threat exists. The threat to such bases are from acft/missle attack and no small arms can defeat theres. So it becomes a cost/benefit analysis. Why spend a pile of $ to defend against a threat that will not be encountered?

Response by Lt Col Warren Domke made Mar 27 at 2022 8:43 PM

Lt Col Warren Domke — Sun, 27 Mar 2022 20:43:58 -0400

I am a retired Air Force officer who qualified on the M16 before going to Vietnam and was qualified on the .38 pistol most of my years in service. For most of us this level of familiarity is adequate for our everyday duties, which could include flightline maintenance, civil engineering or any other of a range of support activities. Aircrew members had different qualification requirements as could other service members whose exposure to combat might be different from everyday duties. Full qualification as riflemen would demand regular training which would be expensive and would require considerable time away from regular duties, with relatively little value in normal operations in return. I agree that some ground combat training is valuable to any military culture, and a higher level of training could be justified--however training airmen to be ground fighters could very well be a waste of resources. We should always prepare for our primary missions and be prepared to execute them fully, which we do well by and large. I have always been grateful to our sister services for their contribution to national security. We also contribute to national security and do it quite well. All of us could always do better and we should try to do more as we are able.

Response by TSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 29 at 2022 8:23 PM

TSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 29 Mar 2022 20:23:34 -0400

Let me preface my comments with I am prior service Army (12 yrs Active, with the 82nd Airborne Division) and I joined the Air Force Reserver after a 13 year break. I completely agree with your assessment about everyone needing to be prepared. What I cant believe is that in most deployed environments the Air Force keeps all weapons locked up in an armory (unless your in a forward location), the only ones carrying daily are SF. So to your question about what are we supposed to - well the answer is die when an attack comes - because by the time we get to the armory to draw a weapon its gonna be over, and not meaning any disrespect but SF is not infantry and against an elite unit that might specialize in Air Field seizure or rear area disruption like special forces types of units, you do not have the man power or quite frankly the skill set to fight them off. You dont train for those types of scenarios in earnest, because we have units that specialize in these areas you can rest assured that our enemies do too - we should train against units like the 82nd Airborne division or Rangers in large scale air field assault exercises so we can be prepared for the reality of fighting against these types of scenarios. Then on to the weapons skills, the Air Force is only required to fire once every three years, as you are aware shooting is a perishable skill, if not continuously reiterated its gone. The time between shooting is enough to become forgetful and nervous enough to not be mindful of what they are doing. Not all of us have our own AR weapons to stay proficient with. Maybe when something like this happens leadership will rethink how this is done.

Response by SSgt Mathew Cummings made Mar 30 at 2022 11:59 AM

SSgt Mathew Cummings — Wed, 30 Mar 2022 11:59:04 -0400

In regards to modern USAF personnel, recruiting measures are leaning away from actually being "military" and more just a career. As far as training everyone to be on par with basic marksmanship, too far of an unacceptable attrition rate would be incurred with mandate marksmanship for all positions in compliance with the recruiting measures. I absolutely do not agree with it from a personal opinion. Now if it were to come down to the budget comparison, if you don't have a service branch than can fully defend itself, then you do not have a military service branch, you have entry level cub scouts. I do note that specified jobs require it and I tip my hat to the fact. I am repulsed by the lack of self preservation capabilites on a mass with far too many individuals in this country and in the "military" today. Forget the fact I'm a Marine. I do my best to know history. Hardship creates strong citizens, strong citizens create good times, good times create weak people, weak people create hardship. Sic vis pacem, para bellum!

Response by A1C Medrick "Rick" DeVaney made Apr 28 at 2022 2:55 AM

A1C Medrick "Rick" DeVaney — Thu, 28 Apr 2022 02:55:52 -0400

I'm About Six Years Older Than Dirt, Served From 61 - 65,
But I Think We All Had To Be Range Qualified Before Basic Training Ended,
Have The Rules Changed?

Response by TSgt Douglas Greenwood made May 7 at 2022 10:40 PM

TSgt Douglas Greenwood — Sat, 07 May 2022 22:40:26 -0400

All Air Force members, while at Basic training received weapons qualification. At least when I entered the military, that’s the way it was.

Response by SPC Rodger Bell made May 12 at 2022 7:54 AM

SPC Rodger Bell — Thu, 12 May 2022 07:54:39 -0400

If you are a part of any branch of the military you should know basic Rifleman

Response by Sgt Lance Mara made May 15 at 2022 9:41 AM

Sgt Lance Mara — Sun, 15 May 2022 09:41:57 -0400

Excellent point; especially on you rhetorical question, "ummmm why did you join the military in the first place ...?"
Being a prior crew-chief, I was well aware that a perimeter breach left is with a very short time (I think it was a matter of less than a minute) before any of us expired. Using a small tool box for cover with out the ability to return fire successfully would only serve to enhance the shooters position. That is, of course, if the airman could find the safety in the first place.
The AF doesn't necessarily need to know battle tactics, but should know how to defend themselves should the Army or Marines ability to defend the base's perimeter to full extent be comprimised.
It's happened.
If aircraft don't launch, ground pounders will be at a disadvantage. That and the enemy has our equipment. Correct me if I'm wrong, but- sans rules of engatement - in a nutshell that's all there is to it.

Response by SSG Stewart Ritchey made May 15 at 2022 10:32 PM

SSG Stewart Ritchey — Sun, 15 May 2022 22:32:40 -0400

I was familiar with shooting as a kid before I joined the AF in 1956, so I promptly fell in love with the M-1 carbine, their weapon at the time. It made a polite little bang, with no recoil at all, unlike my deer rifle "Ol' Kick an' Beller".
With today's weapons, it shouldn't take any more than a couple of day's instruction to determine which end the bullet comes out of and hit a target with it. I don't think that's asking too much out of a basic training schedule. After all, don't all youngsters think they're John Wayne? Or Juanita, as the case may be?

Response by SPC John Williams made May 16 at 2022 12:20 PM

SPC John Williams — Mon, 16 May 2022 12:20:29 -0400

I wasn't in the Air Force, so I'm not familiar with what they get trained on. I always figured that they had some weapons training. I can see where they might not need to qualify on m16. I do think everyone in the military should have some weapons training because it helps enforce the seriousness of the business. A lot of the of soldiers first time to ever touch a weapon is in Basic Training. I think the training could be a very good thing.

Response by Sgt Bruce Holmes made May 16 at 2022 7:37 PM

Sgt Bruce Holmes — Mon, 16 May 2022 19:37:22 -0400

What a maroon!!!

Response by PO1 Charles Coffee made May 19 at 2022 6:41 AM

PO1 Charles Coffee — Thu, 19 May 2022 06:41:54 -0400

You're in the military

Response by A1C Robert Gundy made May 19 at 2022 2:31 PM

A1C Robert Gundy — Thu, 19 May 2022 14:31:39 -0400

I think you are in error

Response by TSgt Ken Vandevoort made Jun 11 at 2022 5:30 PM

TSgt Ken Vandevoort — Sat, 11 Jun 2022 17:30:53 -0400

I worked with another ground radio operator and we both received PCS orders at the same time. I went to the Middle East to a radio station at a site. We had our own weapon and we had to count and verify 120 rounds at the start of each shift (actually there were 126).
My co-worker went to Vietnam and was assigned to South Koreans on the ground as their radio operator. Long story short, he was wounded twice, saved the South Koreans and was decorated by the South Korean government and received the Air Force Cross.

Response by Col John Madison made Jun 22 at 2022 6:51 PM

Col John Madison — Wed, 22 Jun 2022 18:51:41 -0400

Most of the Air Force is "in the rear with gear" with exceptions for CCTs/PJ, and affiliated AFSC's attached to Army units, Air Ground Ops, etc. In the blue to green scenarios, the units filling those were spun up with US Army training on camps/posts/Forts doing USA small unit training and drills to do just that when they had to fulfill such missions. I would expect that to occur in future op's. There is only so much time one can take to "prepare" all personnel for their anticipated roles in the combat theaters, and this is indeed dynamic, always subject to change. We all see the view from our own tree stand, but most typically the USAF personnel who spend the greatest amount of time over enemy territory are the pilots...but their weapons are different than the grunts, unless they are shot down. As for larger crews...about the best they can do is to throw their flight lunches at the enemy.

Response by CH (CPT) Jerry McGowin made Jun 23 at 2022 11:42 AM

CH (CPT) Jerry McGowin — Thu, 23 Jun 2022 11:42:57 -0400

The Air Force is basicly Boy Scouts that fly.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 23 at 2022 7:52 PM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 23 Jun 2022 19:52:29 -0400

That is down right stupid. I know what their thinking is but its stupid. ALL branches of the military should take the Marine Approach. EVERYONE is 1st and foremost a ground troop. THEN ur MOS. Simple reason is u never know if ur protection is going to breakdown. And if it does and Airforce then has a lot of preventable deaths on their hands.

Response by MSgt Thomas O'Rourke made Jun 24 at 2022 1:19 PM

MSgt Thomas O'Rourke — Fri, 24 Jun 2022 13:19:42 -0400

It’s based on exposure to hostile fire. Security Forces a lot of combat skills training and CE gets regular marksmanship training but some other AFSCs get less. I was in CE.

Response by SSgt Jeremiah Rathbun made Jun 24 at 2022 7:52 PM

SSgt Jeremiah Rathbun — Fri, 24 Jun 2022 19:52:17 -0400

I retired from POL in 2011, but qualified every two years. Every time I deployed to the AOR, I deployed with a M-16. I understand the mindset of office workers not expecting to ever use a rifle, but wished we could have spent more range time, myself. I personally believe that everyone in the services should have to qualify at least annually. Too many younger Airmen saw their service as a job with great benefits, but didn't see the real purpose. Even though I only worked fuels, I deployed enough and saw enough rockets, mortars, and small arms fire coming toward me to understand our roll as members of the military. I shudder to think what the mindset is these days... I truly worry about the military's capabilities these days. If we look at it historically, Airmen were armed AND using their rifles in many of the past conflicts, regardless of career field. How many times were FOBs in Vietnam and Korea under attack by ground forces? If things escalate beyond Ukraine, we will get the call. This newer generation of Airman are not ready.

For the most part, I agree with the other branches calling it the Chair Force. Even a lot of Security Forces is not ready for the reality of pulling the trigger. I hope I'm wrong...

Response by SSgt Zane Wise made Jun 25 at 2022 8:21 AM

SSgt Zane Wise — Sat, 25 Jun 2022 08:21:24 -0400

I don not know what the training is now but when i went through Basic in 76 we were taught on M-16 and how to break it down clean and reassemble. and then went to the firing range to shot, granted alot of us did not know what hell they were doing but i did as i had gun training and used guns as a teenager so I enjoyed the chance to use the gun. By the way i went into Aircraft Maintenance and worked C-141's my whole 8 years and went all over the world flying on them but did not have to carry any weapons. But i do know that if the situation had come up i would have looked for and used any weapon i could get my hands on.

Response by MSgt Earl King made Jun 25 at 2022 1:23 PM

MSgt Earl King — Sat, 25 Jun 2022 13:23:03 -0400

So in what situation would a airman be able to use a rifle, you are not combat trained for a reason! If they wanted to be in combat, they would have joined another branch of service, I suggest you stop mudding the water and just do your job, because it seems to me you aren't!!

Response by Pvt Gary Grunenberger made Jun 25 at 2022 2:37 PM

Pvt Gary Grunenberger — Sat, 25 Jun 2022 14:37:38 -0400

That is about the stupidist reason iv ever heard. All men and women of all armed forces (note the word armed) should be a least checked out on firearms.

Response by TSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 25 at 2022 7:39 PM

TSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 25 Jun 2022 19:39:33 -0400

in 1996 when I was a Unit Deployment Manager, we were moving out 45 airman and all had to qualify on the M-16. The qualifications went well for almost everyone. We had one young SSgt who failed to qualify three times. He should have been removed from the AF for not being able to qualify. However, he was the best aircraft maintainer in the squadron and the commander deployed him. Point is, the Air Force is inherently technicians, not rifleman.

Response by Sgt Neil Foster made Jun 25 at 2022 7:48 PM

Sgt Neil Foster — Sat, 25 Jun 2022 19:48:39 -0400

I agree with your question 100%. I joined the USAF in 1979 because it was the 'least military' of all branches... For MANY Airmen, weapon training was limited to firing an M-16, modified to shoot .22 LR ONE TIME during Basic Training... and many never saw a weapon for the remainder of their four-year enlistment!

I came to realize that in today's (late 70s/early 80s) highly mobile modern battlefield THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS 'REAR ECHELON'... what is considered 'rear echelon' today can easily become BEHIND THE LINES tomorrow. IF YOU DO NOT KNOW HOW TO USE A WEAPON AT THAT TIME, YOU ARE DEAD!

Additionally, seeing how much danger an inept President (at that time, it was Carter) put us all in was my wakeup call. The Iranian Hostage Crisis, the Sandinistas taking over Nicaragua and the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan all made me realize that the shit can hit the fan at any time, and I wanted to make sure I was able to defend myself.

I was assigned as a Classified Cargo Courier, requiring annual qualification on the M-16. I decided that the annual training was insufficient, so I purchased an AR-15, and practiced regularly... I realized how bad things were when I was giving a friend a ride, and he saw a 30 round AR-15 magazine in my car and said "This looks like part of a gun." I wish he was joking, but he WASN'T.

It all boils down the the fact that we were (are) members of the US Military. Our ID cards said "ARMED Forces of the United States"... we ALL need to be able to protect each other's backs if and when the Shit Hits The Fan!

Response by SgtMaj Billy Zinnerman made Jun 27 at 2022 1:23 PM

SgtMaj Billy Zinnerman — Mon, 27 Jun 2022 13:23:00 -0400

I agree with you whole heartly, I don't know what they are thinking about. The only thing I do know is the Pararescue Is what It Is ,Because to apply you have to be prior special forces in another branch of militarfor at least five (5) years. Also with a medical background .

Response by Sgt Dan Gahafer made Jul 27 at 2022 8:19 PM

Sgt Dan Gahafer — Wed, 27 Jul 2022 20:19:28 -0400

When I was stationed at Ramstein AFB in the early 1980s as a young SGT, my boss was a TSGT who told me many times that if the Soviet Hordes attacked over the Fulda Gap, we would be evacuated with the dependents. While it's true that we had no combat training as computer programmers, I think he was deluding himself but nonetheless he never qualified on any weapon outside of basic training. I, on the other hand, qualified expert on M-16 and .38, and had no illusions about evacuating.

Response by PO2 John Harker made Aug 2 at 2022 3:05 PM

PO2 John Harker — Tue, 02 Aug 2022 15:05:52 -0400

I felt the same way about the Navy at first, but I learned that the Navy does indeed have ground forces and a need for ongoing small arms training. I spent time in a MIUW unit which is a mix of expeditionary warfare and ground combat. Our job was to prevent a Pearl Harbor style attack on friendly ports no matter where they were. We were also capable of defending our campsite and sonar nets. We could be completely independent of any base if necessary, and deploying the net simply required enough manpower to carry the sonobuoys and the small boat. A small campsite/command post could be set up within range of the sonobuoys.
Also surface Sailors would qualify with 50 caliber mounts to defend against hostile small craft and incoming anti ship missiles, the idea being to shred those before they reached attack range.

Response by Sgt Ingrid Malik made Aug 2 at 2022 6:21 PM

Sgt Ingrid Malik — Tue, 02 Aug 2022 18:21:28 -0400

I was in the Air Force from 1978 to 1982 and I had to qualify on the M-16 when I got orders to Germany. I served on an Air Base for four years. We had an Army unit stationed with us. They were great soldiers and it was an honor to serve with them even though we were different branches of the Armed Forces. I had my job and they had theirs, We in the Air Force have great respect for the Army unit stationed with us.

Response by A1C Isa Kocher made Aug 5 at 2022 11:22 AM

A1C Isa Kocher — Fri, 05 Aug 2022 11:22:26 -0400

the cook does not spend all day feeding chickens and harvesting parsley. a taxi driver does not spend all day doing motor maintenance. the coast guard does not have aircraft carriers and the marines don't have intercontinental ballistic missiles.

the usa president does not personally command a tank.

i qualified on the rifle range. all my shots neatly grouped inside a narrow circle, all more or less touching each other just left of center. someone had to help load it. i fired it.

i was a weather tech. early retirement with disabilities. didn't finish all four years. inredible surgery saved my face but i had wires holding my skull together for a year.

i did not care that my surgeons wore no stars. anywhere. civilians.

they put my face back together well enough.

that's why we are loyal to the mission, we the people, not me me me. IMHO

Response by SGT Randy Bordner made Sep 7 at 2022 9:02 AM

SGT Randy Bordner — Wed, 07 Sep 2022 09:02:39 -0400

I believe all military members should have at least a moderate proficiency in ight weapons. Look up Chief Master Sergeant Richard Etchberger who was posthumously awarded the Medal of Honor as a radar technician. He and a group of other AF technicians died defending a remote location that our military said "was impossible" to over-run but we under estimated the North Vietnamese soldier. History has proven over and over how underestimation of the enemy leads to disaster. What about the Tet of 1968 when the Viet Cong were attacking and over running our airbases? Guess who was on the perimeter fighting back? Air Force personnel. You should not count on always having the grunts protecting the base. Worst mistake we can make is believing that an airman will never need to shoot a rifle. I believe everyone in the service should have a moderate level of competency with the M4, a pistol and a belt fed machine gun. They don't have to be an expert but should be able to be competent enough to engage the enemy successfully when necessary.

Response by MSgt Carl Longenecker made Sep 7 at 2022 9:47 AM

MSgt Carl Longenecker — Wed, 07 Sep 2022 09:47:28 -0400

The Air National Guard provides primary weapon training during annual training, and requires primary weapon qualification before deploying whether a weapon will be carried or not at the deployed location.

Response by SFC David Reid, M.S, PHR, SHRM-CP, DTM made Sep 7 at 2022 2:49 PM

SFC David Reid, M.S, PHR, SHRM-CP, DTM — Wed, 07 Sep 2022 14:49:43 -0400

Have you asked leaders and others who served about this?

Response by CPL Tanya Otey made Sep 8 at 2022 8:43 AM

CPL Tanya Otey — Thu, 08 Sep 2022 08:43:06 -0400

I agree, all members of military should at least be taught the basics of weaponry in case of an attack I did not know they did not qualify with weapons.

Response by TSgt Teresa Escarsega made Sep 8 at 2022 9:44 PM

TSgt Teresa Escarsega — Thu, 08 Sep 2022 21:44:01 -0400

Well if I wanted to be like the Marines or Army I would have joined those services. However not all Airmen are knuckleheads. I had to carry a gun and we did are own perimeter checks and guard duty. As well as carrying a gun when issuing munitions to other units. So if you don't agree with the Air Force standards why did you switch services. You should have stayed Army people like you are arrogant and think they know it all. I sure am glad I would never have to work beside you. However thank you for your service anyways. We all belong to the same Armed Forces. Retired AF AMMO

Response by MSgt Joseph Nuben made Sep 10 at 2022 10:09 AM

MSgt Joseph Nuben — Sat, 10 Sep 2022 10:09:27 -0400

At one time the Air Police old term in the fifties went to school at Parks Air Force base for training which included legal Spe Ops and warfare courses was 6 months long i personally went from May to Dec of 1955 we were well trained by Army and Marine personnel ' I was glad that i did get that training as in the fifties and sixties we were in some hot spots . I do agree that the Air Force should get more weapons training and be proficient in its use and care.

Response by SMSgt Sheila Berg made Sep 11 at 2022 9:36 AM

SMSgt Sheila Berg — Sun, 11 Sep 2022 09:36:40 -0400

The Air Force has different requirements. There is a qualification standard. A sharp shooter badge is available for those that meet that requirement. Military police have higher shooting requirements. The airmen on Mobility status for rifle training as well as 45's. Don't generalize the Air Force requirements from an Army perspective!

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Oct 16 at 2022 10:50 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Sun, 16 Oct 2022 22:50:55 -0400

If we rely on the Air Force to conduct ground operations we are f@cked. Run like hell!

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 17 at 2022 11:22 AM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 17 Oct 2022 11:22:09 -0400

I didn't know about this. Great idea!

Response by CDR William Kempner made Oct 21 at 2022 9:09 AM

CDR William Kempner — Fri, 21 Oct 2022 09:09:41 -0400

As a former USAF CCT Officer, I understand the thoughts from both sides, but as wisely pointed out here, the AF was never designed at a ground force/base defense force. USAF Security Police are the force for base security stateside, and they do a good job. Certainly , the people on the "sharp end"-PJ's, CCT, Combat Weather (or whatever their name is now) TACP-need to be qualified, stay qualified and proficient.(SPs, too, of course) But the average airman just doesn't need it, nor the time away from regular duties. Somebody mentioned Tet Offensive of 1968. I think that Airmen deploying to a combat theater SHOULD get some familiarization with sidearms, possibly the M-4 if the situation is dicey enough. Kind of like pilots/aircrew getting weapons qualification, based on their role and where they go. But broadbrush qualification of ALL Airmen is a waste of time and money.

Response by CPO Kurt Baschab made Oct 23 at 2022 5:26 PM

CPO Kurt Baschab — Sun, 23 Oct 2022 17:26:06 -0400

I AGREE, WITH YOUR THOUGHTS, you will have service members telling you that the AIRFORCE IS NOT A GROUND FIGHTING UNIT, THIS IS TRUE , UNTILL IF HAS TO BE , BECAUSE IT IS BEING OVERRUN, SERVICE MEMBERS WILL SAY A AIR STRIP HAS NOT BEEN OVER RUN SINCE WWII , SAD TO SAY IF A NATION LIKE CHINA ATTACKS THEY HAVE THE BODYS TO OVERUN A AIRSTRIP, SO WE NEED EVERYONE QUALIFIED ON THERE SERVICE WEAPONS , HOW TO READ A MAP, ETC

WE CAN PRAY IT WONT HAPPEN , THAT WHEN IT HAPPENS, JUST ASK THE Commander of pearl harbor, he and all navel brass believed they were safe from air attack, yet they were mistaken , and lost battle ship row .

THIS IS WHY EVERYSINGLE SERVICE MEMBER SHOULD BE REQUIRED TO GET QUALIFIED AND ISSUED A SERVICE WEAPON . it never happens until it happens .

UNTILL IT IS BEING OVERRUN,
THEN EVERYONE NEEDS TO BE A GROUND FIGHTING UNIT , but it to late to train your service members and more us service member die, I believe every single member in the United States ARMED FORCES SHOULD BE REQUIED, TO BE QUALIFIED WITH THERE SERVICE WEAPON,
why?
SADLY IF WE GO TO WAR, WITH A MAJOR SUPER POWER, LIKE CHINA WE WILL NOT HAVE 3 TO 6 MOUNTHS TO REBUILD AND TRAIN AMERICA ARMED FORCES, LIKE WE DID DURING WWII , WE WILL BE LUCKY TO HAVE A WEEK, MOST LIKLY LESS THAN A HOUR , AMERICA ENEMIES WILL NOT ALLOW AMERICA A CHANCE TO BOUNCE BACK, LIKE WE DID DURING WWII .
this is why I also believe that every single service member should be Issued there service weapon at boot camp, they will keep there service weapon on or near them at all times until discharged from the service,

this is a weapon they will have the option of purchasing from there service when leaving the military service, they can only do this with a HONORABLE Discharge from there military service.

the reason this should be done, is to keep America free, god help this nation if we every go to war with a nation like china we will need every citizen who has been trained who is armed and ready to defend this country.

why?
America will not be as lucky as we were in WWII, WE WILL NOT GO UNTOUCHED, IF China attacks or some other nation attacks, we will be fighting in America city streets, because the US Government is currently not protecting her borders, as per her Constitutional duty's.

America enemy's are sending there service members, spy's TERRORIST, across America southern border to attack and cause chaos, when the times comes , if you do not believe this, you are willfully deft, dumb, and blind, to how dangerous this world is, the question is why are they allowing it to happen ? why is the government working so hard to disarm law abiding American citizens while refusing to investigate and arrest armed criminals and illegals? so yes having as many law abiding citizens and Vets and retired vets armed and ready to fight is protecting this nation. having retired vets, or vets with there service weapon ready to go cannot hurt this country, because the vets will be ready to protect this nation, family, friends, and neighbors.

every services member should not only be required to qualify with their service weapon, EVERY SINGLE MEMBER SHOULD BE REQIRED TO READ AND UNDERSTAND AND ANSWER THE FIVE (W) WHO, WHAT, WHERE, WHEN AND WHY The DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE , THE UNITED STATES CONSTITION, AND EACH OF THE BILL OF RIGHTS, WERE WRITTIN .
WHY YOU ASK?

The answer is Simple,
WHEN YOU ENTERED YOUR MILTARY SERVICE, AND TOOK YOUR OATH, YOU BASICLY SAID , TO GOD AND COUNTRY TO EVERY AMERICAN CITIZEN THAT YOU ARE WILLING TO RISK LOOSEING LIFE AND LIMBS TO PROTECT THE AMERICAN CITIZENS INDIVIVIDUAL CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS.
YET MOST American citizens HAVE NOT EVEN READ THESE DOCUMENTS .
SAD ;(

every single service member who has freely taken this OATH TO UPHOLD, PROTECT AND DEFEND THE UNITED STATES CONSTITION AND THE BILL OF RIGHTS FROM BOTH FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC THREATS, should be required to read and understand them , every service member needs to understand WE DID NOT TAKE A OATH TO PROTECT A POLTICAL PARTY, OR A SINGLE ELECTED OFFICAL AND THERE STAFF, WE TOOK this OATH of are own free will TO PROTECT THE AMERICAN CITIZENS INDIVIDUAL CONSTITUTIOANL RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS.

The service member needs to understand that the united sates Constitution and the Bill of rights place restriction on what the federal government and states can do to the people and states.

IT DOES NOT ALLOW THE FEDERAL Government to do as she please, THIS MEANS that OATH YOU TOOK REQUIRES YOU TO PROTECT EVERY SINGLE GOD GIVEN RIGHT, NOT JUST THE ONES YOU LIKE OR YOUR POLTICAL PARTY LIKES.

YET SO MANY YOUNG, AMERICAN CITIZENS , BOTH MEN AND WOMEN HAVE NOT EVEN READ THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE, UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION OR THE BILL OF RIGHTS, AMERICA PUBLIC SCHOOLS NO LONGER TEACH AMERICAN CHILDERN WHAT THERE GOD GIVEN RIGHTS ARE.

THIS IS SO SAD.

WHEN YOU READ THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE , JUST OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD YOU WILL SEE AT LEAST FOUR GOD GIVEN RIGHTS , in this document , might be more listed, BUT THIS IS WHAT I REMEBER OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD , THE FOUNDING FATHERS DID NOT JUST SEND KING GEORGE A LIST OF COMPLANTS, GRIEVANCES AND CRIMES THAT WERE COMMITED BY THE KING OF ENGLAND, NO! THE FOUNDING FATHERS ALSO LISTED AT LEAST FOUR GOD GIVEN RIGHTS THAT EVERY SINGLE HUMAN BEING HAS.

THEY ARE THE RIGHT TO LIFE, IT WAS LISTED FIRST, BECAUSE EVEN AMERICA FOUNDING FATHERS KNEW WITHOUT LIFE, YOU HAVE NO OTHER RIGHTS, THE 2ND RIGHT WAS LIBERTY, YOUR RIGHT TO SPEAK, TRAVEL GO TO CHURCH ETC WITHOUT FEAR OF BEING ATTACKED BY THE STATE OR OTHER CITIZENS THE Third, IS THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS , notice it says you have the right to pursue happiness, it does not Guarantee happiness or a equal outcome, just that the government will do it best to ensure fair play. THEN IT GOES ON TO EXPLANE WHY WE HAVE THE 2ND AMENDMENT, IT IS TO PROTECT THOSE GOD GIVEN RIGHTS, THAT NO GOVERMENT CAN TAKE AWAY UNLESS WE THE PEOPLE ALLOW IT.

THIS BEING SAID , WE THE AMERICAN SERVICE MEMBERS HAVE TAKEN A OATH TO PROTECT AND DEFEND THE AMERICAN CITIZENS INDIVIDUAL CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS FROM BOTH FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC THREATS.

SO HOW CAN WE AMERICAN SERIVICE MEMBERS PROTECT THESE GOD GIVEN RIGHTS? especially IF WE THE ARMED SERVICE MEMBERS HAVE NOT EVEN READ ONE SINGLE WORD OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE, THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTIONA OR THE BILL OF RIGHTS , Did we not take A OATH TO PROTECT THESE GOD GIVEN RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS?

THAT BEING SAID, SHOULD WE NOT AT LEAST READ THEM? TO UNDERSTAND THEM ?

WE the service members TOOK A OATH TO PROTECT THESE GOD GIVEN RIGHTS, WE ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO PROTECT THE political party's or elected officials we are supposed to protect America and her citizens freedoms protect the AMERICAN CITIZEN GOD GIVEN RIGHTS ?

IT IS TRULY SAD MOST AMERICAN CITIZENS HAVE NOT EVEN READ, THE DECLARTION OF INDEPENDENCE, UNITED STATES CONSITITION OR THE BILL OF RIGHTS.

SO HOW ARE AMERICAN SERVICE MEMBERS SUPPOSED TO KNOW A LEAGAL ORDER FROM A UNCONSITIONAL ORDER IF THEY HAVE NOT EVEN READ AND CANNOT ANSWER THE FIVE (W)?
HAVE NOT BEEN TAUGHT RIGHT FROM WROUNG , HAVE NOT READ THE BIBLE, OR UCMJ

IF THE SERVICE MEMBERS HAVE NOT EVEN READ THE DOCUMENTS ONCE? HOW CAN the service member DEFEND THEM?

I BELIVE THIS IS JUST AS IMPORTANT IF NOT MORE, AS ENSURING EVERY SINGLE SERVICE MEMBER IS QUALIFIED WITH THIER SERVICE WEAPON , I BELIVE WE NEED BOTH.

IT JUST AS IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND YOUR OATH, AND WHAT YOU ARE DEFENDING , AS IT IS TO BE PHYSICALLY FIT, OF SOUND MIND, AND BODY, in order to BE QUALIFIED WITH YOUR SERVICE WEPON, TO ENSURE YOU ARE CAPABLE OF DEFENDING THE AMERICAN CITIZEN RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS JUST AS IT IS IMPORTANT TO KNOW WHY YOU HAVE TAKEN THIS OATH.

WHEN YOU ENTERED YOUR MILTARY SERVICE, AND TOOK YOUR OATH, YOU BASICLY SAID , TO GOD, COUNTRY and TO EVERY AMERICAN CITIZEN THAT YOU ARE WILLING TO RISK LOOSEING LIFE AND LIMBS TO PROTECT THE AMERICAN CITIZENS INDIVIVIDUAL CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS.
boy did I go on a rant, and I digressed a bit
I will get off my soap box
HAVE A NICE DAY AND BE SAFE

Response by TSgt Max Lugauer made Oct 24 at 2022 3:49 PM

TSgt Max Lugauer — Mon, 24 Oct 2022 15:49:37 -0400

I joined the Air Force on 22 Aug 1967, we had one day of dry fire ( it rained and we stayed in a classroom). The next day we had live fire, and 20 rounds of practice ( we fired all rounds on a 100-yard range). we had to get 50 rounds out of 65 on paper. After basic training, all we had to fire the M16 was once a year. in Aug 1969 I was sent to Viet Nam a month after I arrived either the 82nd Airborne or the 101 was pulled from around the Viet army and took over the protection of Tan Son Nhut AB. In the Air Force at that time had Security Police Augmentee. I volunteered we were given 1 week of firearms training on the M16, 38 revolvers, and the 12 gauge shotgun. We were the last line of defense if needed, which meant the Shit hit the fan and we were in deep trouble. I would do it again in a heartbeat. I retire on 1 Sept 1987.

Response by Maj Robert Larkowski made Nov 13 at 2022 10:07 AM

Maj Robert Larkowski — Sun, 13 Nov 2022 10:07:27 -0500

I applaud your enthusiasm for getting AF more Gung Ho but the mission of the AF is different from that of the Army and the other Services.
That will probably never change.
Enjoy your time in the AF!

Response by PO1 David M Burns made Nov 28 at 2022 8:46 PM

PO1 David M Burns — Mon, 28 Nov 2022 20:46:20 -0500

with a few exceptions, the Air Force is primarily a combat support outfit. Notice I said "With a few exceptions" But they like to play soldier!

Response by Sgt Donald Daugherty made Nov 29 at 2022 7:22 AM

Sgt Donald Daugherty — Tue, 29 Nov 2022 07:22:11 -0500

USAF Airman fly jets to the combat zone and control the airspace. It has been said that he who control the air space controls the war effort.
You silly grunts think with your rifles in a ditch. Airman service and maintain these jets and they take off and land at bases in safe zones... no where near the combat.
If an airbase is going to get over run by the enemy the Airman and jets are long gone.
If an airbase is under severe attack we have ARMY anti aircraft folks at the ready as well.
And... now with drone technology we cover even more ground with less people and from a further away distance.

Response by LT Louis McKellar made Dec 9 at 2022 2:11 PM

LT Louis McKellar — Fri, 09 Dec 2022 14:11:51 -0500

As an E3 going from a CONUS base to remote Alaska, which is considered overseas, I had to qualify with the M16. As an NCO in the command post, I carried and qualified with a 2inch S&W model 15 revolver.

As a naval officer, I famfired a pump shotgun, a model 1911 pistol and an M14.

Response by TSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 12 at 2022 9:06 AM

TSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 12 Dec 2022 09:06:38 -0500

For the same reason that SERE training can be done on-line, medical readiness training can taught by non-medical personnel, the term “certified” doesn’t mean proficient, and just-in-time training is considered good enough when your life and someone else’s life is on the line. You do understand how much of the USAF is PR? It’s perception and perception IS reality. For the same reason that SO MANY inspections are now paper/documentation based and people aren’t allowed to do what they are supposedly trained and qualified to do. If we don’t demonstrate that there’s a deficiency or problem, how can we say that there is a deficiency or problem? Do you know how often we turned inspection into jokes because those evaluating us had no idea of what we were supposed to be doing. Our section received an OUTSTANDING rating during a CUI and we just rambled out a bunch of words that we knew they wouldn’t understand just to see if those inspecting us were knowledgeable on the subjects. It’s a eye opening experience when the colored lenses come off.

Response by SrA Kathleen Cuyler made Dec 16 at 2022 12:01 AM

SrA Kathleen Cuyler — Fri, 16 Dec 2022 00:01:17 -0500

Join a security position and you will. I had marksman with shotgun, and 9mm and quified with 38

Response by MSgt Veronica Cook made Dec 18 at 2022 7:46 AM

MSgt Veronica Cook — Sun, 18 Dec 2022 07:46:27 -0500

I was qualified on both M16 and 9M, and if needed to,could handle myself. In the Air Force, we also multi-tasked. Don't judge the book. Just like all of us in arms, we are there when needed.

Response by Sgt Ingrid Malik made Jan 2 at 2023 4:27 PM

Sgt Ingrid Malik — Mon, 02 Jan 2023 16:27:54 -0500

I was in the Air Force during the Cold War and stationed in Germany. I had to qualify on the M-16 or I couldn’t go. I didn’t just learn how to shoot. I had to demonstrate that I could take it apart, clean it and put it back together.

Response by SSgt Michael Grafmuller made Jan 2 at 2023 9:49 PM

SSgt Michael Grafmuller — Mon, 02 Jan 2023 21:49:17 -0500

While all air force used to qualify I would agree the false culture seemed to think security forces and special forces. While the Air Force culture is to avoid work and pretending that we were not part of the military that only accounts for 80%. There are more than enough transportation troops that spent days at a time far outside the wire in hostile areas in possession of loaded weapons 24/7 & for a short time security forces sent minimal personnel to work along side us, but that was short, especially for convoy protection units. I will say most Air Force wrongly believe security forces are tip of the spear, in truth many careers have wartime positions and weapons training but this does not usually show unless in a combat zone and even then we are not fortunate enough to stay inside the wire or even in sight of the base perimeter

Response by SSgt Michael Grafmuller made Jan 2 at 2023 10:05 PM

SSgt Michael Grafmuller — Mon, 02 Jan 2023 22:05:58 -0500

My active duty experience has not been anything like this but reserves are a completely different world where most of this is true. Transportation, PJs and security forces have the most exposure to actual hostility outside the wire. And with the exception of weather and intel who see no action at all are the career fields that spend the most time working with the army. I would agree that with the exception of security forces, transportation vehicle operations, civil engineering and actual special forces there is more danger than good in arming most and that goes for active duty and reserves

Response by CPL Miguel Velez made Oct 10 at 2023 9:11 AM

CPL Miguel Velez — Tue, 10 Oct 2023 09:11:02 -0400

That’s a good one. I enlisted to do action and defend our Nation. So I joined SF. Lots of joy there. I was en charged of our arms room, my 192 M-16, 12 shotguns, 5 .45 had to be sparkling cleaned as new. My responsibility was to handle all weapons serviced and functional. I was excited when I told my own Coronel that his weapon was no approved. He had to go back and strip the weapon as I requested.

Response by SP5 Gary Perkins made Nov 15 at 2023 6:51 PM

SP5 Gary Perkins — Wed, 15 Nov 2023 18:51:45 -0500

Example: Enemies could parachute