• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Shooting 7.62 with the Carl G... whats the point?

Da_man

Sr. Member
Reaction score
0
Points
230
This weekend we had our support weapons NIAC in Valcartier.  Those who did the C9 and C6 got some live ammo, but grenadiers only got those blue target pratice rounds where you really cant practice because you have no idea where they hit.  Those who had it the worst were those on the 84mm.  They shot freaking 7.62mm rounds.  Isnt the point of live fireing a weapon to get a feel of it?  What can a 7.62 round can do that dry firing can not?  Why even bother going to a range with it to shoot that. help me out here.
 
"Why even bother going to a range with it to shoot that."

For starters, it gets you familiar with firing the weapon on a range. Secondly, the real stuff may have been allocated for overseas use; the last time I used the M203 we fired chalk rounds for just that reason.

Methinks you doth protest too much... :crybaby:
 
Drills, drills, drills.  Drills are what makes the gunner and the loader an effective team.  All crew-served weapons require lots of practice to maintain proficiency on.
 
Da_man said:
What can a 7.62 round can do that dry firing can not?   Why even bother going to a range with it to shoot that. help me out here.

It can provide some indication of the gunner's marksmanship.
 
Well no, he has a point.

If you can't even see where the rounds went, whats the point of going to the range?  You can practice drills all you like at the armory - isn't the point of going to the range and live firing weapons so that you get a feel for the weapon when its in use, and to help improve accuracy with it?  If you can't even see where the training rounds hit  (I don't know, the M203 was after my time) - and you only dry-fire a Carl G...wouldn't it save money just to stay at the armory and practice drills there instead?
 
CBH99 said:
If you can't even see where the rounds went, whats the point of going to the range?  

What are you talking about?   You can see where the rounds go.   You have good indication when you hit the target, unles you are shooting at soft targets.....so you should go to the proper Range with Hard Targets.  
 
CBH99 said:
If you can't even see where the rounds went, whats the point of going to the range?  

Open your eyes and follow the trace. If you can't do that, you shouldn't be gunning.
 
There are pros and cons to using live and training rounds with all weapons.  In particular, since the 84mm requires the gunner to obtain experience with the sight's and firing the weapon to increase his likely-hood of hitting the target, it is beneficial and economical not to waste money on rounds that would mostl likely miss the target in the first place.  Until gunners have a sufficient amount of time and experience on the weapon, it is pointless to expend expensive ammunition, just because he wants to hear a big boom.  The training round for the 84mm has a tracer in it, thus you can observe strike and determine wether or not you have actually hit and used your sight's correctly, being extremely important, since further targets are harder to hit.

Having sufficient experience as a Sgt and pointy head, understanding this aspect of training with sub-calibre rounds for weapon systems is beneficial and only produces confident and experienced gunners that will be able to kill targets when asked to do so.    

Many military's utilize training devices for their weapon systems such as lasers and small calibre rounds, and with the army getting more and more technical, one should accept these systems and grasp what he/she can learn from them.
 
Da_man said:
This weekend we had our support weapons NIAC in Valcartier.   Those who did the C9 and C6 got some live ammo, but grenadiers only got those blue target pratice rounds where you really cant practice because you have no idea where they hit.   Those who had it the worst were those on the 84mm.   They shot freaking 7.62mm rounds.   Isnt the point of live fireing a weapon to get a feel of it?   What can a 7.62 round can do that dry firing can not?   Why even bother going to a range with it to shoot that. help me out here.

Here's some help;

the blue plastic M203 rounds are filled with bright orange chalk. If you can't see where they land, you need your eyes checked.

The 7.62 84mm round has an immediate lighting red tracer. If you ca'nt see it, your eyes are closed.

Finally, considering that reg force units get similar allotments for range practices, what makes you so special? The real ammo does'nt start to show up until workup trg for a deployment, and certain exercises.

And before you start honking about the americans and brits, I know many troops from those countries who landed in a foreign country and were handed a weapon they had never even heard of, then told to patrol with it. You are'nt as badly off as you might think.
 
Da_man said:
Why even bother going to a range with it to shoot that. help me out here.

Am I correct in understanding that a live 84mm round for the Carl G costs in the hundreds if not thousands of dollars?
 
pretty much costs that much


And why give someone a live 84m round if they don't know how to properly fire the weapon, thats why you get the tracer round.
 
Michael Dorosh said:
Am I correct in understanding that a live 84mm round for the Carl G costs in the hundreds if not thousands of dollars?

Yes, the last time I saw the fugures, 84 mm ammo averaged about $1000 per round.
 
Michael O'Leary said:
Yes, the last time I saw the fugures, 84 mm ammo averaged about $1000 per round.

WHere can someone find information on how much everything like that costs? or is it need to know basis type info?
 
Put it on Santa's (Liberals) wish list:

Training simulated or live is still training......

the Navy is so poor (we had another fuel budget cut) we do everything simulated from alongside.

Quit F*&&%kin moaning! I bet you complain (original poster) in front of the younger troops!

I like the earlier comment about drills and proper procedures. Thats the training value, regardless what comes out the end.

Agree, it would be nice but thats our reality. The Navy has all the gear, missiles (Standard/Harpoon/Sparrow/guns and we get to simulate. (like being married)

Talk about frustrating, but oh well! Merry Christmas! Vote PC!
 
Back in the day we fired a 6.5mm insert round that matched the trajectory characteristics of the actual round and it had a tracer so you could observe the round and the strike..  Now why would we want to waste $1000 a round on newbies that fire rounds out into space when they can get thier bearings with a round that cost pennies and they have to carry out all the drills properly to get it to fire?  We fired dozens of rounds that way and only after we were all profecient we were allowed to fire our 2 live rounds at a hard target.  Dry training and insert rounds save us millions of dollars in training costs that would be wasted on lost rounds and misses on the range.
 
when I did the Carl G. on my QL3, we used concrete training rounds, and the best two teams got to use the HE rounds. when I questioned about the concrete rounds, I was told they were replaced by the 7.62 rounds.

Has anyone heard what happend to the concrete round? and why they are not used instead of the 7.62?
 
NL_engineer said:
when I did the Carl G. on my QL3, we used concrete training rounds, and the best two teams got to use the HE rounds. when I questioned about the concrete rounds, I was told they were replaced by the 7.62 rounds.

Has anyone heard what happend to the concrete round? and why they are not used instead of the 7.62?

The Cement head is still used, but for the very inexperienced, why waste it? The 7.62 round costs a bit more than a dollar, while a rocket, with the live or cement head costs from $600-$1000.

I'd rather learn to hit the tgt with a bullet 25 times than miss on my one and only with a rocket.

IME, the cement head has been used on some live fire exercises, as it is not a dud producing round, and occasionally at the range.
 
BernDawg said:
Back in the day we fired a 6.5mm insert round that matched the trajectory characteristics of the actual round and it had a tracer so you could observe the round and the strike..  Now why would we want to waste $1000 a round on newbies that fire rounds out into space when they can get their bearings with a round that cost pennies and they have to carry out all the drills properly to get it to fire?  We fired dozens of rounds that way and only after we were all proficient we were allowed to fire our 2 live rounds at a hard target.  Dry training and insert rounds save us millions of dollars in training costs that would be wasted on lost rounds and misses on the range.

Back in days when their were men in the bn..............
In Rv81 a certain Major who had a fascination with machine guns decided amongst other improvements for the CP defense it should have a tank hunter component. Three of us fired off twenty to twenty five live rounds a piece until he was satisfied. Those orange ear plugs didn't work to well and we came off the range kinda bloody, right into a Sentinel Reporter and Photographer. I think the story they ran was 'realistic training exercises' complete with photo's. From then on when ever the CP went foot mobile in addition to radio, batteries I got to carry the wonderful Carl G just in case a T-72 wandered into the CP. C/S O-A
 
Back
Top