- Reaction score
- 1,304
- Points
- 1,040
I have nothing to add at this point; however, I find this discussion very interesting and informative. I would simply "mark" this thread; however, I hate the flood of emails to let me know that there is a post.
So, to stay on target (somewhat), I will disagree from this earlier assertion:
First of all, it's a test, not a teaching tool, and if done correctly (eg: following all the work up applications, scored properly, with coaches when required, etc), it assesses, accurately, marksmanship from 300 m in to 10 (?). Now, in our conventional ranges, there is no method to induce the stress of combat, so instead of that, artificial stressors are introduced.
During the run-down, your breathing increases and you have the stress of making shots within a time limit. This assesses the shooter's ability to control his or her breathing, as well as to make "naturally aimed" shots at all ranges out to 300m. (OK, not ALL ranges, I mean, we don't fire at 246.5 metres for example, but I think you all understand what I mean...). As well, due to the ammo distribution, we are forced stoppages. Yes, it is the empty mag stoppage, and a good shot will count his or her rounds and know when it's coming; however, suffice it to say that stoppages are programmed into the test.
So, this test is not designed for combat marksmanship, but rather for "stressed musketry", I suppose, which in turn makes one a better shot in combat, or so the theory goes. In other words, if one's aim is instinctively following the marksmanship principles, then one will score higher on the PWT 3. And if one aims instinctively, even under the artificial stress of the PWT, then one can induce that that same shooter's marksmanship should be better under the very real stress of combat.
(I hope that this made sense. It is the holidays, after all)
And having said all that, I wholeheartedly agree that the 100m + fight is best suited for the crew-served weapons. As I've often said, half-jokingly to candidates in the past, riflemen are "glorified bodyguards" for the crew-served weapons.
So, to stay on target (somewhat), I will disagree from this earlier assertion:
Allow me to explain.c. The PWT-3 "Run-Down" is a stupid test - it encourages soldiers to run and shoot when they clearly are not in a position to suppress, let alone kill, the enemy. "Shooting and moving" is best reserved for the 0-100m fight where the rifle becomes useful. Anything past that is "any necessary, well-aimed fire to support a crew-served weapon."
First of all, it's a test, not a teaching tool, and if done correctly (eg: following all the work up applications, scored properly, with coaches when required, etc), it assesses, accurately, marksmanship from 300 m in to 10 (?). Now, in our conventional ranges, there is no method to induce the stress of combat, so instead of that, artificial stressors are introduced.
During the run-down, your breathing increases and you have the stress of making shots within a time limit. This assesses the shooter's ability to control his or her breathing, as well as to make "naturally aimed" shots at all ranges out to 300m. (OK, not ALL ranges, I mean, we don't fire at 246.5 metres for example, but I think you all understand what I mean...). As well, due to the ammo distribution, we are forced stoppages. Yes, it is the empty mag stoppage, and a good shot will count his or her rounds and know when it's coming; however, suffice it to say that stoppages are programmed into the test.
So, this test is not designed for combat marksmanship, but rather for "stressed musketry", I suppose, which in turn makes one a better shot in combat, or so the theory goes. In other words, if one's aim is instinctively following the marksmanship principles, then one will score higher on the PWT 3. And if one aims instinctively, even under the artificial stress of the PWT, then one can induce that that same shooter's marksmanship should be better under the very real stress of combat.
(I hope that this made sense. It is the holidays, after all)
And having said all that, I wholeheartedly agree that the 100m + fight is best suited for the crew-served weapons. As I've often said, half-jokingly to candidates in the past, riflemen are "glorified bodyguards" for the crew-served weapons.