What's with all these Aimpoints on our Troops M16s?

[PATH]

I aggre with the majority. The red dot is great for quick target acquisituion and in low light use while allowing you to maintain focus on the scene before you. Make sure however that your little red dot is set to hit where it is pointing.

 

[SodaPop]

I have nothing to say.

You've all covered the grounds.

 

[dude]

FWIW- we can that our friends in the IDF* for the introduction of red-dots & such things on combat rifles.









*as usual

 

[SodaPop]

I just don't like the idea of a dot completely disappearing when the battery dies.

Those Leupolds are absurdly priced.

 

[444]

"So what do these beauty's go for?"
"aimpoints - which one is it they're using?"

http://www.aimpoint.com/
http://www.riflescopes.com/riflescopes/aimpoint/index.html

 

[Blain]

Just how do you zero in these babies?

 

[444]

Zeroing:
http://groups.msn.com/TheMarylandAR15ShootersSite/zeroingmethods.msnw

Basically; 1.5" low at 25. Right on at 50 giving you a zero of something like 220 yards (with an AR). You are like 1.5" high at 100 and like a couple inches low at 300 (these numbers are approximate, see link above). In other words you hold center mass from 0-300. I was hitting a pepper popper at 400 with a high head hold.

"I just don't like the idea of a dot completely disappearing when the battery dies."
Again, the battery will last for something like a year if you never shut it off. If the battery dies, you use your iron sights (assuming you can't take a minute to change the battery and have totally ignored preventitive maintainance by periodically changing out the battery like once a year). And again, you can simply look through the Aimpoint and use your front sight with the scope tube assuming the role of a large ghost ring.

One more thing that is cool about the dot sight is since it doesn't exhibit parallax, as long as you can put the dot on the target, you can hit it. I was going through a course where you had to crawl inside a long wooden box and hit a silhouette target some distance out the other end of the box. They warned us that shooting with the muzzle in the box would blow dust all over the place and totally obscure your vision. In an effort to cut my time, I simply stuck my shoulders into the box, held the rifle out the end of the box like a pistol, put the dot on the target and fired with the stock no where near my shoulder.

 

[c_yeager]

I love it when people talk about that new-fangled technology like it somehow puts us at a DISSADVANTAGE. Then they go on about how we did just fine with iron sights in world war two. Well, guess what, we lost over a QUARTER MILLION of our boys in that war. I for one am QUITE glad to see such improvments in place. And i think that the proof of their performance is obvious in how many caskets we are shipping home.

 

[Blain]

Yeager, are you saying that the M16 is better than the M14, or the great M1?

 

[gun-fucious]

The "M-16" is the longest actively deployed infantry rifle system in US history.
(i like to refer to it as a quaint antique design, That really pisses off the Bradyites)

Despite its early start up issues, due to improper ammo and maintainence,
it remains a highly successful infantry rifle.

When HKs rumored G36 based upper appears, the rifle will remain an AR15

Yes, the Garand and the M14 were great, but like the Tyranosaur,
they have been replaced by a mouse!

 

[Double Naught Spy]

I have seen a variety of optical devices being used by our soldiers in IRAQ including various ACOGs (not all NSN1s), Aimpoint, Trijicon Reflex, and I could have sworn there were some Elcans as well, but that may have been on troops other than US.

It was noted that the optics were a hardware solution to a software problem. Maybe so maybe not. It is the application of better technology to make the task easier for the soldier. The argument can be made that all sorts of technology is a hardware solution to a software problem, but that doesn't mean the solution is wrong or bad.

Way back a long time ago, the early firearms were simply barrels, rudimenary stocks, and no sights. Then somebody came up with a hardware solution to a software problem and put sights on those barrels and PRESTO things got a lot better.

Optics have some decided advantages such as quicker target aquisition and the slight magnification helps with seeing the intended targets better and placing shots better in a quicker manner.

 

[ajacobs]

Let me Clarify my above quote

It is a hardware solution to a software problem. They don't spend enough time training people to shoot well and replace that with aimpoints.

I do not argue that the aimpoint is not an improvement over standard sights in some situations. One of my ar's wears an Aimpoint and another a c-more and I have others with and without optics. The truth is that most soldiers are not very proficient with their firearms and qualify semi anually due to budget constraints. The aimpoints do make it easier to hit for people with less skills and cater well to the video game generation. If you veiw it like the army did and just want to improve hit ratio than, like many things in the goverment, you can throw money at it (purchase aimpoints) and get improvement. If you want to address a real problem you can restructure the way and interval of training and improve the soldier.

Do I want our soldiers have a higher hit percentage? Of course
and an aimpoint can do that.

But I would prefer to improve skills first, and they will carry over to the use of things like aimpoints for an even higher hit percentage.

I have ran millitary rifle qualifications for the infantry and 40 rnds twice a year is not enough. I wouldn't consider myself safe to carry concealed if that is all I shot.

 

[dude]

be bitter (and wrong) if you want, but........

40 rounds twice a year seems to be just fine for the most powerful military force on the planet


.......Combat Arms troops shoot alot more

 

[ajacobs]

I am not wrong nor bitter(maybe I would have been bitter if I was a helocopter Mechanic). I was in the infantry active duty. Both as 11b and 11m. I have participated in running riffle qualification ranges. Admitidaly the 40 rounds twice a year leaves out rounds to zero. But it is true. Most of the focus is not on marksmanship but unit tactics and that is done with blanks and miles gear.

 

[Al Thompson]

Actuaally, to be qualified to STRAC standards, you have to not only shoot the 40 rounds at pop-up targets, but there's a night fire phase and qual in protective (gas) masks. Sounds like your S-3 and Commanders fell down on the job.

In the Ist Cav (82-86) and 1st AD (86-89) we fired a lot more than that, especially in 1st AD.

 

[dude]

hey, easy on the facts there!!

Hell, I was an leg-aviator and we ALL qualed on the M-16 (night/day), M-60 (ground/air), M203 and sidearm twice a year.............firing way more than the mininum ammount of rounds.

I guess some units are just alot more squared away than others.

 

[ajacobs]

I don't claim my experiance was the same in regards to the number of rounds fired. It may have to do that my time was served during the reduced budget years of Clinton as Commander in Cheif. I never fired at night or with a pro mask in 4 different duty assignments after basic training.

 

[zahc]

Just to be annoying, the correct spelling would be "Troops'"

BTW aimpoints are awesome.

 

[Turk]

Training what Training???

For basic and AIT I trained with a M-14. Then assigned to a basic training company. When I got my orders to RVN I had to qualify with the 16. Lets see a few hours in the mechanics and then to the range. I think I had two 20 mag. the instructor had a hot date that night so we moved right through qualification. Two mags. full auto I qualified as an marksman but I quess it didn't matter as I carried a 60 for the first 4 months after being a rifleman for a couple of days.

Turk

 

[355sigfan]

I can't say much more than has been said. My patrol rifle wears a Eotech and its amazing how they can improve your shooting. The aimpoint is also great.
PAT

 

[gun-fucious]

it seems like the "training" is basic familiarization of the weapon system

The real training is the "Welcome to 7734, here is your accordian" method

When you see battle footage, the on the job training of the shoulder launched missles is pretty obvious.
Did'ja hear the doods hoot & holler when that building was struck? I kinda doubt they had ever pulled the trigger on the real deal before.

Your average civilian at a weekend "Urban Carbine" class prolly shoots 1000 rounds. Promoting CMP rifle shoots would send alot more qualified recruits into the system.

Buy a Homeland Defense Rifle, It's good for America!

 

[dude]

I hope all you folks who think our fine Military is 'under trained' (see above) and need to get 'it ' OJT-- actually have some Miltary time. Because if not you don't know JACK.

 

[444]

I don't understand this whole hardware/software arguments. If there is a better way to do something, that acheives your goals, why would you decide to spend all kinds of time and money doing it another way, just for the sake of doing it the old way ? If time and money are limited, why not spend the training time and money on the primary sighting system instead of the back-up sighting system ?

As a side note. I took a female out shooting that had done very little shooting before. She told me that she knew the basics of using iron sights. I had a Hi-Point carbine lying around that I thought would be a good rifle for her to shoot. Lightweight/low recoil/inexpensive/cheap ammo. It so happens that I bought the carbine used and it had a laser on it. I personally never really used the laser, but I did check to see that it was zeroed when I first got the carbine. After firing a couple mags with mediocre results, she asked me why anyone would want that little flashlight on their gun ? I said, it isn't a flashlight, it is a laser. You turn it on and put that little red dot on the target and squeze the trigger. She tried it and was bouncing cans all over the desert. She thought it was terrific. I had to pry the carbine out of her hands when it was dark just to get her to leave. Now I realize we are not talking about lasers; but, the same principle applies. The learning curve is much shorter. You put the dot on the target and squeze the trigger. Very simple. Very easy for a novice to grasp. It improved her hit percentage immediately with no further training. And isn't that the goal ? Isn't putting hits on the target in the shortest period of time the goal ? To me, teaching someone to hit the target is what we are trying to acheive. If we have the time, money, and desire we can move on to more advanced skills of shooting, but in the short term, hitting the target will suffice.

 

[gun-fucious]

heres an interesting thread on training:
http://www.infantry.army.mil/infforum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=61

 

[Onslaught]

Two quick points (I stopped reading the posts when you guys started arguing the M16/M14/M1 Garand thing, so I apologize if somebody already addressed this directly)...

Would a hundred hours of training for each Fighter offset some of the need for them?

I know that Cratz2 is "for" the red-dots, but I borrowed his question to add this... Yes, I suppose that 100 hours of rangetime on irons would make our guys better, but put that same effort into training on the Aimpoint, and they'd be even faster, right???

I just don't like the idea of a dot completely disappearing when the battery dies.

I think it's funny when someone says "I'd never use one of those things because they run by batteries, and batteries can die, making it useless". (No, Mr. SodaPop, I know you didn't say that... again, I'm just borrowing the quote that made me think of it) Well, as has been said, you can see right through the red-dot sights on an AR to use the front and rear sights... so if the battery goes dead... use the iron sights you'd be forced to use if you never had an aimpoint in the first place! There's just no "negative".

Besides that, the battery life on these averages between 1,000 and 10,000 hours, depending on the setting you use... Just put in fresh batteries at deployment time, and if you put your sight on HIGH power, and forget to turn it off EVER, leaving it on 24 hours a day, the battery would be dead in approximately 41 days... longer than THIS war will last On low power, the average run time is 416 days... and according to www.aimpoint.com, the battery can last up to 10 YEARS on "night vision" setting.

You'd have to actually USE one to see and feel how these things work. They don't feel seperate from the iron sights. You don't do anything different with the position of the weapon, etc... You just focus past the sights, onto the target, and the red dot is sitting directly on top of the front sight post... It's the neatest thing!

Here's a pic of an EoTech co-witnessing with the front sight... The rear sight is an ARMS #40, and it's folded down in the picture, but if it were up, it would look just like the sight picture on your A2, plus the red reticle.