When I was in ROTC we were taught to use the sling on our left arm to steady the rifle. This was with air rifle, rimfire, and occasionally with M16 at the 300m range. I know that it really helps with a crossbow, too.

Is this still the standard? The footage of the war shows what looks more like a CQB style sling. And I don't see anyone using this at the range. They use this air-rifle looking approach, left hand as a rest (usually ARs).

Is the sling style going out of fashion? What's the deal? I really don't know how to properly shoot a rifle anymore. Never really did, actually.

I can tell you it is the only way to be competetive from the sitting, kneeling and prone positions at range. Look into NRA HighPower Competition for the proper use of slings A properly adjusted sling really 'locks' you into the stable position for long range shooting.

The sling is actually not allowed, in HighPower Competition from the standing position used at the shortest distance (100 yds) other than a requirement in Service Rifle (as opposed to Match Rifle) for the sling to be on the rifle in the 'dress' configuration during standing off-hand competetion.

Swing by the range during a HighPower Match, even at reduced distances the same disciplines are followed as I'm sure you'd enjoy it...

Cheers,
XWind

I know the Army does not teach its recruits to shoot using the standard Known Distance course anymore. All the recruits get is this simulated long range fire at reduced size silhouettes at less than 100 yards. I saw that on that Discovery Channel show "Basic Training" where they followed these half-motivated weenies around during Army basic. Hoo-aahh........

The Navy and Marines, however, do use the full 600 yard KD course for qualification. I believe the use of the sling is still taught. I do think, though, that the realities of modern combat don't allow too much time for either donning a sling, or laying down precision long range rifle fire most of the time.

For the most part, unless you are a member of the USAMU or a USMC Expert Rifleman, any civilian NRA highpower shooter ranked sharpshooter or better will be a better rifleman by several orders of magnitude than any grunt in the US Army.

[ 03-24-2003, 08:01: Message edited by: ksduckhunter ]

Thanks guys. So these people I see at the range, with their ARs resting magazine-on-palm, at the 100, are just playing around or something I guess.

I was showing my wife how to use the sling once, and got a couple comments from people. One was helpful, two were pretty snobbish.

ksd, I hope things have changed, but USN boot weapons training in the early 1980s consisted of a 4 hour lecture on firearm safety and the basic operation of a 1911, followed up by a single 22 rimfire round fired from a 1911 conversion. Range access was generally denied to FNGs who were not Gunner's Mates. It was pretty disappointing.

I don't know about what they teach in the military, but I do know that I see very few non-former military hunters who actually use their slings for anything other than carrying their firearm over their shoulder.

I keep one on everything, including my shotguns(very helpful for turkey hunting).

Thanks for the input and feedback BECoole. This question got me digging through some of my manuals and I found a picture that shows 'palming the magazine' as a generally poor way to shoot off-hand and was not recommended. I think the description you gave of holding forward of the magazine is much more stable.

I've got a dumb question illustrating my ignorance of some computer techniques. How do you post an image on this site? It seems the ones I've looked at were actually posted on some other web site. It appears that the url to the image is entered on this site and this site processes the url resulting in an image in a post.

Is there anyway to get an image posted on this board that resides on a home PC? If not, is there a site or sites that will provide free bandwidth to hold your image so the url for the repository site can be entered here resulting in an image embedded in a post? Any help would be appreciated as I may be able to scan some images to help visualize the different techniques.

I know this is a bit off-subject but posting (uploading) pics from my desktop would make things much easier to understand.

Thanks Again and Enjoy Your Range Time,
XWind

This thread reminds me of my days in USMC boot camp. We used a sling wrapped very tightly around the bicep then threading the sling between the wrist and forearm. Hope that makes sense. Anyway, we spent one week just learning the proper sight alignment and sight picture of the weapon. They would place a white 55gal drum in a cicle of recruits. The drum had small drawings on KD targets. We spent that first week "snapping in" only. Then on the second week we fired at 200, 300 and 500 meters. Considering the rifle was not in match condition we did very well. It gave me great confidence in the M-16 out to 500 meters.
The marine corps spends the money and time to make a good shooter.

Hell, I'd be surprised if they still teach aiming, sling or no!!

[ 04-05-2003, 19:39: Message edited by: todd ]

No one can judge the Army's marksmanship training from what you see on a tv series, even if it is titled "Basic Training". The soldiers you saw being trained were all support MOS trainees. The soldiers start out firing a grouping exercise on a 25 meter range, on a silhouette target that represents 300 meters. When they can fire 2 consecutive 3-shot groups into a 4 centimeter cirlce they are considered a "GO" for the grouping exercise. This is Rifle Marksmanship period 4 (or RM-4). During RM-5, zeroing, they use the same range and target. They must hit 5 out of 6 consecutive rounds in a 4 centimeter circle in the center of mass of the silhouette to be zeroed. Then RM-6 takes them to the LOMAH range (Location of misses and Hits). On this range they fire at known distances of 75 meters, 175 meters and 300 meters. A computer tells a coach and the Drill Sergeant where the trainee hit the target, and even tells where the round went on a close miss of the target. RM-7 and RM-8 takes them to another range that is the same distance as LOMAH. RM-7 is silhouette targets that expose themselves one at a time for a certain time before going back down behind the dirt berm. RM-8 is basically the same, but the targets come up two at a time. This is when the trainees are taught to engage the closest target first, since in combat the closest target usually presents the greatest threat. RM-9, -10 and -11 are the qualification courses, with RM-11 being the actual record fire qual course. On this range the trainees fire at pop-up targets at 50M, 100M, 150M, 200M, 250M, and 300M. There is a 50M target on the left side and on the right side on the lane. The targets come up at random, 1 or 2 at a time. The trainees are given 40 rounds to engage the 40 various targets that come up. 23 to 29 hits for Marksman, 30 to 35 hits for Sharpshooter and 36 to 40 hits for Expert.

I have seen former marines come through Army Basic Training and absolutely struggle to qualify on these realistic pop-up targets. Their excuse is that they are too accustomed to shooting at stationary known distance targets. They admit that the Army qualification course is more difficult than the Marine's qualification course. The Army qualification course is more geared toward an enemy soldier exposing himself just long enough to maneuver and advance toward our unit. As far as Army "Grunts" shoot, WE shoot every month, with the goal of every infantry soldier to shoot expert with his assinged weapon. An infantry battalion in the 10th MTN DIV will typically fire just under $1,000,000 worth of ammo every month (as of 2 years ago when I was there). I have been a drill sergeant at Ft. Jackson since June 2001. I am an Army Grunt that you speak so lowly of, but know very little about. I don't put down other branches of the military because we are all on the same team. Anything that benefits one branch of our great military could probably benefit all other branches of our military, and that would make us more effective and lethal on the battlefield. I thinkk the Army and Marines should combine each others shooting programs withou taking anything away from each other. I would love to see the Army teach the sitting, standing unsupported and knealing positions in basic training. These positions are taught to infantry soldiers, but I think they should be taught in basic training. The sling for the M-16 isn't made to be a shooting sling like the M-14 sling, so it isn't effective to teach these trainees to use a sling for something it wasn't intended for. I would rather see the military go back to a sling that could be used for shooting, like the old canvas Garand sling. There are plenty of things we could do to enhance the Army's marksmanship program, but putting down a branch of the military based on personal opinion will only hinder the relationship and cohesion of our various armed forces. If only we could convince the Army Generals and higher leadership to change the marksmanship program for the better... Until then, I will continue to pass on the knowledge I have learned in sniper school, as well as the knowledge I continue to learn as a competitive high power rifle shooter.

My comment on the emphasis by the military upon volume of fire vs aimed, accurate point-target fire was not aimed (no pun intended) at any particular branch!! If the Army has resurrected the emphasis on hitting individual targets since I left active duty, no-one could be more pleased with such a development than I!!

Interesting post: For some perspective, let me tell you how it was in the Army in 1960. (Yes, I'm an old fart!)
First, the weapon was an M1 Garand.
Basic training was divided into 2 sections, first, 8 weeks of "Basic", which included everything. Then, if your MOS was "grunt", another 8 weeks of "AIT" (Advanced Infantry Training)
Only about the last 4 weeks of "Basic" included range time, however, that was usually 3 or 4 days a week. The range itself was a KD, with different sized popups at 25, 50, 100, 300, and 500 yards. (or possibly meters-don't remember for sure.) We were taught the use of the sling, but strangely enough did NOT use it in actual firing. Firing was done from "pits" in the ground. I suspect that in "AIT" much more use was made of the sling. I also know that in the AIT section, they used a "walk through" range with popups at unknown distances. The only other live fire exercise in "Basic" was a day or so of "small unit tactics", basically squad level advance/cover fire.
We were told at the time that this was the most advanced infantry training center in the US. (Fort Leonard Wood, MO) Sidenote: the 25 and 500 yard targets were the easiest to engage: One quickly learned to shoot low at the 25 (head and shoulder popup) the spray from dirt/rocks/ricochet would take it down. The 500 yard popup was a full sized torso, and stayed up long enough to dial in elevation... The intermediate targets were engaged with "battle sight zero" And yes, we did have to take the M1's apart and put them back together blindfolded.
At the time, and now, I would consider the training adequate for "support" personnel. Of course, the kicker was, as soon as I reached my permanant assigment I was issued a Carbine, not and M1. And had zero training with it.

You don't include dates here.

When I was in the US Army, 1966-70 the rifle was the M-14 and transitioning to the M-16.

Fire cover was transitioning from aimed fire to "field of fire" . . . which is a polite way of saying, "keep their heads down."

Studies show that engagement is typically less than 300 yds, and most of the time in the range of 100 yds.

Because wounding a soldier causes more "strategic load" on a military unit than simply killing the soldier, there has been a shift in tactics toward wounding the opposition. Wounding requires medical aid, evacuation, etc. Killing a soldier requires that troops get to use the corpse as a bullet stop.

Current tactics calls for short range engagement. If we were not engaging at short range, we'd be using the M-14 or the Garand.