Air Force basic training question


PDA






chris in va
July 20, 2007, 05:54 AM
Go ahead, snicker all you want. :rolleyes:

We had to qualify with the M16 in basic. Many of us had never shot a rifle before, certainly not something like this. A couple guys had however and commented how light the recoil was on it.

The RO pointed out they weren't REAL 5.56 rounds but 'training' ammo. :scrutiny:

Now what exactly does THAT mean?

If you enjoyed reading about "Air Force basic training question" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
TimboKhan
July 20, 2007, 06:04 AM
Interesting question... A 5.56mm cartridge generates very, very little recoil to begin with, so I am not sure what your instructor was getting at there.....

Phantom Warrior
July 20, 2007, 06:27 AM
The only thing I could thing of would be blank ammunition. Blank ammunition has no bullet, so it has almost no recoil. But that would only be for MOUT training or exercises w/ MILES gear. If you were qualifying, you should have been using ball ammunition. And I've never seen or heard of any kind of downloaded ball ammo being used in the military. Or anywhere. Does such a creature exist?

Suffice it to say, you were probably using regular 5.56 ball ammo. Your RO may have been misinformed or pulling your leg.

sacp81170a
July 20, 2007, 06:27 AM
The RO pointed out they weren't REAL 5.56 rounds but 'training' ammo.

I don't know how the USAF is doing it now, but we used .22 adapters and .22 LR ammo to qualify in basic in '79. Cheaper, and at the distances we were shooting, ballistically similar. The only other thing I can think of was that maybe it was plain 55 gr. hardball, M193, instead of the 62 gr. M855. This would make sense if they're still using the older rifles with a 1 in 12 twist, since they won't stabilize M855 causing accuracy to go out the window. Were the rifles you used for qual so loose that they kind of rattled? :D

If the AF has stocks of M193, they'd be shooting that up for basic rather than using the "real" issue ammo, M855. Were the tips plain or green?

chris in va
July 20, 2007, 06:35 AM
I don't even remember seeing the rounds. We weren't told to take out the magazines, just handed the rifles.

Entirely possible they were .22 conversions, but it cycled the action just fine and I could hear the SHINK of the buttstock spring.

They really...REALLY did not trust us with those things. Some of us were still kids at 18-19 and had never seen a rifle before.

sacp81170a
July 20, 2007, 08:08 AM
We weren't told to take out the magazines, just handed the rifles.

It's gotten even worse than I thought. We were at least required to load our own magazines. Good grief! :scrutiny:

FPrice
July 20, 2007, 08:17 AM
The RO pointed out they weren't REAL 5.56 rounds but 'training' ammo.

Now what exactly does THAT mean?

Before I got out in 2004 the AF was going/had gone to "green" ammo for training. I forget the composition of the bullet but it was supposed to reduce lead pollution on their ranges. It was for training, not for actual combat as I recall.

I think they stopped using the .22lr adaptors a long time ago.

Grunt
July 20, 2007, 08:21 AM
What they're talking about is the Mk-254 frangible ammunition rather than the M-855 FMJ ammo. Your ammo was issued to you in a 20 round cardboard box like what you'd buy at Wal-Mart, didn't come on a stripper clip and you were told not to adjust your front sight with these bullet tips, right? Yup, that's frangible ammo. It's not made for combat or anything other than training. The idea is that it's a lead-free ammo that is better for the environment (hmm, doesn't lead also come from the ground in the first place?:scrutiny: ) but personally, I avoid that crap like the plauge.

DMK
July 20, 2007, 08:25 AM
I don't even remember seeing the rounds. We weren't told to take out the magazines, just handed the rifles....They really...REALLY did not trust us with those things. Some of us were still kids at 18-19 and had never seen a rifle before.Surely they did not hand you loaded rifles. :uhoh:

Grunt
July 20, 2007, 08:29 AM
CATM instructors have to do enough for the shooters so I'll be damned if I'd get down there and load their magazines then load their weapons for them too!:cuss: Besides, if you do that, you won't have stories for the next class about the one guy that loaded his magazines one round forward, the next round backwards, another round forward, another round backwards for every one of his magazines!:banghead: I mean things like this are priceless and reinforces the new Air Force motto, "If you're not in the air, you probably shouldn't be there.":neener:

SigfanUSAF
July 20, 2007, 09:21 AM
I shot ARs quite a bit prior to USAF basic in Oct-99. I shot a bunch of surplus M193 and M855, and I can tell you the M16 in basic felt identical to what I had shot before. I don't quite get the "training round" either, unless it's something that came about in the last few years. Best thing I remember about that day was not only did we have M16A2s, but there were a couple of nice "vintage" slickside Colt 604s on the range too:D

NavyLCDR
July 20, 2007, 09:31 AM
"the one guy that loaded his magazines one round forward, the next round backwards, another round forward, another round backwards for every one of his magazines!"

Dang it! That explains why my AR-15 FTF's every other round! Someone told me that loading the magazines that way would even out the wear pattern on something called the magazine follower and it would last longer that way. He claimed that since he started loading that way he hasn't had to replace a magazine follower in decades.... :neener:

Of course, if you handload, you can load half the rounds with the pointy end of the bullet inside the case to account for this...

SigfanUSAF
July 20, 2007, 09:50 AM
"the one guy that loaded his magazines one round forward, the next round backwards, another round forward, another round backwards for every one of his magazines!"

Dang it! That explains why my AR-15 FTF's every other round! Someone told me that loading the magazines that way would even out the wear pattern on something called the magazine follower and it would last longer that way.

NO! That only works to help the follower in the straight body M16 mags. The early ones had a feed mechanism to flip every other round, the newer A2s don't have this feature, so they curved the mag slightly:neener:

jkingrph
July 20, 2007, 10:15 AM
When I was in basic end of '68 early '69 it was standard issue ammo. A few months later in OTS it was standard 38sp. ammo in the revolver used by the AF for officers then, probably some of the most anemic 38 ammo I have ever used. I still have a stash somewhere. It makes good plinking ammo and good brass source.

Grunt
July 20, 2007, 11:34 AM
Well, they DID stack rather nicely in the magazine like that tough. :D Of course, the first instinct of the Care Force Cat. C shooter was to raise his hand because the first round he tried to chamber didn't go. I walk over and look down at the ejection port...looked a little closer....a little closer still to make sure I was seeing what I was seeing and asked this kid what in Hanna's holy hell are you doing? I pull the magazine out thinking he put all the rounds in backwards and it was then I seen the next one was pointing forward and the one under that was backwards again. Now I could have been descrete about it and tell him to fix it but that one was just too good to not show the rest of our instructors on the line. :evil: Yes, we laughed at him for that one and even to this day, that story comes up in a lot of the classes we teach. "OK folks, note how the follower is shaped like a cartridge? That's a clue. Do NOT load them backwards or like one kid did, alternating the cartridges backwards and forwards!" We expect mistakes but the ones that stand out like this one, putting the rifle together so the rear takedown pin hole on the upper is assembled to the front pivot pin on the lower, having a piece of hto brass land on your next and asking us if this is going to effect your jugular...and then asking the folks at the emergency room this same question, managing to shoot a score of one (1) out of 50 freakin' chances...yeah, we're going to talk about that for a while.:evil:
Now a couple guys I work with spent time at the Medina range at Lackland and they have even better stories. Kids peeing their pants, walking downrange as firing is still going on, one kid that just took off running down the road after the first shot went off, convincing the most lost of the lost that they have one explosive tipped round (actually a regular M-855 round with the tip colored by a black sharpie marker) that they have to get rid of and they want the kid to fire it but to be careful because it might explode handling it (yeah, CATM troops coming from the cop career field can be some real sadists out there! LOL), you name it, they've probably seen it.

HorseSoldier
July 20, 2007, 11:52 AM
The RO pointed out they weren't REAL 5.56 rounds but 'training' ammo.

Besides the frangible option it might have been blue tip (AA68 DODIC) training ammunition. Shoots a plastic bullet that ballistically matches real 5.56mm ammunition out to 25 meters or so. Does have a reduced powder charge (still enough to cycle the weapon), but requires the use of a special bolt as the cartridge rim is rebated so people can't accidentally mix and match ball ammo and blue tip.

Bartholomew Roberts
July 20, 2007, 12:01 PM
The idea is that it's a lead-free ammo that is better for the environment (hmm, doesn't lead also come from the ground in the first place? ) but personally, I avoid that crap like the plauge.

Good instincts. The Army range where the "green" ammo was developed is in the middle of a massive environmental lawsuit because the "green" ammo is alleged to be even more harmful to the environment/humans than lead.

Telperion
July 20, 2007, 12:11 PM
Good instincts. The Army range where the "green" ammo was developed is in the middle of a massive environmental lawsuit because the "green" ammo is alleged to be even more harmful to the environment/humans than lead.On what basis? Any details?

Bartholomew Roberts
July 20, 2007, 12:39 PM
Details can be found searching THR. The link to the stories has been posted twice here. I'd give you the link again; but I just don't have the time right now.

Essex County
July 20, 2007, 03:05 PM
USAF Basic training....Think of it as a country club that lets you plink! I remember in 1966 you used regular ball ammo in M-16's that wouldn't have made the cut in Southeast Asia........Essex

MikeG
July 20, 2007, 09:14 PM
Entirely possible they were .22 conversions, but it cycled the action just fine and I could hear the SHINK of the buttstock spring.


If it cycled just fine it wasn't a :cuss: .22LR conversion. :D

Grunt
July 20, 2007, 09:53 PM
The Air Force went away from the .22 conversion with the A2 coming into service. The older 1:12 and 1:14 (yes, old 601 series AR-15s still pop up every now and again when we do inspections at the DCC) worked alright with the .22LR but the 1:7 barrels on the A2s would strip off the lead and lead the bores bad enough that it wasn't worth the effort to keep the conversion kits in service.

jaholder1971
July 21, 2007, 12:46 AM
Kirtland AFB had a Savage Snail trap installed for use by Airmen requalifying. Savage has pictures of it on their web site.

I can't believe that with all that New Mexico desert out there they couldn't just get the CE squadron or contractors to make a range out of New Mexican dirt berms unless some Tree and Bunny hugger made them.

paintballdude902
July 21, 2007, 01:12 AM
yeah i believe i have a picture of the airforces new .50bmg sniper rifle
http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a121/paintballdude902/jadedbig.jpg


jkingrph did u make it to vietnam? u were in basic the same time my father was in ots and he was in country in '72

jrfoxx
July 21, 2007, 03:11 AM
Dont feel so bad, When I was in Navy boot camp in 2001 (6 months before 9/11), we fired 20 (roughly) shots with m16's equipt with "laser tag" type stuff.No live ammo.No instruction AT ALL, just handed a gun and told to fire at the target standing.That it for my Navy gun training/experiance in the whole 5 years...Sad.We still make fun of the "Air Farce" guys though....:neener:

RobTzu
July 21, 2007, 04:14 AM
Wow. I went to Army Basic in Aug of '99, and my class was all rear support people, Petroleum, Supply, etc. We had 2 solid weeks at the Range, and fired about 100 rounds a day...they did have green tips IIRC, but at that time I did not know poo about firearms. I could not imagine having someone fire a MILES geared up Rifle then letting them use the real thing at some point in the future. A untrained person in a combat situation is probably more hindrance than help with a M-16/M-4.

chris in va
July 21, 2007, 05:00 AM
Ok that's pretty pathetic about the laser tag. I will say though, we had some Navy guys in basic that had to run 4 miles compared to our 1.5 miles. Actually we started at 1/4 mile since many of us had never run before. We worked up to it.

Princi
July 21, 2007, 07:35 AM
I had to qualify at Lackland with the M-1 Carbine. The guy shooting next to me had never fired a rifle before. I had far in access of the number of needed holes in my target. Needeless to say - he didn't qualify.

Prior to going to Vietnam, I had to qualify with the AR-15 (I've often wondered what would have happened had I failed to qualify).

After arriving at Bien Hoa, I was issued a M-16 and two loaded magazines, both of which I kept in my clothes locker. After awhile the locker got a bit messy with books, magazines, clothes, etc. Then one night we got hit. You smart ones figured it out already: I couldn't find the magazines. By the time I found them and got out to the bunker the attack was over.

Needless to say, I always knew exactly where those magazines were from that point on. Wonder why they didn't teach that at Lackland.;)

Grunt
July 21, 2007, 09:35 AM
They probably didn't tell you this at Lackland but I'm going to tell you this now. The Air Force view on small arms training is nothing more than a CYA statment for .gov in the event you get your butt shot off. If you were sent into Upickastan in your career and get shot, family members can't come crying making claims that you didn't know how to defend yourself. They pull up your 522 off SFMIS and say, "see, he's had the class on how to operate this weapon" and they will claim that you just failed to properly utilize the training you were given. Never mind that the classroom portion was maybe 3 hours and another 1 1/2 to 2 hours on the firing line!:banghead:
Personally, I'm torn on how the marksmanship course (and a lot of ground combat training for that matter) ought to be taught. On the one hand I want to say this is the freakin' Air Force and the odds of Joe Airman actually getting into a shooting match with Johny Jihad is fairly slim so is it worth it to do anything more than the cursory training they are getting now? On the other hand, I figure we did one week of dry firing around the barrels and then another week on the firing line every year in the Marines for rifle qualification and our results in the Marines showed we knew our way around a rifle. So why can't the Air Force do this? I mean I've seen Marine grunts with maybe a GED that have no problem figuring out a rifle yet I see a lot of folks in the Air Force with college degrees that are lucky to know which end the bullet comes out! The other side of me wants to scream there will be no more holes stabbed to ensure this person passes! If you can't qualify and are supposed to be deploying next week, too bad, let's hope your alternate can shoot better!:fire: Want a shorter class? Ain't gonna happen and as a matter of fact, expect it to be a full week or more. Dope off in the class and you are going to get hemmed up in short order and have some commanders that will start putting some bite into firing line failures. Did you know that if you fail to qualify after 3 attempts, it's a command decision as to weather or not you are fit for duty and can be discharged? I've never seen this actually happen though however I've seen one MSgt. come through our firing line 8 freakin' times here last year!:fire: It's the things like this (and more) that need to be changed if the Air Force is to ever have any respect from the other services.

YodaVader
July 21, 2007, 10:05 AM
I went through Air Force basic training in 1983 and the rifles we used were adapted to fire 22lr. We did not fire any 5.56mm/.223 . It was definitely 22lr.

I was at my base in NC a few years later and we had to qualify , again the rifles were adapted for 22lr.

jkingrph
July 21, 2007, 11:23 AM
I went through Air Force basic training in 1983 and the rifles we used were adapted to fire 22lr. We did not fire any 5.56mm/.223 . It was definitely 22lr.

I was at my base in NC a few years later and we had to qualify , again the rifles were adapted for 22lr

I have been out of active reserve about 10 years now. The last time I qualified, we officers were fireing standard 9mm ammo(I carried my 10mm Gold Cup out one day and the range NCO's had a blast with it). The enlisted troops were "firing" the M-16 with some type of lazer adapter and target. I never did go over to see how they worked. Long before that I had gotten interested and purchased my own AR-15, so was completely familiar with that format.

I told several of the non gun savy troops if push came to shove I would gladly trade my m-9 for a M-16.

Domino
July 21, 2007, 12:20 PM
I went through Air Force basic in October of 06' and I felt they need to concentrate on small arms training a bit more but, the Air Force is moving in that direction. When I went through they had just started issuing us non firing M-16's that we had to carry and dissasemble for the first couple of weeks. These weapons were just like the real thing except they had no trigger components and the barrels were not rifled and had no bore. At warrior week they dedicate one day to M16 training. The first half of the day is classroom training followed by range practice and testing.

Here's how it works...
You get a total of 100 rounds, 50 rounds for practice and sight adjustment and 50 for the test. Targets are placed 25 meters away and have 6 silloutes that are simulated at 50, 75, 100, 150, 200, and 300 meters (I think.)

When the test begins you have a total of 5 positions you have to fire from, so you have 10 shots per position. They would also disignate 3 targets and in what order that you had to hit within those 10 shots.

You are also required to do at least one or two magazine changes for each postion and you are given 90 seconds per position. If I remember correctly we had to fire from unsupported prone, unsupported prone with a gas mask, kneeling supported, kneeling unsupported, and standing supported.

All in all I felt the test was fairly challenging but they give entirely too much time to perform the shots. Even with FTF's and FTE's every other round I managed to be finished in ~30 seconds (per postion) and I still managed to get a perfect 50.

The Air Force is certainly changing from the Chair Force it used to be back in the 70's and 80's. I have a desk job and I know some of my coworkers to have been involved in convoys.

Grunt
July 21, 2007, 02:48 PM
You mean they have you qualify on the 6-sillouette practice target? The qual targets have 10 sillouettes on them. Oh well, you don't need to qualify in boot camp in order to graduate. Yup, I'm serious about that. In the Marines, if you went unk, you were put back 2 weeks until you did qualify but in the air force, just firing is good enough.:rolleyes: One other thing has changed since you went to boot camp is that now you are going to be firing with the flack jackets, battle rattle and helmets as well as of Feb 07. Here's the AFQC course of fire:

20 rounds divided into 4, 5-round magazines for zero.
30 rounds divided into 10, 3-round magazines for practice. You start in the prone supported, fire 3 rounds, reload and fire your second 3-round magazine within 50 seconds...if the tower operator is keeping track of the time. You repeat this same 2, 3-round magazines in 50 seconds for the prone unsupported, kneeling supported and over baracade positions. Next you put on your gas mask and with those last 2, 3-round mags, engage those 6 sillouettes in 90 seconds.
50 rounds divided into 5, 4-round magazines and 10, 3-round magazines for qualification. We usually start with the gas mask to get that portion out of the way and for this phase you have 120 seconds. You fire your first 4-round magazine at the bottom 4 sillouettes (I tell my shooters to imagine running the bases), reload and fire your first 3-round magazine at the top left side 3 targets, reload with that second 3-round magazine and fire at the top right 3 targets. You then repeat this same course of fire for the prone supported, prone unsupported, kneeling supported and over baracade positions but for these other 4 positions, you have a 90 second time limit.

Really, we don't care how you fire your rounds but when we score the targets, we can only count 5 hits per sillouette. I've told students before (and a time or two was ignored or goldfish syndrome set in and they did it anyways) that if you fire all 50 rounds at Captain Crunch's brain housing group because it's a big easy one to hit, you are walking out of here with a score of 5...and UQ.
Speaking of scoring, qualifying isn't all that difficult. If you are gunning for expert, you need to get a 43 out of 50. It's not all that hard to do, believe me! Now just to qualify, out of 50 chances, if you are a Cat. A shooter, cops, OSI, PSs, TAC-P, etc. you need to score a minimum of 32. Cops now shoot the TRQC course of fire and they need an 18 out of 30 but that's a different course of fire. Cat. B shooters, mainly flyers, arms couriers, some CE types (Redhorse comes to mind) need to score a 25 out of 50 or hit one round for every one they miss. Now you get to your Cat. C shooters, the cooks, and bakers and candlestick makers, pretty much everybody else in the air force need to score a whopping 19 out of 50 chances to shoot a glorified gopher at 25 meters. That's 38% in case you want to run the numbers so no, we don't ask a lot out of these people. Mainly, it's just load it, shoot it and preferebly not shoot yourself or one of my instructors (point a gun at me BTW and I point a gun at you but the difference is mine's loaded :D ) and then take it apart, clean it, put it back together and hope it works again. Like I said, small arms aren't really taken all that seriously in the air force. It was after Kimpo in 1951 when Gen. LeMay began SAMTU but that history isn't taught and those lessons have been long forgotten. It's going to take sadly, another incident similar to Kimpo to wake these people I'm afraid. :(

def4pos8
July 22, 2007, 12:36 PM
My initial qualification on the M-16 was straightforward and routine (ninety rounds of ball I think) during november of '73. Slam fires were explained -- and executed on the line. :rolleyes:

Some of the previous stories were pretty good. Those who haven't discovered the humor button at ChAirForce.com ought to give it a try. ;):D

yokel
July 22, 2007, 03:44 PM
At USN boot camp in Great Lakes, IL in 1995 we were issued '70s era M16A1s, however, our training was limited to taking apart the rifle to the extent authorized for routine cleaning, lubrication, and minor repairs. No live firing due to the fact that the indoor range was shut down for repairs at the time.:(

nemoaz
July 22, 2007, 03:48 PM
So, as I understand it, all you Flyboys combined have shot about 250 rounds through an M16, half of it with a .22 adapter... yet we are supposed to care and I suppose attach some weight to the fact that some AF bigwigs want a new pistol and rifle? No wonder that one general wants a revolver without all those confusing buttons.

Just kidding! I know it's not your fault. But you guys need weapons training more than a new weapon. You could be carrying USP45's and Barrett .50's but it won't matter if no one knows how to shoot.

Grunt
July 22, 2007, 08:55 PM
I agree completely that better training is needed but first you have to get people in these classes that actually WANT to be there! I'd be willing to bet that 90+ percent of the people I see in these classes are there only because they have to be there. No point to changing the training until the mindest of those people receiving the training changes.

KC&97TA
July 23, 2007, 12:55 AM
I have guys that threaten to speak to the Lt Col after being on my ranges, something about standing too long and shooting in the hot sun. TOO Much shooting? The Major had a goal of 500 & 500. 580 rounds of 5.56mm and 350 rounds of 9mm in 16 hours, that's my record on 36 guys, if I hadn't given them breaks and lunch I know I could have conducted more training.

A few weeks ago we had 105k 5.56 and 105k 9mm and over 10k 7.62x39mm, we did return some to the ASP, but this was our ammo for a 4 day shooting package for 63 Marines.

I've seen a few varietys of 5.56mm, but it's all been jacketed or molly coated or hollow point or dark gray/black

don
July 23, 2007, 01:08 AM
Back in '66, if AF basic,I was handed a M-16 with a loaded magazine and told to shoot at the target. BFD. I scored expert NBFD. Really mickey mouse qualification.

quicktime
July 23, 2007, 07:30 AM
You can always tell the Air Force over here their rifles have all of the blueing and a shiny red dust cap on the muzzle. Oh yeah they are always in PT gear. I don't think they even own uniforms.

kBob
July 23, 2007, 10:59 AM
This is why until the recent shootng camps in SWA the USAF made for its folks being loaned out as truc and bus drivers and such the Army made fun of Blue Suit Marksman ship training.

WHen I went through Basic and then AIT in 1973 we fired somthing like 310 rounds in Basic. That included 30 rounds for practicing 25 meter zero (after you got it with the first 15 they cam along and messed up your sights and had you do it again) shooting the quaifier course for practice with 70 rounds issued, 40 rounds of night fire familurization ( all from the prone and at 25 meters) 40 rounds of shooting in protective mask for familurization, actual qualification (25 to 300 meters) 70 rounds, and the Death valley move out range with 60 rounds ( two man buddy teams fire adn movement down a 300 yard long "valley" engaging pop ups in fighting positions "houses" and Bunkers and throwing two training pratice grenades)

That was Basic......cooks, clerks, Jerks, mechanics, medics, and even soon to be rotor heads in the making did this right along side future MPs, Artys, Tread Heads and Gohd's People The USA Infantry.

We in the Infantry then shot that all over again plus squad move out ranges and platoon manuever ranges. All that with M193 Ball and tracer for night fires and when assigned duty on move outs as Automatic Riflemen.

In 1976 I got out and began looking at a way to get back in as a commissioned officer. I found a two year school that offered an AA and a Commision at that time. As folks going to College Rotc need four years to finish that program the Army deviced a number of ways to get credit for the first two non contract years of College ROTC. FIrst was be prior Service. Well, I had that. second was completeg a three or four year HighSchool JROTC program. Gosh I had done that, too. Third was atteneding a six week Basic ROTC Camp at Ft. Knox KY. In that last they paind the same rate as an E4 and naturally meals and a bunk and barracks space were "free" Being the sly devil I am and not wanting to get a real job for the summer I convinced folks from the school all the way up to the Department of the Army that the changes in basic Infantry tactics that took splace in 1974 an 1975 were such that (having been serving in EUrope and not yet changed over to those tactics by 1976) that I NEEDED to co to Basic Camp. They bought it. DIs pite the fact that they realy did seem to cram the training from 8 weeks of Basic into six weeks it seemed like SUmmer Camp to me. They dropped 90 percent of the harasment so as to fill these potentual Officers heads with the basic data.

Germain to this discussion though is that we shot the same rifle training as I had done in Basic there in 1973. Including the Death Valley Buddy Team training. And the neat part.....practically all the Kay-dets were not yet even contract, that is they had no commitment to continue in the Army or any branch after that training that pay and that food.

Mean while My High School Budy that was commissioned as a USAF officer that year was considered qualified with less than a magazine of ammo through an original M-16 and 12 rounds of .38 Special from a model 10 S&W. Fortunately he was alreay a gun nut and also so well trained by High School JROTC in the shooting basics (mainly with a Rem 513T) he had his BSA Marksmanship Merit Badge as well and so was far better trained than most of his USAF COntemporaries. He just retired this year BTW.

Isn't it funny that most NRA instructors end up having basic course students shoot around 60 rounds from the rifle or pistol in the basic courses and yet the USAF was handing folks "Assault Rifles" and "High Capacity Handguns" with such pathetic training for decades. It is suppose to be better for USAF Snuffies now and as I mentioned there is (or was) in theator additional trianing.

We can but hope.

-Bob Hollingsworth

Jeff22
July 24, 2007, 03:39 AM
We used (elderly and beat up) M16s with .22 rim fire adaptors (RFA)to qualify with when I went through Air Force Basic Training in 1980.

After Basic Training I went off to the Law Enforcement Specialist class at the Security Police Academy. We were trained on the M16 rifle and the M15 revolver (the Smith & Wesson model 15 combat masterpiece). In that application we used full power ammunition.

Later on in my military life I cross-trained to a Combat Arms Training Specialist.

For a while in the early 90s the ANG was short of 5.56mm ammo to qualify category B & C personnel with the rifle, so we used .22 rim fire adapters (RFAs). Of course, by then all the RFAs we had were old and beginning to wear out and spare parts were no longer available. The AF wouldn't allow us to use the army converters (which were a different design) for safety reasons. (And I never did know what made them unsafe . . . ) We sent out a teletype to all the CONUS bases (active and guard) that we wanted any .22 RFAs they were willing to part with, and there for a while about every week or so the UPS man would show up with another box full of conversion units from some base happy to be rid of them . . . We still had problems, mostly because (1.) the magazine springs were wearing out (2.) the RFAs themselves were wearing out, and (3.) whoever spec'ed out .22 ammo for the government bid at the time got us Eley target velocity ammo rather than something a little hotter. (The Eley worked great in my High Standard target pistol but not so good with the rim fire adaptors).

phridum
July 24, 2007, 04:42 AM
Chris in VA...the reason some of you had to run farther was because they were going for special forces rescue, air traffic controller, and weather man jobs. Despite being AF, they have my respect...if they made the cut.

George Hill
July 24, 2007, 01:08 PM
"Now what exactly does THAT mean?"

I believe it means that it didn't sit in an air conditioned lounge like the other Air Force stuff.

If you enjoyed reading about "Air Force basic training question" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!