XM8 question.
 

from what i understand the XM8, as it is to be fielded, has no true iron sights. instead it has a battery powered optic that has a back-up reticle etched into the glass to allow use even if the batteries die or the reticle washes out.

my question is this; does anyone forsee a problem with training soldiers (many of whom have no firearms experience) without the use of iron sights? would this be a bad thing or a good thing?

i assume it would make marksmanship training easier since all one has to do is place the retcile on target and fire but it seems like the loss of training to use standard iron sights would be a bad thing. i also think that given some of the field conditions have only a glass optic would be a bad idea, mud abounds in the field (depending on the theater of action) and it does not present a problem using iron sights but i imagine it would become an issue when your only effective use of a weapon depends on keeping glass clean and mud free.

Well, the British Army - and presumably all Steyr AUG users - having been relying on optical sights for over 20 years, with no obvious problems that I'm aware of.

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and Discussion forum

If an acceptably rugged optical sight is available, there isn't any particular advantage in teaching recruits to shoot using iron sights. The idea is make your recruits able to hit their targets with the issue weapon as quickly and efficiently as possible. BTW, it is easier than you think to clog iron sights with mud if you go to rolling in it.

You haven't lived until you've broken the tip off the front sight post on your M16 and then tried to hit with it.

i'll be honest, the AUG didn't even cross my mind before i posted. i suppose that if the only weapons a recruit would be trained with and use in battle were those without iron sights then there would be no reason why a lack of iron sights would be a detriment.

i am curious, how does one go about actually breaking the front sight post?

I suspect that when the military first switched to cartridge-type rifles, a lot of people worried that soldiers weren't learning to load loose-powder loads anymore. ;)

Beats me. What was really strange was the fact that it was just the tip. Maybe 1/8" or so was sheared off. I can attest to the fact that it was definitely enough to raise the point of impact a significant amount. :D

You'll find that military Steyrs actually have iron sights built into the top of the optics/carrying handle, for just such a situation. I've never handled a civilian Steyr so I cannot attest to whether or not all models feature backup irons, but the F88 Austeyr certainly does.

Australian soldiers are trained in the use of both the optical sight and emergency iron sights. I believe a complete absence of iron sights on a battle rifle is an absolute disaster waiting to happen.

When I went through basic training for the Australian Army the use of a scope made it much quicker and easier for the DI's to get the recruits (with little to no prior firearm experience) to get the marksmanship results required. Bearing in mind that with the need to teach parade drill, discipline, navigation, first aid, basic radio coms, marksmanship, weapons handling, field craft, bayonet drills, military history etc., etc., there wouldn't be enough time to spend teaching and practicing the proper use of iron sights. At least not without altering the training program.

In fact, even the Aus. Army's FN Minimi's are equipped with a Steyr type scope to further shorten and maximize training and weapon familiarity.

Deadman, were you not trained in the use of the emergency iron sights?

Technically yes, but nothing really in depth. Maybe the infantry boys have more emphasis placed on iron sights, but as a non combat orientated reservist there haven't at this stage been many instances where iron sights have been needed. However I've been meaning to conduct one of our virtual range sessions with iron sights only for a while now.:cool: