I think wdimagineer2b you need to read my post. I don’t have a problem with the WHT or training; but once cadets have reached the required standard of training we should trust them to get on with it.
In the same way, I had a useful chat this week with some of my superiors about RCOs. We make sure that RCOs are trained, qualified and regularly checked for competency. So why does someone insist on ‘approving’ their RAMs? Don’t we believe the qualification is adequate? If not, it needs to be changed…
RCO now could just be a 1 day briefing on how to follow a RAM. A separate RAM/EAM-writing course could be done by planning officers to enable the RCOs to run their ranges.
So when did you finish your time as a cadet?
I was a cadet and after when many of our great and good were cadets and I like them and many thousands of cadets over the decades (prior to c.2008) had proportionate instruction on weapons, tested and that was it, then we just got on with it. Were we all gung ho and dangerous and just got lucky not to have any serious accidents? Just how much training do you need? Getting a cadet up to the standard to go onto a range for a N°8 (or L98) should not take more than a couple of hours for a group of cadets.
In the old days as an RCO you trained the cadets and took the ranges, not the specific job/role training system we have now. Which has seriously hampered shooting in the Corps over recent years.
Could you tell me exactly when did the cadets (and staff) become so inherently unsafe wrt shooting that it was decided that we needed to have all this extra testing etc? Does it actually enhance the experience of the activity above what it was previously?
I cannot think of an accident or incident involving Air Cadets using rifles in the last 40 years. I personally taught/trained and passed OK to fire several hundred cadets, none of whom were involved in incidents. I am pretty certain that even before the frenzy instilled by electronic media that if there was something happened that was that disasterous/dangerous that cadets were no longer to be trusted (and this is a loss of trust) without repeated testing, it would have got to us pdq. The same applies to staff involved in shooting.
I am sure that people will come up with individual tales of wow and disgust to justify the current position, which begs the question if what happened was so dangerous, why wasn’t it reported and if it was why was there no national message with an immediate stop to all activities while it was investigated, which seems to be the default position.
So a comment such “it’s just as well that the the ATC has changed since then” is a naïve and hardly a proportional response. It is worth remembering that not all change is necessary or required. Most changes come about; due to fads, need to generate / maintain incomes and or to invent jobs/keep people in jobs that would otherwise come under extreme scrutiny.
As I pointed out unless there are caveats put in place to get around the problem of being trained/tested, I can see another period where shooting is off the menu, as I doubt staff will get the required training on the new weapons for some time.
I wasn’t actually referring to your post, I was addressing GHE’s worn-out rant about the good old days when nobody bothered with training or testing.
In answer to your question GHE I finished as a cadet 15 or 16 years ago.
Try looking at it the other way. Why do you consider weapon training and testing to be such a huge problem as to be worthy of complaint every time the topic is mentioned?
Really? I can think of a recent incident and the email got to us PDQ.
Training on the No 8 rifle is easy and with a good WI or SAAI will take no more than a few hours.
At the end of which the cadet is thoroughly familiar with the rifle, understands the drills well, and actually has a good idea of what they need to be doing when they’re on the range.
Unless you’ve got one of those poor instructors who only teach how to pass the WHT then do not forget that a good portion of Skill at Arms training is teaching the cadet how to shoot. By learning the marksmanship principals and how to apply them - through correct position, hold, breathing control, sight picture, &c they actually stand a good chance of developing through practical experience and coaching into a good shot.
If you just stick a cadet on the range without prior training how can you expect them to achieve anything of value? It’s little different to taking them to a fun-fair shooting arcade. Sure they might have fun for the 15 minutes they’re on the range but would it not be far better to actually train and develop them?
We are a training organisation after all.
Being satisfied simply that your cadets “didn’t have any serious accidents” seems like a bit of a cop-out to me.
A day without incidents does not necessarily equate to a day well spent.
There is a huge difference between teaching the WHT aspects of a “simple” single shot rifle, & the marksmanship principles.
A loooong time ago, I wa taught both by a cadet FS. I got my ATC marksman on my first No 8 shoot so he obviously did something right.
At the outset, cadets are very apprehensive of the WHT element & can sometimes fail due to nerves - when they have previously actioned all the safety elements/answered the questions in practice.
The current WHT system does not allow initial one to one supervision on a trail basis. Do they like shooting? Yes, then start the formal trg & subsequent WHT.
For a single shot bolt action rifle (even the L81), this should be a suitable route.
RAMs - the RAO should produce a “standard” RAM for each range; the RCO should only have to add the relevant information for the document for the shoot in question (names/range qualifications, etc, practices to be fired). The current situation is getting to be put to sleep by RAM briefing & verbatim reading of range orders to the detriment of actuallly looking to see what fires are doing in the range.
although I agree it is more this should happen but where in the book (lessons 1-4) does it tell the cadets how to shoot?
there is no mention of the MM principles and only a minor indication of the trigger operation (ie it is a two stage trigger)
the No8 lessons miss the vital stage of weapons training…how to shoot.
the lessons show the drills, NSPs, cleaning and maintenance, shooting drills, misfire drills but at no point in those four lessons does the book mention the 4 principles of MM…
I will include details of the prone position and sight pictures while teaching but I intentionally avoid going into detail about the principles of marksmanship during IWT to avoid information overload.
My initial focus is on training the cadets how to operate the weapon safely so that they can confidently attempt the WHT. I endeavour to consolidate that with live firing as part of the same session wherever possible. Once those hurdles are out of the way I will introduce new firers to the marksmanship principles and improve their shooting, ideally using coaches.
It almost needs to be (in the ideal world) a concurrent activity while waiting for a WHT and/or range time once passed.
of course you then need to find a SAAI who is not testing and free to run through the lesson who can accept Cadets dropping in and out as they WHT or have the capacity to do so prior to a range…which takes out a CFAV who could be a coach of Safety Sup for those on the range…
It looks like that there will a very high probability that the NSPs (firing off the action of an empty chamber) will result in damage to the firing pin as it will impact the chamber when the action is fired off. The “pin” on the L144A1 is actually a rectangular strip of metal & the bottom forward corner strikes the edge of the cartridge.
The No 8 firing pin & associated headspace was a very different design, hence this was not an issue.
So, how will SASC deal with this? It seems to me that potential damage to the firing pin has not been taken into account (& as the draft “manual” for the L144A1 mentions at the outset webbing, & checking webbing pouches as part of the pre-firing drills, it would seem that their mentality for military weapon handling hasn’t taken this into account.
The rest of the “real world” firers who use .22 competition rifles either don’t dry fire, or use snap caps/dummy plastic rounds. This would probably fall under the SASC’s definition of blank rounds!
The rest of the “real world” firers who use .22 competition rifles also use breech flags as the way to show to all firers/RCO that their rifles are unloaded & safe. Until the manual was issued for the Scorpion air rifle, we used to use .177 breech flags - but now of course follow the full NSPs = firing off the action on an empty barrel & leaving the bolt CLOSED!
Anyone got the direct contact details for the person(s) dealing with the L144A1 at SASC? Someone has got to tell them that they need to (a) change the proposed drills & (b) move away for the military centre-fire NSPs that should not be linked to simple single shot .22 bolt action rifles.
The complete album of photos is here. The stand looks to be a complete design “fail” - why not a standard 2 leg bipod stand as used for all other tgt rifles (including the L81A1)? It’s got a hand rail too, so would be a much better option. You can get folding ones that remain attached to the rifle, but much more expensive.
It doesn’t give a definitive comment - but guessing that this is the safety catch?
I can’t see a front attachment point for any sling - but I am reliably informed that the sling is made out of a “bungee” material" = absolutely useless to get a constant tension
Possibly - but I think I have the direct POC from another source. The design philosophy for a very simple .22 rifle should be reflected in very simple NSPs!
The NSPs for the No8 are extremely simple and do not involve operating the trigger.
The unload ought to be the same process and I’m not worried about using a breech flag so long as the bolt remains open.
It’s a no brainer - leave the bolt open, breech flag inserted.
This is part of my message sent to the SASC point of contact:
Perhaps with a new wpn system, this is the chance to introduce NSPs that will reflect a more modern approach, simplify the drills (no risk to the firing pin) & match comparable (safe) civilian protocol. The best option for NSPs would, to me, be a visual/physical check of the breech/chamber by the firer, followed by the verification by the RCO/safety supervisor, then the insertion of a breech flag. Incidentally, this would also be effective for the Scorpion air rifle, as the current NSPs involve firing off the action on an empty barrel, & then leaving the bolt closed. The use of breech flags would then be mirrored across the board for all single shot rifles (L81A1, Scorpion & L144A1). This would be consistent for trg & NSPs.
These would be the same safe civilian protocols that permit an L81 to be “rested” by taking the rifle out of the shoulder and elevating the barrel over the back-stop?
Breech flags may be of some value if you have people walking backwards and forwards on a gallery range switching firers while a detail is ongoing but I contend that they are an unnecessary complication for the sort of shoots we generally undertake on .22 rimfire. Just leave the bolt open.
Any idea why the cartridge platform is red? Is that to make it more visually obvious that the bolt is rearward?
Maybe interpreting the rules differently? if the bolt has not been locked closed, then the rifle is not considered loaded, & can be rested with the barrel elevated. When the rifle has the bolt made closed into the LOADED position, then NRA Rule 116 has to be complied with:
116 The bolt (or equivalent working part in other types of firearm) must not be closed (or opened after being closed) on a live round if the barrel is elevated at more than 70 mils (approximately 4°) above the horizontal. In practice this means that when closing or opening the bolt with a live round in the chamber the barrel should be horizontal and laterally aligned within the target lane.
in a practical sense, anyone wanting to move a loaded rifle from the shoulder to rest (either pointing the barrel skywards, or moving the rifle to rest on the ground) will probably infringe Rule 117 by the nature of left/right movement of the rifle:
117 Except only where otherwise prescribed in the conditions of a competition or other rules of specific and limited application, a loaded firearm must at all times point no further left or right of the direct line to the assigned target than the standard safety angle of 200 mil (11.25 degrees – approximately six targets width per hundred yards distance). A firer who consistently points a loaded firearm outside these limits may be considered to be acting in a dangerous manner (Para 125).
Breech flags would introduce commonality (especially for the air rifle!) & simplify all aspects of handling, wpn movement (even swapping rifles on an indoor range), etc. It would be visibility to all, at a distance.
Cartridge platform colour - no idea. Visibility of bolt position is certainly a possibility.
our local RAF Armourers will not be releasing the No8 for IWT or LFMT after 30th September.
there is no word when (or indeed IF) the L144A2 is coming in for us but makes for an interesting case for us as we run a monthly weapons weekend offering the Cadets training and shooting. Offering both No8 and L98A2 this will dramatically have an effect on the backlog*
I am yet to see ANYTHING official indicating the future of 0.22 shooting in the ACO.
thanks to these boards or a well known ACO linked Facebook group I have seen articles on line and then photos of the L144A2.
the closest i have seen is the local SATT indicating as a prerequisite “students should be familiar with the No8 (or L144A2 if out by then)”
i guess there will be little chance of the WI/SAAi, RCOs, SS and coaches qualifying on the weapon this year if for the past two months or so they (HQAC, SATTs, our Wing) have failed to distribute any memo on the subject.
i won’t be holding my breath for anything quick
place your bets now:
[given we have 2 years (and counting) without gliding]
who wants L144A2 by Christmas?
by Easter?
By Summer camp season 2017?
*as a Out of interest for this months weekend (tomorrow and Sunday) we had 28 bids for 8 IWT places, 40 bids for 12 LFMT
