|
Author |
Topic Options
|
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2005 2:17 pm
I was able to shoot 8 inche groupings over and over from 300-400 meters with the Fn C1 a1 when I was in.. We had quite a few good shooters in my day.. I could still get close to a 10 innch roup after a run down too... Ask if you dont know what a run down is/was..
|
Posts: 512
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2005 5:18 pm
I like it cause I can still maintain the proper eye relief when useing flack vest w/plates in. weight doesn't matter to me I have a 100 lb ruck cause of my mortor baseplate that I have to carry.
|
Posts: 522
Posted: Sun Jan 01, 2006 10:03 am
RoyalHighlander RoyalHighlander: I was able to shoot 8 inche groupings over and over from 300-400 meters with the Fn C1 a1 when I was in.. We had quite a few good shooters in my day.. I could still get close to a 10 innch roup after a run down too... Ask if you dont know what a run down is/was.. Good old run down and in my opinion one of the best shooting exercise still in effect. Just curious, you guys were starting from 500 m line as well ? $1: I like it cause I can still maintain the proper eye relief when useing flack vest w/plates in. weight doesn't matter to me I have a 100 lb ruck cause of my mortor baseplate that I have to carry...
I agree for weight, as long as the weapon is reliable. Thanks for the info.
|
Posted: Sun Jan 01, 2006 11:38 am
Can anyone tell me if the C7.. and the C8.. is still being made by Diemaco?
Someone told me Colt bought Diemaco...? truth or not?
http://diemaco.com/
|
EME_Seal
Junior Member
Posts: 49
Posted: Wed Feb 01, 2006 12:05 pm
2Cdo 2Cdo: Derby, overall the training is amongst some of the best in the world. Our soldiers for the most part are extremely resourceful, professional, and intelligent. It's just that our marksmanship, for most not all, is absolutely pathetic.
Our weapons test is laughable, and still more than enough cannot pass it. I set up a range on my property, and taught my wife and kids proper weapons handling, coached them for about an hour, and they PASSED. An incredible number of our troops don't consider marksmanship to be that important, thus they don't put in the effort on the range because their buddy who is doing the scoring will ensure that he passes. It seems to be one of the forces dirty little secrets.
If we were to tie marksmanship into career progression and honestly mark scores we would see some improvement. Just an idea I had.
The days of punching holes with your bic pen so your buddy can pass are over. Today we're using computers to do the marking and it is making more people realize that they have to pay more attention to what they're doing. There's no more cheating to get through your PWT. Mind you if your not doing the rundown portion of the test then it's still pretty basic.
|
Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2006 11:40 am
Arctic_Menace Arctic_Menace: Can't say I've tried it. But it does look alot like a mix between the C7 and the C8. It's the butt stock of the C8 with the forestock of the C7. Doesn't make much sense to me because(and correct me if I'm wrong on this) can't both the C8 and the C7 have the M203A1 grenade launcher mounted on them?
They added the c8 buttstock, so we pretty much have a c7 with an adjustable butt. Because with the newer fighting stance, and using the flak vests with the armour plates, its hard to get a good sight picture with the currant C7's. The C7A2's give us the ability of a proper sight picture....so i've been told...I haven't used one as of yet.
|
Thematic-Device
Forum Elite
Posts: 1571
Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2006 11:50 am
GhostDog3 GhostDog3: Can anyone tell me if the C7.. and the C8.. is still being made by Diemaco? Someone told me Colt bought Diemaco...? truth or not? http://diemaco.com/
Looks like they were... They'll still probably make them in canada though.
|
Posts: 11907
Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2006 12:25 pm
EME Seal(There's on oxymoron!  ) while your statement is good in theory it is not in fact true across the board. Just off the top of my head I can think of at least 6 bases that do not have an electronic range, thus we still employ butt parties. If you are referring to the SAT ranges as your PWT, it is a tool to aid in training but does not replace actually firing live rounds down range.
So you can see that your statement is not reflective of the majority of the Forces. That being said I long for the day of everyone having access to the electronic ranges so that we can determine those that need more time on a range, because, lets face it, a soldier who can't shoot isn't really that much of a soldier when it counts! 
|
Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2006 6:00 pm
Thematic-Device Thematic-Device: GhostDog3 GhostDog3: Can anyone tell me if the C7.. and the C8.. is still being made by Diemaco? Someone told me Colt bought Diemaco...? truth or not? http://diemaco.com/Looks like they were... They'll still probably make them in canada though.
Thanks.So it not really Canada that makes them,a feeling I have.
|
Posts: 11108
Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2006 9:47 pm
You know you're old when you hear the term electronic ranges and you automatically think of the old shoot 'em up games at the Mad Dog in Wainwright.

|
Posts: 11907
Posted: Sat Feb 04, 2006 11:55 am
Can't remember when they got rid of the old Mad Dog  Do you remember the Jukebox that never, ever updated the selection? I think they had every Patsy Cline song ever written! 
|
kerfuffled
Forum Elite
Posts: 1293
Posted: Sat Feb 04, 2006 6:33 pm
GhostDog3 GhostDog3: Thematic-Device Thematic-Device: GhostDog3 GhostDog3: Can anyone tell me if the C7.. and the C8.. is still being made by Diemaco? Someone told me Colt bought Diemaco...? truth or not? http://diemaco.com/Looks like they were... They'll still probably make them in canada though. Thanks.So it not really Canada that makes them,a feeling I have.
Diemaco licensed the M-16 and variants and made them in Canada. Colt recently bought out Diemaco.
|
Wullu
CKA Elite
Posts: 4408
Posted: Sat Feb 04, 2006 6:43 pm
becks10 becks10: Arctic_Menace Arctic_Menace: Can't say I've tried it. But it does look alot like a mix between the C7 and the C8. It's the butt stock of the C8 with the forestock of the C7. Doesn't make much sense to me because(and correct me if I'm wrong on this) can't both the C8 and the C7 have the M203A1 grenade launcher mounted on them? They added the c8 buttstock, so we pretty much have a c7 with an adjustable butt. Because with the newer fighting stance, and using the flak vests with the armour plates, its hard to get a good sight picture with the currant C7's. The C7A2's give us the ability of a proper sight picture....so i've been told...I haven't used one as of yet.
I know that I could not get a sight picture worth a damn while standing upper deck sentry while wearing a flak jacket and my weather jacket using a standard C-7. Was a little better with the C-8.
|
Posted: Sun Feb 05, 2006 11:49 am
kerfuffled kerfuffled: GhostDog3 GhostDog3: Thematic-Device Thematic-Device: GhostDog3 GhostDog3: Can anyone tell me if the C7.. and the C8.. is still being made by Diemaco? Someone told me Colt bought Diemaco...? truth or not? http://diemaco.com/Looks like they were... They'll still probably make them in canada though. Thanks.So it not really Canada that makes them,a feeling I have. Diemaco licensed the M-16 and variants and made them in Canada. Colt recently bought out Diemaco.
Ok much better 
|
Posts: 619
Posted: Sun Feb 05, 2006 1:47 pm
EME_Seal EME_Seal: 2Cdo 2Cdo: Derby, overall the training is amongst some of the best in the world. Our soldiers for the most part are extremely resourceful, professional, and intelligent. It's just that our marksmanship, for most not all, is absolutely pathetic.
Our weapons test is laughable, and still more than enough cannot pass it. I set up a range on my property, and taught my wife and kids proper weapons handling, coached them for about an hour, and they PASSED. An incredible number of our troops don't consider marksmanship to be that important, thus they don't put in the effort on the range because their buddy who is doing the scoring will ensure that he passes. It seems to be one of the forces dirty little secrets.
If we were to tie marksmanship into career progression and honestly mark scores we would see some improvement. Just an idea I had. The days of punching holes with your bic pen so your buddy can pass are over. Today we're using computers to do the marking and it is making more people realize that they have to pay more attention to what they're doing. There's no more cheating to get through your PWT. Mind you if your not doing the rundown portion of the test then it's still pretty basic.
Only time that I ever used a range that had computer scoring was in Quebec. Still the old 'Targets UP" "Targets Down" for me.
|
|
Page 2 of 3
|
[ 32 posts ] |
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest |
|
|