Michel wrote: "Feliks wrote: "Lee wrote: "Without looking them up, can anyone name me the four, basic, marksmanship principles? ..."
Sorry. I can't. Perhaps Michel, our neighbor to the north, can opine. He has ..."
Hello Michael, how's things?
Yeh, you've pretty much covered them all in more depth than I meant. I guess I should've been a bit more specific. In truth, I was referring to the way that the British Army (and I think, the US military as well?...but I stand to be corrected) refers to the principles of shooting, known simply throughout the military as "the marksmanship principles." It's drummed into each recruit during basic training here so that they can recite them word for word before passing out. If you specialise in a role, ie become a sniper for instance, then you learn to live and breath them. Each principle being expanded significantly with its own specifics!
1. The position and hold must be firm enough to support the weapon. 2. The weapon must point naturally at the target without any undue physical effort. 3. Sight alignment and sight picture must be correct. 4. The shot must be released and followed through without undue disturbance to the position.
I fully agree with you in relation to the use of automatic fire. There's no point at all, as far as I'm concerned (unless of course, you're a machine gunner or for suppressing / containing fire), to use full auto at any range above 50 metres due to the loss of accuracy. Re the thugs, I recall once seeing a militiaman do exactly as you describe with an old PKM. He literally emptied his belt in one burst, spraying left to right down a road from the hip, with his eyes closed. He even took out a number of chunks from the wall a few foot in front of him which he was, kind of, using as cover. In their case, it's a perfect example of what happens when you ignore any form of marksmanship principles. I don't think that he hit a thing! Ha ha
..."
Sorry. I can't. Perhaps Michel, our neighbor to the north, can opine.
He has ..."
Hello Michael, how's things?
Yeh, you've pretty much covered them all in more depth than I meant. I guess I should've been a bit more specific. In truth, I was referring to the way that the British Army (and I think, the US military as well?...but I stand to be corrected) refers to the principles of shooting, known simply throughout the military as "the marksmanship principles." It's drummed into each recruit during basic training here so that they can recite them word for word before passing out. If you specialise in a role, ie become a sniper for instance, then you learn to live and breath them. Each principle being expanded significantly with its own specifics!
1. The position and hold must be firm enough to support the weapon.
2. The weapon must point naturally at the target without any undue physical effort.
3. Sight alignment and sight picture must be correct.
4. The shot must be released and followed through without undue disturbance to the position.
I fully agree with you in relation to the use of automatic fire. There's no point at all, as far as I'm concerned (unless of course, you're a machine gunner or for suppressing / containing fire), to use full auto at any range above 50 metres due to the loss of accuracy. Re the thugs, I recall once seeing a militiaman do exactly as you describe with an old PKM. He literally emptied his belt in one burst, spraying left to right down a road from the hip, with his eyes closed. He even took out a number of chunks from the wall a few foot in front of him which he was, kind of, using as cover. In their case, it's a perfect example of what happens when you ignore any form of marksmanship principles. I don't think that he hit a thing! Ha ha