Noz Posted January 26, 2011 Share Posted January 26, 2011 I just finished a book called "The American Rifle". It is a fact packed book on the American battle weaponry (with emphasis on the shoulder fired weapons)from match lock to the M4. The accuracy that was expected from a Revolutionary war musket wielding soldier was one hit for every 857 pounds of lead fired. That's not shots, that/s pounds. The best hit percentage shown was 1.25% of rounds fired in battle with some of the more modern guns. Also, I was not aware that the M1 Garand was approved, after lengthy testing, in .276 caliber? General Douglas MacArthur objected to the 276 and forced it to be chambered for the same round used in the 1903 Springfield, the 30-06. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spooky Joe, SASS #24061 Posted January 26, 2011 Share Posted January 26, 2011 That's because many of today's soldiers follow one of Murphy's Laws of Combat: When in doubt, empty a magazine. One of my weapons instructors lived by the rule One hit is better than 600 misses per minute. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loophole LaRue, SASS #51438 Posted January 26, 2011 Share Posted January 26, 2011 I just finished a book called "The American Rifle". It is a fact packed book on the American battle weaponry (with emphasis on the shoulder fired weapons)from match lock to the M4. The accuracy that was expected from a Revolutionary war musket wielding soldier was one hit for every 857 pounds of lead fired. That's not shots, that/s pounds. The best hit percentage shown was 1.25% of rounds fired in battle with some of the more modern guns. Also, I was not aware that the M1 Garand was approved, after lengthy testing, in .276 caliber? General Douglas MacArthur objected to the 276 and forced it to be chambered for the same round used in the 1903 Springfield, the 30-06. Noz: It's been some time since I read this book - and you are right, it's a fascinating read. But the numbers you cited regarding hits vs. pounds - weren't those the expectations of the British army for their infantry? If I recall, one of the distinctions the author was trying to make was the new and different attitude of the emerging American rifleman, a sharpshooter trained to hit individuals that he aimed at (especially officers on the other side) and not just to "spray and pray" into the ranks of the opposing forces. LL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noz Posted January 26, 2011 Author Share Posted January 26, 2011 Noz: It's been some time since I read this book - and you are right, it's a fascinating read. But the numbers you cited regarding hits vs. pounds - weren't those the expectations of the British army for their infantry? If I recall, one of the distinctions the author was trying to make was the new and different attitude of the emerging American rifleman, a sharpshooter trained to hit individuals that he aimed at (especially officers on the other side) and not just to "spray and pray" into the ranks of the opposing forces. LL I went back and looked and you are correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noz Posted January 26, 2011 Author Share Posted January 26, 2011 That's because many of today's soldiers follow one of Murphy's Laws of Combat: When in doubt, empty a magazine. One of my weapons instructors lived by the rule One hit is better than 600 misses per minute. Actually the modern soldier does better than 100 years ago as far as hit% Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.