Posted on May 28, 2015
Why don't all members of the Air Force have to be fully qualified to be a rifleman in case of hostile events?
392K
4.23K
1.93K
562
562
0
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?
Rifleman
3P: Security Forces
Air Force
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 907
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Everything comes at a cost. What are you willing to exchange for the time needed to make airmen proficient?
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
TSgt (Join to see)
I learned to shoot a Mossberg .22 semi auto that looked like an m1. my grandfather gave it to me when I turned 12. I still have it. it's a great shooting rifle I used for squirrels and rabbits back in ohio. the barrel is getting worn so I don't shoot it much. my grandfather put a weaver 4x scope on it just for me because I shoot left handed. the cross hairs got broke and my uncle replaced them with hair from my cousin. do you remember anything about your old gun?
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Be serious! Do you really want a bunch of Zoomies running aroud with weapons?
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
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.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google