Terrific article on the most elite military sniper school on earth: The Marine Scout Sniper school
All about PIGS and HOGS
All about PIGS and HOGS
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
STALKING AND SHOOTING: How US Marine Snipers Become The Deadliest Shots On Earth
- Thread starter TheBelgian
- Start date
US Military:
SOTIC / SFSC - sure the members of team gold & green are going to throw this one out.
USN SSC - sure the members of team gold & blue are going to throw this one out.
Given they were both recently overhauled based on lessons learned from OIF & OEF, as well as new advances in the shooting sports, they each now have some very strong new components. I have to say hats off to the staff of those schools for their efforts in dumping some of the old sacred cows in the programs and adding some new controversial material.
That being the case, there are a number of foreign military sniper programs that I am sure many people would also argue are on par or better (Canadian, Australian).
Per the "grab the popcorn" above, as they say "opinions are like a certain part of anatomy, everyone has one, but you don't want to necessarily see them or hear them"!
I would love to see an extensive objective comparison of the various sniper programs out there, but as with many things, sharing is not always universally accepted.
-1
*****************
I really want to see the pictures, but my connection is too slow, I guess. Half an hour to see two pictures, I give up. I'll see them at the library next week. Why do news sites have to put so much CRAP on each page that has to download? Grrrrrr.
Last edited:
Look at the list of snipers confirmed kills that are published and back track what school they went to. According to the Marines the USMC school is the best in the world, just ask them, actually you dont have to ask they will tell you..
I wouldn't leave the Brit, French, German and Israeli schools off the list for consideration.
I wouldn't leave the Brit, French, German and Israeli schools off the list for consideration.
I'd think mission difficulty and effectiveness would be a better scale of skill level. Kill numbers are easily affected by circumstance/stituation. I have a friend who was with 2nd Recon Bn complained that everytime they had a good mission SEALs would steal it or Army would just show and fuck it up so take that for what it's worth(hearsay). Can't really put your skills to the test if you aren't getting the missions.
Also thinking that, in reality though all the schools are pretty good considering not that long ago it was hard to find one school amongst the whole dam military.
Some really good .mil schools are constantly evolving with shooting technology and adapting new equipt to their needs. They are dynamic and have been VERY successful in theater over the past 10 years. They are just part of organizations that pride themselves in not making headlines and keeping scoresheets
That is a great article. Thank you for sharing. I guess it gives us a very small idea of what is involved in the development of a Marine Scout Sniper. I want to thank all of the previous Scout Snipers who have put everything on the line to defend our country. It is because of people like you that make my family safe.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Hate to say it, but I am not holding my breath for long!
IMHO, unless we kick off another major military operation, a lot of what the US Military has gained over the last 10 years of war will be soon lost. Historically speaking, the US Military is very well known for being a day late and a dollar short at the outbreak of a conflict. Just as they get to where they need to be, and the conflict ends, they will start taking 2 steps backwards for every one step they had taken forward.
Some of the best military shooters that I know with trigger time in the last 10 years, I know because like myself, they are no longer serving in the military and they are now working in the private or public sector. Everyone of those shooters has tried to leave it better than they found it, but it is a constant never ending battle to keep the Military Desk Jockeys and Worthless Politicians from flushing it all down the drain.
Hopefully the Military will continue its relationships/partnership with the civilian training and shooting programs. Unfortunately that is pretty much limited to SOCOM, but hopefully more units will be able to also be able to take advantage of it.
Only time is going to tell.
Regardless of which school is best, I'm impressed by the level of commitment to excellence and the skill level in so many different areas of the art of extreme long range precision shooting!
The photos were amazing! Would love to see a full on video reportage ah!!
The photos were amazing! Would love to see a full on video reportage ah!!
Even though I'm ex-Army I'd vote the Marine Corps school as well. I've seen too much "adaptation" to the Army curriculum and even "we don't need the main school" mentality. "We'll train 'em here in combat" mentality. Lets get rid of this/that We don't use it here...and the list goes on. The Marine Corps Course goes in depth on every point a sniper may encounter wherever he may go. That means it covers all the 'advanced' basics to a very good degree. Meanwhile the Army and Navy have taken the short route and pretty much focus on 'needs right now' vs. a well rounded sniper. They all teach good stuff, just that I still feel the Marine school covers everything as a whole, better.
You have to understand, the USMC School is a Basic Course, and not an advanced one..
Comparing it to a secondary course that is not the MOS course, is Apples & Oranges.
As far as a Basic School, the USMC School is second to none... end of discussion.
Comparing it to a secondary course that is not the MOS course, is Apples & Oranges.
As far as a Basic School, the USMC School is second to none... end of discussion.
That's some funny shit right there
Just a loving poke at my wet foot friends.
Thinking back, in my lifetime, military sniper schools were few or not even existing at some points, but the one thing that seems to have changed is civilian tactical shooting courses/schools. It might be the internet age and I might have missed them 30+ years ago, I don't remember but one civilian tactical shooting school from my youth. I hope these schools and companies that run them stick around to preserve the lessons re-learned over the past 13 years and the military takes advantage of them when the budget shuts the service schools down again.
You have to understand, the USMC School is a Basic Course, and not an advanced one..
Comparing it to a secondary course that is not the MOS course, is Apples & Oranges.
As far as a Basic School, the USMC School is second to none... end of discussion.
I'd have to agree I made an apples to oranges comparison. The standard Army School and Navy (read Seals) are two very different schools. I do not know how SOTIC fares today, but in the early eighties, I would have definitely chosen a Marine Graduate over an SF graduate. I do understand that the SF course was modified substantially. So, that may be an unfair comparison.
Also, my experience being thirty years old with this, is somewhat of an apples/oranges comparison of what we know today. But the one thing that sticks out in my mind is the Marines are solid on every point needed in a snipers world. Systems have advanced, but there are things you still need to know from the 'old school' way of doing it. A foundation in any subject is a plus.
Couple of points here:
SOTIC / SFSC (also NSW SSC) - major overhauls, really does not look like the old program.
Special Forces Sniper Course - YouTube
(PR vid, but it gives you some ideas)
Per above, a lot of the old sacred cows have been shown out to pasture, or butchered and eaten. When you train, deploy, fight, and return to train, the stuff that works sticks, the other stuff goes by the wayside fairly quickly. Don't get me wrong, still room for improvement when compared to some of the better civilian programs out there, but the lines between the Civilian and MIL training programs are blurring more and more.
"Best at doing what?" - per the discussion in many other topics here, not all of the Mil Sniper Schools are on the same sheet of music, or more importantly they do not have the same goals & objectives, or training curriculums. Personally, I think that is a huge mistake, if one branch deems it worthy, then the others should look at it as well. As such it is also really an "apples to oranges" comparison to try and look at the USMC School versus the US Army School. Case in point, the USMC places more of an emphasis on things such as acting as a Forward Observer. Sure the USMC Snipers are better at it, but you can't fault the Army Snipers for something they did not receive equal training on. Also hard to compare MOS training with ASQ training, IE: the USMC course is 12+ weeks versus the Army course which is 7 weeks.
"Shooting" - if you want to get down to trigger pulling, and throw out all of the rest of it, it goes back & forth some, but best of luck beating USAMU, and the SF and Ranger Sniper Teams. Take a look at the results of events like the Int Sniper Comp and the USASOC Sniper Competition. In all fairness, the Army does place a big emphasis on competitive shooting, but once again so should all of the branches IMHO. If you read up on the recent changes to the NSW SSC, you will see that the USAMU had a fair influence in that process. Very good example where the benefits of a well developed competitive shooting program are influencing and benefiting operational training.
IMHO, competition between the services can be a good thing, but it still blows my mind how much separation still exists between the various branches. Last I checked they were all fighting together for the USA!
No disrespect intended with the Army comments, just throwing it all out there in the hopes that it may benefit someone.
Last edited:
LRshooter101,
I'm glad to hear the 'old sacred cows' went out to pasture or got butchered. As you say one of the biggest things is what each course was intended for. Back in my day SF (wasn't called SOTIC then IIRC) sniper school was geared towards bringing an indigenous person up to a level where they could bring precision fire to the game with an indigenous force. Usually on patrol so the force size was roughly that of a platoon. Boiling it down, they were bringing foreign 'marksmen' up the level of better marksmen in the U.S. The stalking portion was in conjunction with those regular forces being trained so not really a cut above there. Although I will say in two trips to Central America most of them down there have quite a way of moving and blending into the jungle. The school had slots open to U.S. soldiers I'm thinking as a way to a) justify the course to the U.S. Army, and b) identify and correct improper technique in teaching (if it won't work with us, it won't work with them).
As to the Army/Navy schools, this was clearly an apples to oranges comparison because I meant each of them being quite different.
The Army course was a basic course initially intended to be just like the Marine Corps course. In the early eighties had seen most of the Army sniper programs not even holding a candle to the Marine course. In fact it wasn't uncommon to see Marine snipers embedded in various units conducting an operation that would include the use of a sniper. So, due to the level at which the Marine graduates attained, we (the Army) pushed for a school that mirrored what they did. From what I understand (I was out when the school was formally established) this was the original curriculum. Fast forward to today, and I find this is where most of the 'cutting' is found from the program that might still have relevance or need more in depth exploration. This is probably the biggest disparity I can see.
As to the Navy school, the Seals have their own sniper course now for reasons I can foresee. Whether it was lack of volunteers to go Seal from the Marines or Marine Snipers didn't do well in Buds/Seal training is unknown to me. I do know the result of Seal qualified Marine Sniper Qualifed people was a small percentage. Either way the Navy chose to take Seal qualified personnel and up shooting and stalking abilities to the level they need. Also the other type of snipers they use from helo's. In any case their level of training is quite a bit above that of a U.S. Army Sniper Graduate. Where Sotic stands against the Navy, I do not know either. I have seen a lot of signs they are increasing their capabilities more closely to the Navy level. As far as the D-boy's they have always maintained a very high capability in this area. Their route back then was an initial SF course followed by many extreme training exercises to increase capability. I'm assuming they would attend SOTIC today.
As far as the USAMU is concerned, it was talked about many times that we could better our marksmanship through advanced training. I never saw it happen from them. My opinion is like many, they are off in their own little 'competition' world. Regular Army marksmanship is allowed to degrade continuously. In fact the 500 yd. KD qualification the Army used to have got knocked down to the 300 pop up. Now I understand various units use the 25m reduced target for qualification? The USAMU is always in large part responsible for the degradation of U.S. Army marksmanship and I find no way to praise them. People who need it and need to learn it are bypassed. Big green and 'budgets' also need to be looked at for that. But, the classic case of "they don't need it" is so wrong. In Korea, Air Force personnel overrun and killed with the wrong bullets in hand for the weapon they died with. Viet Nam with no front lines meant anybody might need to turn into a rifleman. Numerous examples in OIF and OEF of 'non-combat' personnel unable to handle a weapon and fight.
Again, I wasn't an observer in every unit, but I didn't hear much about the USAMU doing a whole lot except compete.
I'm glad to hear the 'old sacred cows' went out to pasture or got butchered. As you say one of the biggest things is what each course was intended for. Back in my day SF (wasn't called SOTIC then IIRC) sniper school was geared towards bringing an indigenous person up to a level where they could bring precision fire to the game with an indigenous force. Usually on patrol so the force size was roughly that of a platoon. Boiling it down, they were bringing foreign 'marksmen' up the level of better marksmen in the U.S. The stalking portion was in conjunction with those regular forces being trained so not really a cut above there. Although I will say in two trips to Central America most of them down there have quite a way of moving and blending into the jungle. The school had slots open to U.S. soldiers I'm thinking as a way to a) justify the course to the U.S. Army, and b) identify and correct improper technique in teaching (if it won't work with us, it won't work with them).
As to the Army/Navy schools, this was clearly an apples to oranges comparison because I meant each of them being quite different.
The Army course was a basic course initially intended to be just like the Marine Corps course. In the early eighties had seen most of the Army sniper programs not even holding a candle to the Marine course. In fact it wasn't uncommon to see Marine snipers embedded in various units conducting an operation that would include the use of a sniper. So, due to the level at which the Marine graduates attained, we (the Army) pushed for a school that mirrored what they did. From what I understand (I was out when the school was formally established) this was the original curriculum. Fast forward to today, and I find this is where most of the 'cutting' is found from the program that might still have relevance or need more in depth exploration. This is probably the biggest disparity I can see.
As to the Navy school, the Seals have their own sniper course now for reasons I can foresee. Whether it was lack of volunteers to go Seal from the Marines or Marine Snipers didn't do well in Buds/Seal training is unknown to me. I do know the result of Seal qualified Marine Sniper Qualifed people was a small percentage. Either way the Navy chose to take Seal qualified personnel and up shooting and stalking abilities to the level they need. Also the other type of snipers they use from helo's. In any case their level of training is quite a bit above that of a U.S. Army Sniper Graduate. Where Sotic stands against the Navy, I do not know either. I have seen a lot of signs they are increasing their capabilities more closely to the Navy level. As far as the D-boy's they have always maintained a very high capability in this area. Their route back then was an initial SF course followed by many extreme training exercises to increase capability. I'm assuming they would attend SOTIC today.
As far as the USAMU is concerned, it was talked about many times that we could better our marksmanship through advanced training. I never saw it happen from them. My opinion is like many, they are off in their own little 'competition' world. Regular Army marksmanship is allowed to degrade continuously. In fact the 500 yd. KD qualification the Army used to have got knocked down to the 300 pop up. Now I understand various units use the 25m reduced target for qualification? The USAMU is always in large part responsible for the degradation of U.S. Army marksmanship and I find no way to praise them. People who need it and need to learn it are bypassed. Big green and 'budgets' also need to be looked at for that. But, the classic case of "they don't need it" is so wrong. In Korea, Air Force personnel overrun and killed with the wrong bullets in hand for the weapon they died with. Viet Nam with no front lines meant anybody might need to turn into a rifleman. Numerous examples in OIF and OEF of 'non-combat' personnel unable to handle a weapon and fight.
Again, I wasn't an observer in every unit, but I didn't hear much about the USAMU doing a whole lot except compete.
Unless you talk to someone who has been to all of the different schools you will never get an objective answer on which course is the best. BUT, as far as a basic course goes, USMC SSBC is obviously the best!
Having some experience here, I can say...
When I went to the USMC School, I was a PFC and it was 12 weeks long. At the same time the Army school that was a direct comparison was 3 weeks long.
A few years ago, when working at Rifles Only we had a lot of recent graduates and soon to attend people, and from a large majority of them, they felt the Army Basic school was so full of problems, many were asking to go to the National Guard Sniper School as they felt the course of instruction was much better. The inbreeding, or institutional incest that was on display was ruining a lot of what was being taught. So you saw a bunch gravitate towards the National Guard program as it is was younger, and better at teaching without the problems.
SOTIC is not a basic course, it's for people who have already progressed within the Army Special Operations Community. It's considered by all an excellent course. In fact they are the only school that initially corrected the errors put into the manual likes humidity and such. So the SOTIC is very good...
The SEALs again, it's not a basic course, you're already at the top of your game. And to be perfectly honest we had an instructor from that school who tried telling us the Ocular Adjustment on the NF was for setting your "eye relief' on the scope and he was adamant even falling back on the "I'm a SEAL Sniper Instructor" which was really cringe-worthy. They are good, but SEALs have so many different system and the majority also attend class with David Tubb so you have to understand, they are not just depending on one Source like the USMC.
The Marines are cheap, very few are attending outside marksmanship instruction. Most of the other Special Operations people attend outside marksmanship. So you have a lot of differences.
When I went to the USMC School, I was a PFC and it was 12 weeks long. At the same time the Army school that was a direct comparison was 3 weeks long.
A few years ago, when working at Rifles Only we had a lot of recent graduates and soon to attend people, and from a large majority of them, they felt the Army Basic school was so full of problems, many were asking to go to the National Guard Sniper School as they felt the course of instruction was much better. The inbreeding, or institutional incest that was on display was ruining a lot of what was being taught. So you saw a bunch gravitate towards the National Guard program as it is was younger, and better at teaching without the problems.
SOTIC is not a basic course, it's for people who have already progressed within the Army Special Operations Community. It's considered by all an excellent course. In fact they are the only school that initially corrected the errors put into the manual likes humidity and such. So the SOTIC is very good...
The SEALs again, it's not a basic course, you're already at the top of your game. And to be perfectly honest we had an instructor from that school who tried telling us the Ocular Adjustment on the NF was for setting your "eye relief' on the scope and he was adamant even falling back on the "I'm a SEAL Sniper Instructor" which was really cringe-worthy. They are good, but SEALs have so many different system and the majority also attend class with David Tubb so you have to understand, they are not just depending on one Source like the USMC.
The Marines are cheap, very few are attending outside marksmanship instruction. Most of the other Special Operations people attend outside marksmanship. So you have a lot of differences.
Unfortunately I have to agree with Sandwarrior in regards to the AMU. While they are great at competing I have never seen them do anything to help the Army as a whole when it comes to marksmanship training. They are based out of Fort Benning and I have never even heard of them helping train one of the Sniper courses or lend a hand during Basic Rifle Marksmanship for the Basic Training battalions there. They just worry about themselves and their upcoming competitions.
As for the actual Sniper Schools within the services, I would agree the USMC has the best basic Sniper School. Just the fact that it is significantly longer indicates they have more time to teach and refine whereas the Army is more of a crash course. I have not gone through a true SOTIC but the instructors there are all very knowledgable and do their best to pass on current info and techniques. My old junior just came back from the Bragg course and said it was a great course. He doesn't come from a Sniper background but from talking with several other SOTIC grads and having an old SOTIC instructor on my team they definitely cover some things that were not covered at the big Army school when I went long ago.
As for the actual Sniper Schools within the services, I would agree the USMC has the best basic Sniper School. Just the fact that it is significantly longer indicates they have more time to teach and refine whereas the Army is more of a crash course. I have not gone through a true SOTIC but the instructors there are all very knowledgable and do their best to pass on current info and techniques. My old junior just came back from the Bragg course and said it was a great course. He doesn't come from a Sniper background but from talking with several other SOTIC grads and having an old SOTIC instructor on my team they definitely cover some things that were not covered at the big Army school when I went long ago.
Terrific article on the most elite military sniper school on earth: The Marine Scout Sniper school
All about PIGS and HOGS
You can watch the video Modern Sniper on Netflix.
So what did it mean when I went in 05 (Army, which at the time was 6 weeks long) and we had 2 Navy seals? I'm proud of my time in grade, but I'll be the first to admit, the Army has a long way to go until they meet the Marines standards. I was rocking an M3A with a rack grade rifle overseas! At least we could have a solid kit like the Marines! Even variable glass would've be a step in the right direction. I still made due...despite being the ripe age of 23 when deployed.
Luckily for us, our PL had a solid understanding how to utilize our platoon...
Luckily for us, our PL had a solid understanding how to utilize our platoon...
The usmc basic course has undergone some pretty good changes in the recent past as well, putting more focus on positional shooting, barricades and tripod work for grade versus just a crash course of "here's how to do it, now just go back to shooting prone". Field skills and stalking are still a huge emphasis though, but has been reworked as well and you can now shoot from further out than 200 (had to get within 200 when I went through) but you have to be in the proper position for the distance, ie if you are within 300 you can take a standing shot off your tripod but the further back you go the lower you have to get, the Sam way the kd course is ran.
USAMU,
Navy SEAL Sniper School (Part 1) | Navy SEALs
QUOTE "A few days after we arrived we were joined by guys from the Army marksmanship unit (AMU), the military’s elite match shooting team. The SEALs are not known for their humility within the Special Operations community, but for what it’s worth, we always strive for the best, even when that means going outside our community. In this case our instructor cadre was smart enough to bring in the best of the best. These guys could shoot. Most of them would go on to compete at the highest levels worldwide; some had Olympic gold medals to their credit. I quickly realized I needed to pay attention, take notes, and do whatever these guys suggested. This was some of the best marksmanship training I have ever received, and their training methods would not only stay with me throughout my time in the teams, they would also influence my teaching practices in the future." (more in the article)
If at least one of the SEAL Sniper Instructors is willing to give AMU some credit, I would say that it is worth something.
United States Army Marksmanship Unit (USAMU)
QUOTE "Excellence on the range has enabled Horner and his teammates to thrive when it comes to instructing other Soldiers in marksmanship proficiency. Soldiers from Special Forces, Ranger, and regular Army units repeatedly request the assistance of USAMU Soldiers prior to deploying to combat. “I get a lot of satisfaction out of that,” Horner said. “I really like teaching Soldiers and guys getting ready to deploy.” The fundamentals Horner uses in his sport--rapid fire engagement, engaging targets at varying distances, engaging moving targets, shooting in alternate positions and weapons manipulation—relate to the teaching points he uses to instruct other Soldiers. “We don’t tell them how to get to the target because they already know how to do that,” Horner said. “Once they recognize the threat, we instruct them on how to engage it and neutralize it as quickly as possible, regardless of the distance.” (more in article)
No doubt that Horner and many of the other "AMU Stars" spend a lot of time training and competing, but they are doing a fairly decent job of training other personnel when they can.
IMHO, the decline of Big Green's Shooting Skills, has a lot more to do with the Brass & Bean Counters. When I was RA we were lucky to make a range once or twice a year, and it was all budget driven, not body wants to spend money when you are not actually fighting. Once I got into Spec Ops, that changed to some extent, but during the Cold War years it was still slim pickings. Things picked up a little with Panama, Gulf I, Somalia, and Bosnia.
With the conflict over the last 10 years, the opportunities for training having picked up considerably, both with the in-house MIL programs, and the use of outside civilian programs. However IMHO, without another serious conflict, that is all going to slowly but surely come to an end. Unfortunately many of the MIL Snipers and Instructors are finding their way out and into the private sector, so a lot of the institutional knowledge is being lost. I am keeping my fingers crossed that the Mil Sniper Programs do not all end up back at ground zero 4-5 years down the road.
Navy SEAL Sniper School (Part 1) | Navy SEALs
QUOTE "A few days after we arrived we were joined by guys from the Army marksmanship unit (AMU), the military’s elite match shooting team. The SEALs are not known for their humility within the Special Operations community, but for what it’s worth, we always strive for the best, even when that means going outside our community. In this case our instructor cadre was smart enough to bring in the best of the best. These guys could shoot. Most of them would go on to compete at the highest levels worldwide; some had Olympic gold medals to their credit. I quickly realized I needed to pay attention, take notes, and do whatever these guys suggested. This was some of the best marksmanship training I have ever received, and their training methods would not only stay with me throughout my time in the teams, they would also influence my teaching practices in the future." (more in the article)
If at least one of the SEAL Sniper Instructors is willing to give AMU some credit, I would say that it is worth something.
United States Army Marksmanship Unit (USAMU)
QUOTE "Excellence on the range has enabled Horner and his teammates to thrive when it comes to instructing other Soldiers in marksmanship proficiency. Soldiers from Special Forces, Ranger, and regular Army units repeatedly request the assistance of USAMU Soldiers prior to deploying to combat. “I get a lot of satisfaction out of that,” Horner said. “I really like teaching Soldiers and guys getting ready to deploy.” The fundamentals Horner uses in his sport--rapid fire engagement, engaging targets at varying distances, engaging moving targets, shooting in alternate positions and weapons manipulation—relate to the teaching points he uses to instruct other Soldiers. “We don’t tell them how to get to the target because they already know how to do that,” Horner said. “Once they recognize the threat, we instruct them on how to engage it and neutralize it as quickly as possible, regardless of the distance.” (more in article)
No doubt that Horner and many of the other "AMU Stars" spend a lot of time training and competing, but they are doing a fairly decent job of training other personnel when they can.
IMHO, the decline of Big Green's Shooting Skills, has a lot more to do with the Brass & Bean Counters. When I was RA we were lucky to make a range once or twice a year, and it was all budget driven, not body wants to spend money when you are not actually fighting. Once I got into Spec Ops, that changed to some extent, but during the Cold War years it was still slim pickings. Things picked up a little with Panama, Gulf I, Somalia, and Bosnia.
With the conflict over the last 10 years, the opportunities for training having picked up considerably, both with the in-house MIL programs, and the use of outside civilian programs. However IMHO, without another serious conflict, that is all going to slowly but surely come to an end. Unfortunately many of the MIL Snipers and Instructors are finding their way out and into the private sector, so a lot of the institutional knowledge is being lost. I am keeping my fingers crossed that the Mil Sniper Programs do not all end up back at ground zero 4-5 years down the road.
I always saw the same from the USMC shooting team. If it wasn't for my spending two years working the Parris Island ranges, I wouldn't have interacted with a single team shooter my entire career. I had a CWO Range officer who spent 12 years shooting the teams, and hadn't been in his MOS (1371) since he was a LCpl. Another Line SNCOIC who was a 0311/0369 and hadn't done a pump since he was a PFC. The PMI section had several of those types as well, so maybe that would be considered passing on their skills to the Corps as a whole, but really it was their way of dodging the FMF. I couldn't get orders out of there fast enough...
Schools are just schools. They teach the basics, certify that you meet the minimums, dog the shit out of you day in and out, and that's about it. I thought I was hot shit coming out of USMC Sniper School as "High Shooter" until one month later I was being humbled in the Urban Sniper Course put on by SOTG. I learned how to call wind in SSBC and I learned how to shoot in Urban. But it was in my platoons that I learned how to be a sniper. Mission after mission after mission, pushing the limits operationally, physically and mentally, is where you learn the actual trade. I never was the best, but I knew a thing or two and the Company Commanders I supported liked my team's performance. Except that one, and he was a fucking tool who couldn't employ a can opener, much less a Scout Sniper Team... [MENTION=150]NOMAD[/MENTION] knows exactly who I'm talking about. Fuck that guy.
In my years I've worked with incredible SEALs, SF, Aussie SAS, Royal Marines, US Army and USMC Snipers, and Recon Marines. I've also met my share of shit heads from virtually every branch and background as well. I've seen STA Platoons that were incredible, and ones that worried far more about their haircuts and hoodies than missions. I worked with one 10th Mountain Scout Platoon that despite having attended the schools, they were hurting badly for follow on training, and asked myself and my partner to come up there for a month TAD on their dime to help train them (got nixed, my Plt Cmdr said fuck no). The differences between successful and shitty usually came down to Battalion/Company Commanders that used them how they are best employed, the Platoon Sergeant and Chief Scout doing their jobs to push the platoon to new levels, and a Battalion that supported their STA Platoon members to do more schools than just SSBC along with members not resting on their laurels when they earn their Hogs Tooth. STA doesn't have a school pipeline like Recon or Force does - You have to fight with the Bn to come off every last TAD dollar or do PTAD to get what you need, and beg/borrow/steal for school seats left and right.
Who has the best basic school though? Marines, of course. Why? Because fuck you, that's why!
Last edited:
I always saw the same from the USMC shooting team. If it wasn't for my spending two years working the Parris Island ranges, I wouldn't have interacted with a single team shooter my entire career. I had a CWO Range officer who spent 12 years shooting the teams, and hadn't been in his MOS (1371) since he was a LCpl. Another Line SNCOIC who was a 0311/0369 and hadn't done a pump since he was a PFC. The PMI section had several of those types as well, so maybe that would be considered passing on their skills to the Corps as a whole, but really it was their way of dodging the FMF. I couldn't get orders out of there fast enough...
Schools are just schools. They teach the basics, certify that you meet the minimums, dog the shit out of you day in and out, and that's about it. I thought I was hot shit coming out of USMC Sniper School as "High Shooter" until one month later I was being humbled in the Urban Sniper Course put on by SOTG. I learned how to call wind in SSBC and I learned how to shoot in Urban. But it was in my platoons that I learned how to be a sniper. Mission after mission after mission, pushing the limits operationally, physically and mentally, is where you learn the actual trade. I never was the best, but I knew a thing or two and the Company Commanders I supported liked my team's performance. Except that one, and he was a fucking tool who couldn't employ a can opener, much less a Scout Sniper Team... [MENTION=150]NOMAD[/MENTION] knows exactly who I'm talking about. Fuck that guy.
In my years I've worked with incredible SEALs, SF, Aussie SAS, Royal Marines, US Army and USMC Snipers, and Recon Marines. I've also met my share of shit heads from virtually every branch and background as well. I've seen STA Platoons that were incredible, and ones that worried far more about their haircuts and hoodies than missions. I worked with one 10th Mountain Scout Platoon that despite having attended the schools, they were hurting badly for follow on training, and asked myself and my partner to come up there for a month TAD on their dime to help train them (got nixed, my Plt Cmdr said fuck no). The differences between successful and shitty usually came down to Battalion/Company Commanders that used them how they are best employed, the Platoon Sergeant and Chief Scout doing their jobs to push the platoon to new levels, and a Battalion that supported their STA Platoon members to do more schools than just SSBC along with members not resting on their laurels when they earn their Hogs Tooth. STA doesn't have a school pipeline like Recon or Force does - You have to fight with the Bn to come off every last TAD dollar or do PTAD to get what you need, and beg/borrow/steal for school seats left and right.
Who has the best basic school though? Marines, of course. Why? Because fuck you, that's why!
Well said. I would've love to train with you guys prior to jumping the pond.
I pretty much always enjoyed working with the other branches, with the exception with one particular unit full of of big heads but little knowledge of the bush. That particular 10th Mtn unit didn't have a training problem, they had an employment and upper level leadership problem, and it was well proven on a JRTC run we did with them. I'll sum it up by saying SS teams are small for a reason, camouflage and stealth are your best friend. It's a great story and one of my fondest ops with my now late sniper partner, but I'm not throwing it out in the open airwaves.
One of the Marine Corps' biggest assets was the Sniper Employment Officer Course, or whatever they call it now, and bringing about the 0203 MOS. I've had BCs and CCs look at me like I had a dick growing out of my forehead when I would advise them how I should be best employed, simply because I didn't have shiny shit on my collar. My Platoon Commander would tell them the exact same thing and holy shit, it was all the sudden the greatest idea in the world. When we worked directly for the Deuce, that was a clusterfuck. Maybe I just had shitty intel officers, I don't know, but having a Plt Cmdr who was both intel and an infantry officer worked well for us.
well said, one of my best friends was 8541 rolling around being crazy. But we understood each other. we always made it a point that we (as nco's) gave each other what we needed. I got good actionable intel and he got better maps and some of the "rumor"/low profile stuff thats usually gets left out of briefings... but mean a lot to a lonely creeper. Oh and better charts, whiny fucker always wanted my best maps LOL. Too many of the officers would look at a sgt or ssgt and just zone out. Once again NCO's and SNCO's run the operational Marines. Shiny shit is pretty, but nco's do the work.
Something I may have missed saying here as well regarding the USAMU is coming from a Ranger BN and only being an E-5 in S-3 there may quite well have been an ego problem on our side just as much as theirs as far as having someone come along and help bring up marksmanship.
I had heard all the time how the M16A1 had a 460m max range and how special units like the USAMU and the Marine Presidential guard unit, regularly hit at 500 yds. and beyond. I had passed that up my chain of command, and it seemed to go no where. later during the epic fail sniper train-ups of '84-'85 there was not a whole lot done. We needed to get our poop in a group before we asked for help. The other thing going on then was most of that kind of asset were all being moved to the Recon section of the newly formed Ranger Regiment. All the high speed schools were going away for the line Ranger who went through Ranger school and hoped for a school afterwards. Granted they were schools, but in the Army that gave you a skill identifier to get someplace that without the school you couldn't go.
Added:
LRshooter101,
That was an excellent video explaining a lot of the changes from what I saw many years ago to today. I'm glad to see it.
One point made in the video was marksmanship. After many rants/tirades, I'd still like to see the military include a light weight long range 'wind-cheater' in place of the standard 5.56 Mk 262 or M118LR. Marksmanship is great, but a bullet that halves the wind movement of those two in a light package is still needed. A number of rounds come to mind that weigh much less than the 7.62 ammo and shoot better. A wealth of choices that never seem to be getting made.
I had heard all the time how the M16A1 had a 460m max range and how special units like the USAMU and the Marine Presidential guard unit, regularly hit at 500 yds. and beyond. I had passed that up my chain of command, and it seemed to go no where. later during the epic fail sniper train-ups of '84-'85 there was not a whole lot done. We needed to get our poop in a group before we asked for help. The other thing going on then was most of that kind of asset were all being moved to the Recon section of the newly formed Ranger Regiment. All the high speed schools were going away for the line Ranger who went through Ranger school and hoped for a school afterwards. Granted they were schools, but in the Army that gave you a skill identifier to get someplace that without the school you couldn't go.
Added:
LRshooter101,
That was an excellent video explaining a lot of the changes from what I saw many years ago to today. I'm glad to see it.
One point made in the video was marksmanship. After many rants/tirades, I'd still like to see the military include a light weight long range 'wind-cheater' in place of the standard 5.56 Mk 262 or M118LR. Marksmanship is great, but a bullet that halves the wind movement of those two in a light package is still needed. A number of rounds come to mind that weigh much less than the 7.62 ammo and shoot better. A wealth of choices that never seem to be getting made.
Last edited:
Similar threads
