PDA

View Full Version : How much accuracy is needed and for what?



NOOB
10th April 2011, 10:03 AM
How much accuracy is needed and for what?

The propeller-heads with their protractors and pocket calculators would say of course, "As much as possible". Yet if that comes at the cost of reliability, weight, or ease of resupply, that would be too much.

Our targets are not some metro-sexual bullseye, or some Elmer Fudd's "bunny"...they are men...or targets that represent men. After all, one buys a Kalashnikov...or an M4 for that matter to develop skills in the martial use of the rifle, otherwise, we would be playing with Ruger 10-22s. Martial = combat and that means shooting men. So accurate means being able to hit a man. For simplicity we divide the "man target" into head, and body. Thus head shots and body shots.

First we have the Suchka, SBR PDW, 8"- ish barrel. That little blaster, in essence replacing the submachinegun should allow its operator to hit a man's head at 50 yards, and the body with boring consistency out to 150 yards.

Next we have the Insurgent Rifle that we wrote about in the previous article. With a 12.5 - 16" barrel, it should be able to do head shots to 100 yards and bodies to 300 yards. And Mr. Propellerhead, I know you are reading this out there in cybespace. I have several good kalashnikov rifles that will do that.



Then the Guerrilla Sniper Rifle, chambered in a full sized cartridge such as 7.62x51, or 7.62x54R, should be able to do head shots at 200 yards and bodies out to 600 yards. As a matter or record, the last Guerrilla Sniper class had several guys shooting 16" barreled Saiga 308s hitting man-sized IPSC steels at 1000 yards.

It would be nice to have an AK in caliber that could do what a GSR can do with the ease of carry of the Suchka....but outside of custom wildcats, such a rifle does not exist....IN ANY FORM. At least not yet.

Understand also that merely "touching" the target IS NOT enough. The goal is killing it. Killing it in the environs where the rifle is likely to be used. And when necessary, withstanding wind, rain, light brush and penetrating cover with aplomb.

The temptation is often to try to make do with one rifle only, going as big as possible, handling all problems, but sadly that will not do.

As I said...all rifles are "special weapons" and if one tries to force one to "do everything" it will....it will "do everything poorly". Choosing the right tool for the job is essential. Choosing poorly will only yield frustration and failure.

There is a great deal of "lost knowledge" in the study of the rifle. One thing we have always been good at with Suarez International's Training Staff is researching. There is a great deal of "lost knowledge" to be rediscovered. I think that the "rifle community" has become so focused on CQB that it has forgotten much of the rifle's general application.



And then, when the realization is made (seldom enough) they try to "gear it" rather than learn the skills needed to surpass. This is due to a number of reasons.

1). Today's wars have a strong CQB component to them, and while that does need to be prioritized, NOT at the exclusion of everything else. At the recent Houston class we had a father-son team attend. One was an old time Marine, and his shooting was not as good at the CQB realm and was his distance shooting. His generation focused on long range stuff. The son, back from recent service, smoked in the CQB realm, but did not do as well as his dad at the longer ranges. What we need is to blend the two.

2). Many trainers....regardless of what they may have done at one time in a past life, tend to be closed minded, ease-driven, and seldom venture out of their "comfort zone". The students are no different, parroting what they learned in school without analyzing if it makes sense or not.

3). Finally, there are far more pistol ranges reaching to 50 yards than there are rifle ranges reaching to 500 yards. So often, the training is developed as a work around to a limited training environment (and no, no matter how hard you wish, shooting a small target up close is not the same as shooting a target out at distance).



All of these have served to considerably lower not only the expectation of the individual, as far as what he can effectively do with his rifle, but also served to "dumb down" the rifle training available to the interested party.

Here is what a good friend of mine commented on the material in this article -

"This was a primary objective (CQB shooting skills) when we trained in FORECON, to blend the 2. Marines being rifleman first, the CQB aspect can be built on a solid foundation.. We saw the real need during MOUT, where guys would excel in room clearing but then lose focus on a 200yd shot from a window. The ability to to slide easily along that scale makes an operator golden".

I could not agree more and that is the goal, focus, and mission of our rifle program. So make sure your PDW, your Assault Rifle, and your Sniper Rifles are up to the task, and more important....make sure YOUR rifle skills are up to the task as well.


Posted by Gabe Suarez

http://www.warriortalknews.com/2011/04/accuracy-and-performance-standards-for-the-ak-system.html



I thought this was a good article. With firearms, I am a jack of all trades and master of none. After reading this I might be on the right path.