Military Marksmanship: Myth and Fact
The USMC does a better job in small arms training than the other service branches but this is like pointing out that third-grade children are better mathematicians than second and first-graders. The “Marine Corps way of marksmanship” is not unique or particularly special. Any shooting range/club hosting High Power matches has better shooters and your participation there will be much more rewarding to your marksmanship skill.
Consider the qualification targets used during Table One (which was the entire USMC rifle qualification until 2007):
Notice how there are score rings surrounding the full-size silhouettes. These are based on the original Across The Course targets that were replaced decades ago with decimal targets because too many competition shooters were shooting perfect scores, even after adding a tie-breaking “V” ring which the USMC has never used for qualification. These targets were made increasingly larger over the years:
Competition shooters abandoned these targets as too large due to the frequency that top shooters could fire perfect scores. This was back in the 1960s
The “fix” was not in adding silhouette shapes as round bullseye targets can have practical value.
The problem is using over-sized targets and an inability to discern good hits. You can earn enough points to pass the USMC rifle qualification even after literally missing every full-size silhouette with all 50 rounds during Table One.
Missing the 6 MOA circle (“A” target) at 200, the 19x26-inch “D” (Dog) target (9.5 x 13MOA at 200), or 20x40-inch “B” Modified (B-Mod) but hitting the outer 4-ring drops one point, or 50 points for the entire course fifty-round course. Missing every bull/silhouette still scores 200 points; 190 is the minimum to pass, which allows for ten of those 50 misses to be all the way out in the 3-ring.
You can also earn an “expert” qual after missing half of the full-size silhouettes. Yes, really. Missing half the silhouettes but keeping those misses in the outer ring at 4 points for 25 rounds scores 225; 220 points is the cut-off for expert qualification, which allows for five of those misses to be out wide in the 3-ring.
Worse yet, Table 2 added about a decade ago is an additional close-range course worth 100 points. A combined total of 305 or higher out of 350 points possible scores expert. This allows Marines incapable of breaking 220 on Table 1 to still score “expert.” In fact, the USMC has reported this reduction of marksmanship standards allows about 60% of Marines to be rated “expert” due to the overall standard being made easier.
This was documented in “Death of the Marine Marksman” by SSgt. Ethan Rocke, originally published in the Okinawa Marine Newspaper and later picked up by Leatherneck.com under their headline news. SSgt. Rocke was formally recognized by the United States Marine Corps Combat Correspondents Association, awarding him with their First Place Commentary award for his telling editorial.
Read the full “Death of the Marine Marksman” editorial here:
https://firearmusernetwork.com/death-of-the-marine-marksman/
Don’t get mad, Devil Dogs; the Army is even worse.
The big advantage the USMC has is that it fully enforces its standards by having formally-trained, MOS-qualified personnel (0933, 8531, 8530, etc.) conduct range activity. In contrast, the U.S. Army doesn’t have an equivalent Military Occupational Specialty or ASI (Additional Skill Identifier) to ensure subject matter expertise.
Drill Sergeants, who are often wrongly assumed to be experts, have no formal prerequisite beyond passing routine qualification, the same standard used for every recruit during basic training. Army marksmanship “instructors” are considered qualified because they can pass the exact same entry-level test and standard as new recruits.
Drill sergeants have been found to have widespread levels of incompetence with small arms training and this has been documented in formal, published, Army-funded studies.
Research Product 2011-07, Rifle Marksmanship Diagnostic and Training Guide
David R. James, Northrop Grumman Corporation; Jean L. Dyer
U.S. Army Research Institute, May 2011, Fort Benning
https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA544533.pdf
“From 2006 to 2010 the Initial Entry Training (IET) rifle marksmanship program went through numerous changes designed to better prepare the IET Soldier for deployment to Afghanistan or Iraq. These changes redefined parts of the Army’s marksmanship doctrine and required drill sergeants to relearn techniques and procedures required to implement the new training strategies.
“A common theme identified was that many drill sergeants misunderstood parts of rifle marksmanship doctrine and/or inconsistently applied training techniques and procedures. One theme revealed in these efforts was that many DSs were unable to diagnose Soldiers’ marksmanship problems, which led to training that did not necessarily address specific problems.
“Drill Sergeants represent all military occupational specialties throughout the Army. Each DS has a specific level of marksmanship expertise and experience that can range from being exempt from weapons qualification in the prior unit, to qualifying twice a year and participating in multiple squad/platoon/company live fire exercises.
“Based on these observations, it was determined there was a need to generate a rifle marksmanship diagnostic and training guide that consolidated the tacit knowledge regarding the techniques that experienced, expert marksmanship trainers had found to be effective.”
Read why:
https://www.usar.army.mil/Portals/98/Documents/Marksmanship/ARM_FY21-2.pdf