Rifle Firing Position

[Harp]

Response

Why?

Because I have always been fascinated with military history, hardware, and such since I began reading Anerican Heritage Series books andwatching Combat, Twelve O'Clock High, and other military history programs from childhood on up. Do think it's:
a) inappropriate, considering my calling, b) indicative of repressed violent tendencies, or c) other? Perhaps a PM would be in order to give you a more in depth response.

dean[/QUOTE]

Please excuse my earlier remark, Dean. I did not mean to infer
anything by it, and hope that it did not seem a caustic quip.

 

[deanglen]

Because I have always been fascinated with military history, hardware, and such since I began reading Anerican Heritage Series books andwatching Combat, Twelve O'Clock High, and other military history programs from childhood on up. Do think it's:
a) inappropriate, considering my calling, b) indicative of repressed violent tendencies, or c) other? Perhaps a PM would be in order to give you a more in depth response.

dean

Please excuse my earlier remark, Dean. I did not mean to infer
anything by it, and hope that it did not seem a caustic quip.[/QUOTE]

No sweat! I know people who find it odd that a pastor, or anybody, for that matter, can get so interested in things that cause pain and suffering and heartbreak and death , as well as defend freedom, and so on. I just wanted you to know that I would understand if you thought it strange, and wanted to answer you in a thoughtful manner appropriate to your question. I think my response to you shows once again that writing well is difficult when you want to communicate the right tone which speech can do automatically. I didn't take it as a caustic quip at all. More of a pointed inquiry. Thanks for responding, Harp, everything's cool!

dean

 

[Haversack]

deanglen wrote:
"A small professional army has more time to spend on marksmanship than one rapidly expanding to a wartime footing. Also, excellent rifle marksmanship was a decisive factor on the battlefield until machine guns and improved artillery proved themselves to be the real killers around the turn of the century."

Indeed. At the Battle of Mons in 1914, the casualties inflicted on the Germans by the BEF's rapid and accurate rifle fire caused the Germans to think they were facing machine guns. Then again, the BEF was a small professional army which had invested much in marksmanship. Going into WWI, the breech-loading magazine rifle with smokeless powder was the dominant weapon. This had been the lesson of the Boer War, the Russo-Japanese War, the various Balkan contrempts, an innumerable colonial fights.

Haversack.

 

[Haversack]

deanglen wrote:
"No sweat! I know people who find it odd that a pastor, or anybody, for that matter, can get so interested in things that cause pain and suffering and heartbreak and death , as well as defend freedom, and so on."

I wouldn't sweat it either. There have been plenty of clergymen who have had military or violent pasts. When I was growing up, our parish's minister had been a company commander in the PPCLI fighting in Belgium during WWII. He had stories to tell if he thought you could learn from them. And there was once an Archbishop of York who had been a buccaneer.

Haversack.

 

[Johnnysan]

This is why I posed the question, LJ, because I agree, even plastic toy infantry soldiers standing and firing have more space between the trigger hand and support hand, in fact this picture, from the same time period shows that some of them with wider hand placement.

I have also been fascinated by all things military since childhood. Although I never served, this was the way I was taught to shoot by my father who came from a long line of crack shots, served in WWII and at 84 can still hit what he's aiming at 300 yards over open sights.

I have a bolt action British Enfield and have practiced firing from a variety of stances. My accuracy seems to improve when my hand is further out towards the center of the forestock as opposed to back by the clip, despite the fact that I am no longer able to support my elbow with my body. Maybe it's not textbook, but as a range officer once remarked to me: "An "X" is an "X"."

Interesting post, Dean and some great responses!

 

[carebear]

This is why I posed the question, LJ, because I agree, even plastic toy infantry soldiers standing and firing have more space between the trigger hand and support hand, in fact this picture, from the same time period shows that some of them with wider hand placement. But the first guy has them closer. I just was curious about the actual correctness of the close hand placement, or if it was just a style of that time.

Technically there are two distinct standing positions here. One is a match position where the object is absolute stability so that truly precision shots to the inherent accuracy of the weapon can be made. The other is more of a field position where the aim is to get the rifle steady enough to make an accurate (but not absolutely precise bullseye) shot, the joking phrase we use in the hobby is "minute of badguy".

When shooting offhand in a match situation you blade your body more acutely to the target (stand more nearly perpendicular) so the rifle is almost laying across your chest. Your feet are basically shoulder width apart. You lean back a bit at the waist to counterbalance the rifle and draw the off hand in towards your body.This also allows the upper arm to firmly rest against your ribcage (bone to bone contact) and the weight of the rifle taken by the forehand down the forearm to the torso and straight down the leg. The position is adjusted (by moving the feet) until the rifle is on target with all muscles relaxed (natural point of aim). If your rifle is pointing a bit off of the target and you are horsing it on by active muscle force it will swing back to its natural point at the moment of firing, ruining your follow through and causing a miss.

This position is time consuming to truly get into and does not give enough recoil control (there's almost no body mass behind the rifle) for fast follow up shots. If you practice the principles of marksmanship it can be wicked accurate though.

The second picture, standing position with hands further apart, is a more realistic field shooting position. The entire body is turned more into the target putting more of your body behind the weapon (important when shooting a .30 cal) and allowing the shooter to see the whole target area more naturally. The right elbow is held horizontal to the ground to form a deeper pocket for the rifle butt and allow the bolt to be worked without removing the rifle from the shoulder (for fast follow up shots). The forehand is just holding the rifle up, not tying into the upper torso. This loses some stability but allows the rifleman to track a moving target by pivoting at the waist. Natural point of aim is still important for precision but this position gives the ability for a quick "snap shot" (throw the rifle up, align the sights and quickly "press" (not "squeeze") the trigger).

 

[Johnnysan]

Matthew...

This is the best explanation of the two stances that I've ever seen or heard...worthy of printing off and adding to the "keeper" file! What's your background? You have obviously spent some time on a rifle range. Well done and thanks!

(EDIT: I just read your user profile and all has become clear. Thanks for your service, Marine!)

 

[deanglen]

I have learned so much from this thread! Hats are great! Marksmenship is great, too! Thank you to everyone who has shared their knowledge and experience. Wasn't it a chaplain at Pearl Harbor who said, "Praise the Lord and pass the the ammunition, boys."? Well I could see myself in that role. Isn't also true that the Marine Corps trains their men so that each one is a marksman? Precision shooting is a metaphor for accomplishment in so many areas of life, to me. Whether I'm aiming a sermon toward my hearers to inspire them, or a prayer to His ears on behalf of them, stance, grip, and windage seem to play a role.

dean

 

[Harp]

deanglen wrote
There have been plenty of clergymen who have had military or violent pasts.

Haversack.

....like me....

 

[deanglen]

A Slight Correction

deanglen wrote:
"A small professional army has more time to spend on marksmanship than one rapidly expanding to a wartime footing. Also, excellent rifle marksmanship was a decisive factor on the battlefield until machine guns and improved artillery proved themselves to be the real killers around the turn of the century."

Indeed. At the Battle of Mons in 1914, the casualties inflicted on the Germans by the BEF's rapid and accurate rifle fire caused the Germans to think they were facing machine guns. Then again, the BEF was a small professional army which had invested much in marksmanship. Going into WWI, the breech-loading magazine rifle with smokeless powder was the dominant weapon. This had been the lesson of the Boer War, the Russo-Japanese War, the various Balkan contrempts, an innumerable colonial fights.

Haversack.

Uh...I'm pretty sure I didn't write that first paragraph[huh] within the quotation marks as much as I wish I had. Matthew Carberry is the author of that, and another great posting in this thread. Have to give credit where credit is due .Thanks again to all who followed and enriched ths thread.:eusa_clap

dean

 

[mikepara]

As a British Skill At Arms Instructor

I was really pleased When over at Ft Bragg I was awarded my US jump wings and an Expert Rifle badge. Made my day!

 

[carebear]

I was really pleased When over at Ft Bragg I was awarded my US jump wings and an Expert Rifle badge. Made my day!

I went to Thailand for a Cobra Gold Exercise a few years back and trained and jumped with the Royal Thai Recon Marines. Got my Thai Gold Wings.

It was humbling to have these men, who are involved in nasty little skirmishes along the border with everyone from drug smugglers to Muslim insurgents to patrols from Burma and Cambodia, look at me like I was a "god of war". Hard men but they lived up to Thailand's "Land of Smiles" reputation.

 

[tallyho]

Matthew...

This is the best explanation of the two stances that I've ever seen or heard...QUOTE]

I agree! you put it into words very well. I could show someone standing in front of me the different positions, but it is very hard to actually describe them.

Over the last 100 years doctrine has dictated the type of marksmanship training. Full power rifles at the beginingof the century to WW2 (Lee-enfield, Mauser 98, sprinfield 03) used full size Cartridges of about .30 caliber and were capable of being accurate shooters out to 1000 yards. The prewar professionals had excellent marksmanship skills. Once wartime recruits came in, marksmanship declined. This same pattern happens during all wars.

The two things that changed during WW2 were the introduction of Semi-automatic rifles (Garand, Tokarev, G-43) and the shortening of the round creating the first Assault rifle (STG-43/44).

Volume of fire started to over take long range accuracy. The Germans determined that rarely did infantry really engage beyond 300 yds. The full power cartridge was unnecesary. smaller cartridges meant you could carry more.

straight line stocks became the norm(M-16) allong with a further reduction in bullet size and increase in ammo quanity.

Individual weapons have not changed much in operation and calliber in the last 30 yrs. the most recent changes have been in sights, easy of bringing the weapon to bear, and reliablity. marksmanship has become important again with all the urban fighting that goes on (its not good press to shoot a lot of civilians)

This of course is an extrememly simplified explanation, but i beleive it gives a good general view of the last century.

Corrections and comments are very welcome

 

[carebear]

That seems like an excellent nutshell description of the evolution of military riflery to me.

I agree that we are undergoing a bit of a renaissance in military marksmanship nowadays, which is for the good. As deanglen says, mastering the rifle, like any martial art, teaches a discipline that can positively impact other parts of your life.

It's a little harder nowadays to learn this art, what with the urbanization of society (fewer places to safely and conveniently shoot) and the political climate (fewer places where one is encouraged or even allowed to shoot).

 

[carebear]

Col. Jeff Cooper (USMC Ret.), one of the founders of the "Modern Technique" of the pistol (using two hands) and a master shooter, wrote a book a few years back (not available in stores) called "The Art of the Rifle". It covers all aspects of rifle marksmanship including the philosophy. Great photographs. I recommend it to anyone with an interest in shooting, it was written by a man who loved it.

Jeff was a noted thinker and has been writing commentaries on everything from shooting to life in general for decades. Agree with him or not, you knew he was a man of wit, intelligence, nobility and style (and opinion). He has several other books, collections of essays really, that cover shooting and much, much more.

He would have felt quite at home with Loungers as he in several essays bemoaned the transition from sea travel to planes, the glorification of immaturity and the vulgarization of society in general.

He just passed a couple weeks ago. He wasn't well known outside the shooting fraternity but he will be missed.

Semper Fi Colonel

 

[deanglen]

The member of the church I serve who wants to get me over my head in marksmenship gave me a live .50 BMG round he got from a friend. It's pretty impressive. He said that our snipers in Iraq use this caliber. I did some internet search on it and dug up lots of info on the M82A1 sniper rifle and its variants, plus some video of its effectiveness, which I must say was gut-wrenching in many ways. I'm using the round this weekend as a sermon illustration piece, I like using objects, they're not just good for kids, adults learn a lot from them too. The round is big, has a heft and after polishing it up with one of my wife's jewelry cloths it shines wonderfully. Ought to hold the attention.

dean

 

[carebear]

It'd be interesting to hear what Scriptural principle you're using 650 grains of copper and lead to illustrate.

The only analogies I can think of are all kinda Old Testament-y.

 

[deanglen]

It'd be interesting to hear what Scriptural principle you're using 650 grains of copper and lead to illustrate.

The only analogies I can think of are all kinda Old Testament-y.

I'd be glad to PM you that if you wish.

dean

 

[Harp]

Ft Bragg, NC

I was really pleased When over at Ft Bragg I was awarded my US jump wings and an Expert Rifle badge. Made my day!

Mike:
Did the regulation five jumps with a nite drop, or just the
proverbial jump-for-the-helluvit?
Wish I had run the SAS selection or gone to Aldershot for
a few weeks.

 

[deanglen]

Just when you thought this thread was dead!

Okay, is this a bona fide firing position still taught or what? Span-Am War period, but you'd expect that from me.

dean