• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

A Tactical/Combat Shooters Course

D

D-n-A

Guest
http://www.mcu.usmc.mil/sncoa/Okinawa/ACRS5-04SMMC.htm

Article that is related to a topic we had here a while ago (what training did pvt lynch's unit receive).


CLASS 5-04
SERGEANT MAJOR OF THE MARINE CORPS
WRITING AWARD
Gunnery Sergeant Schaffer


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A Tactical/Combat Shooters Course

As warfare changes and evolves, there is an urgent need for a tactical/combat shooters course for every Marine because this will save lives.  In the modern world the Marine Corps needs to change the way it thinks and trains young Marines.  There is a need for more advanced marksmen on today's battlefields.  They should be well versed in the art of close quarters and urban combat.  The current curriculum for training Marines with their table of organization (T/O) weapons needs to go beyond the current goal of sustainment and teach advanced marksmanship.

The conflicts in Somalia, Afghanistan, and Iraq have been different types of warfare fought on different types of battlefields that were unlike anything seen since Vietnam.  Unlike the war in Vietnam, the majority of enemy combatants in more recent conflicts are not fighting for a country but rather for a religion or warlord who is either trying to impose his ideals or is fighting for more power and money.  As we observed in Somalia, a company of well trained Rangers kept an entire city at bay for close to twenty-four hours.  While this was portrayed as a defeat to US diplomacy, militarily, the Rangers held their own against a numerically superior force.  They sustained eighteen killed in action (KIA) while it was estimated that they inflicted between five hundred and one thousand KIA inflicted on the Somalian Rebels (Bowden, 1999, p. 333).  It is the type of training that Rangers currently use that the Marines should be pursuing.  The problem is that few Marines spend any time with their T/O weapons other than when they go to the rifle range for their annual qualifications.  These qualifications focus on sustainment and not advancement.  How can the Marine Corps let this stand?  This is an issue that could save American lives.  Every Marine should go into battle with the very best and advanced training available.  Marines are required to spend two hours a week training in the Marine Corps Martial Arts program but none with the weapon that is the only thing that stands between them and the enemy.  The Marine Corps does not need to reinvent the wheel, just develop training which focuses on weapons manipulation and speed reloading.  This should be coupled with squad and platoon immediate action drills.

Most infantry military occupational specialties (MOS) are already doing this type of training but it should be provided to all Marines.  As seen in the last few years, all Marines can find themselves on combat patrols or convoy duties where the chances of meeting the enemy are very good.  This was the case with the convoy that received so much press during the second gulf war that involved Private First Class (PFC) Jessica Lynch.  Lynch and the other members of a convoy of soldiers from â Å“the 507th  Army Maintenance Company â “ a support unit of clerks, repairmen and cooks had taken a wrong turn in the desert, stumbling into Nasiriyah by mistake.  Without warning, the company suddenly found itself surrounded, an easy target for Iraqi soldiers and Fedayeen paramilitary forces armed with AK-47's, mortars, and rocket propelled grenades (RPG).  The ensuing attack proved to be the Army's bloodiest day of the ground warâ ? (Davidson, 2003, p.1).  Eleven American soldiers were killed and nine were wounded when the 507th came under fire.  As a result of the ambush, the convoy was disorganized and many vehicles careened off of each other, including Lynch's high mobility multi wheeled vehicle (HMMWV).  Most of the soldiers, who were able to fight at this point, were having trouble returning fire as their weapons jammed after each attempt to fire.  These soldiers were either never taught immediate action for a jammed weapon or, under the pressure of combat and after seeing many of their friends die, they failed to utilize it.  The one soldier who fought back and applied immediate action to his weapon was PFC Patrick Miller.  PFC Miller, a mechanic who Lynch cited as being the real hero of the day, kept a cool head throughout the ordeal, despite being wounded.  PFC Miller, after being shot in the arm, picked up a weapon and engaged the enemy applying the immediate action of tapping the magazine, pulling the charging handle to the rear and releasing it, and pulling the trigger (tap, rack, bang).  PFC Miller did this seven times until the threat was neutralized.  Miller was later awarded the Silver Star for his actions, the nation's third highest award for valor (Wallace, 2003, p. 1).  Of all the soldiers in that company, only one applied the immediate action for a jammed weapon, and he was credited with saving the rest of the soldiers' lives.

Would a Marine convoy react any differently?  Marine support personnel receive about the same amount of training, with their weapons, as these soldiers did.  This is the reason that the Marine Corps needs to set up a combat shooter course, so that Marines will have the confidence in themselves, their weapons, and their fellow Marines to effectively fight back.  In combat, training takes over and it is this training that will make the difference between life and death.  Marines and soldiers should not have to think about immediate action for a jammed weapon; they should react.  Most of the training could be conducted at the unit level and could become part of the Marine Corps Martial Arts Program.  Also, there could be two or three days added at the rifle range where the Marines could be evaluated.  This is an idea whose time has come.  Marines should not have to wait until they are in combat to learn how to confidently and competently handle their weapons.  Confidence is built through repetition, and Marines are currently getting very little hands-on time with their T/O weapons.  The benefits of this training would be immediate because Marines will continue to be sent into harm's way, in places like Afghanistan and Iraq, for the foreseeable future.  The Marine Corps should strive to become more lethal at the squad and platoon levels, and this is just the start that it needs.

The United States and the Marine Corps will be in Afghanistan and Iraq for at least the foreseeable future. Marines must advance and adjust the way they think about training for combat.  As warfare changes and evolves, there is an urgent need for a tactical/combat shooters course for every Marine because this will save lives.  This is the type of training that is going to prepare the Marine Corps and the individual Marine to face the challenges of tomorrow's battlefields.  This can only happen if the Marine Corps changes the way it trains its riflemen.


 
The Marine Gunner (CW4) in Haiti ran a program like this for their battalion.  At a minimum troops fired 800-1000 rounds over 3 days at targets anywhere from 400 yards to 2 yards.  Entry through doors was practiced by all.  A very comprehensive shooting program, just wish we could do something like this.
 
In my humble experience, we do conduct shooting "programs" like this.   Unfortunately, they do not occur on a standardized basis throughout the Army as they ought to.   "Practical" courses of fire (beyond typical field-firing) are conducted and CQB-specific shooting techniques are taught to varying degrees within the Reg F infantry battalions that I have served in.   They tend to be an amalgam of experiences gained by personnel who have worked with other military forces, rather than a standardized Canadian Army program, but the end result is effective.   Sadly, we typically only see enough resources to conduct such ammo-intensive training when we are conducting final pre-deployment training based on receipt of a warning order (eg. a confirmed mission).  

To give you a reasonably recent example, all members of 3 PPCLI were put through a live-fire CQB shooting skills course of fire prior to our 2002 deployment to Afghanistan.   The instruction was provided by NCOs who had received "train the trainer" instruction from unit personnel with prior JTF-2 service.    As best I can recall, riflemen fired in excess of 500 rounds, by day and night (to include NVG and laser-aimer, KITE sight, and Maxi-KITE sight familiarization).   This focussed live-fire training was supplemented by considerable use of Simunition in force-on-force urban operations interior combat training.   Once in theatre, ammo was plentiful and we pursued a VERY aggressive program of shooting skills and field-firing continuation training with the full range of infantry weapon systems.

If my understanding is correct, a formalized Canadian Army close-quarters shooting program is now being finalized and will be incorporated into the Urban Operations Instructor's Course conducted by the CTC Infantry School.   The pilot course is kicking off this month.   I am told that the shooting program itself is a week long, and very ammo intensive.   The idea being that graduates of the course will then be qualified to conduct similar training (ammo permitting) at their parent units.   Worst-case, even in the absence of sufficient live rounds many of the basic techniques can be effectively imparted through the use of simulation (eg.   a combination of SAT and Simunition).  

The Canadian Army is a bit behind the times in formalizing what we have been doing on an ad hoc basis for years now, but that is about to change for the better with adoption of the standardized shooting package taught on the Urban Ops Instructor Course.   From what I've heard, it is a very good package which takes the best of techniques from numerous NATO nations as well as our own fellows at DHTC.
 
Further to my last....

I had a beer with the Course Officer of the Pilot "Urban Operations Instructor's Course" this evening at happy hour.   He confirmed to me that the Pilot course serial has been ongoing for 2 weeks, and that the individual skills shooting package was outstanding.   It was a week long, designed and instructed by 2 "loaner" Assaulters from DHTC.   The students fired 300 rds per man per day over 5 days, but the recommendation is that they increase the allotment to 450 rds per man per day.   The course of fire mirrored what we did under the tutelage of our ex-JTF instructors in 3 PPCLI 2 years ago.   Basic individual skills from a static firing position (stance, trigger manipulation, "flash-sight picture", etc), followed by pivot drills, followed by 180-degree "Kill-House" drills with target discrimination.   Gone are the days of a frag through the door and a indiscriminate full-auto fire.   Current ROE don't allow such "liberal" application of fire.   Nowadays, building and room clearance are predicated on postiive identification of targets and discriminatory application of fire.  

From the individual CQB engagement drills, the students have now progressed to team (2 man) and det (4 man) interior combat drills.   This training is conducted using Simunition.    It is also taught by the DHTC experts.   Beyond Det level, the DHTC guys have significant imput but convention infantry drills start to take precedence over the specialized approach.   This is where the non-DHTC instructors with multiple NATO Urban Ops Course qualifications come into play, teaching section-level and above "conventional" tactics which work in a urban evironment.   They exploit the latest lessons learned from the USMC in Fallujah, etc.

I could go on, but I suspect that those with an interest get the idea.   The Canadian Army now has a formalized "CQB/Interior Combat" shooting program designed by DHTC.   It is being taught and will be promulgated within Reg F (and presumably Res F) infantry units.   The Urban Ops Instructor's Course will run once per year in Gagetown.   The availability of Reg F candidates for the pilot course was such that local Res F Sr NCOs were course-loaded.   The prerequisites are (currently) DP 3Ã qualified.   That may change.   The bottom line is that anyone in a leadership rank who is interested in learning cutting edge CQB/Urban Ops   drills and skills should be looking to get on next year's course.   This is seriously "high-speed" stuff, and the price is certainly right...

Cheers,

Mark
 
Mark,

Thanks for bringing us up to speed with what the Infantry is doing to increase proficiency in the close urban fight.

How about the rest of the Army, more specifically the CSS trades?  I think that GySgt. Schaffer's central idea was to increase the level of combat shooting for all trades within the Marine Corps, not just the infantry. 

Also, what is the Navy doing in regard to training their boarding parties CQB skills?  Is there any talk of sending Navy pers. through the Army's new Urban Ops. Instructor's course on a modified naval course?  If the Army course is to be only run once a year, how hard would it for the Navy to reserve a block of time for their course using the CTC facilities and instructors for a CQB/Interior Shooting course?
 
Sounds pretty rock on, and the navy allready has a boarding party course, that they learn all this but in a naval environment.
 
From what I heard is that the Navy's boarding party course is only two weeks long and it takes someone who's never handled a pistol or other weapon other than C7 and tries to bring them up to speed in CQB tactics. 

Does anybody have any referenceable information on the Navy's Boarding Party Course and CQB shooting skills taught?
 
Mark C - You said that reserve Sr NCOs were loaded on to the Urban Operations Instructor Course. Do you happen to know if a provision will exist for reserve NCO's to be loaded on every one? I am from a west coast Regiment and we are the last to hear of anything, of course! If I know that reservists are able to attend, I can push my Ops WO and RSSO to keep an eye open. This is just the kind of course we need! I think it's about time. We did a year of FIBUA a couple of years ago, and had to make up SOP's and get drills from all different sources -USMC, Brits, even a couple of law enforcement members who do hostage rescue! We managed to accomplish our task but this would make it a lot easier.
 
Westie,

I am not sure if a set number of vacancies will be offered to the Res F for the annual iteration of the Urban Ops Instructor Course.  My understanding is that the few who attended this year were local Reservists who filled some last-minute vacancies on the pilot course when Reg F units were unable to fill due to short-notice taskings, etc.  In other words, the limited Res F involvement was (to my understanding) entirely due to opportunity rather than intent. 

Having said that, I am quite sure that if the Res F Infantry senior leadership were to lobby for a slice of the annual course vacancies (or perhaps even an annual Res F serial) they would likely achieve success.  An empahsis on the current threat environment (3-block war, complex/urban terrain, assymetric threat) coupled with the need for relevant sub-sub-unit Res F trg in light of ever increasing Res F participation in overseas operations might provide the necessary justification.  This would be a suitable topic for some well-informed Res F CBG Comd or Unit CO to raise with D Inf at the next Canadian Infantry Association Conference.  Failing that, at the annual CO's conference or the next Army Training conference. 

Start the ball rolling through your unit chain of command and see how far it goes.  The process begins with educating your leadership that such a course exists and convincing them that there would be "value added" to having at least one member of the unit qualified as an urban ops "trainer".

Cheers,

Mark
 
Thanks for the info Mark. I will start pushing from the bottom. The problem that exist in my unit, which I'm sure is not uncommon, is that most of our leadership isn't forward thinking or thinks 'out of the box'. Although we do have some exceptional officers, they are only starting to move into positions of influence.  The other problem we have is the Rockies! It seems all roads stop at the mountains. However I will still push as I think every unit should have a SME in this subject, especially if the rumours are true about a future CRIC to Afghanistan.
 
On the subject of CQB/Urban ops SMEs, at what level do you think that the parent unit will receive the most benefit from soldiers sent on this course?

I'm assuming that in the Regular side of things, 1 MCpl/Sgt. per platoon be sent for the course each serial it's run?  Reserve side 1 MCpl./Sgt. per unit level be sent on the annual res. course, considering that most reserve units can only field 1-2 platoons each.  After a few successive years of running people through the course, at the company level you're going to have a pretty decent cadre of urban ops instructors that will cause the tree of knowledge grow to the point that every rifle section commander is an urban ops instructor (at least in the reg. side of things).

Lets hope that the initial urban instructor's course is not a one-time only thing and that CTC runs this thing on a regular basis to get as many soldiers qualified as instructors as possible.  This could be a very beautiful thing!
 
Back
Top