Fight like you train, train like you fight

Recently declassified documents from the 1960's show a big part of the thought process as to why the M16 was adopted over the M1 and M14.

Among the major considerations, it was found that most engagements took place at ranges under 100 yards. Almost no engagements took place beyond 300 yards. It would be reasonable to presume that of the engagements beyond 300 yards, most of those were conducted via sniper fire, or similar.

Similarly, the following was observed:

"A study of the data led to the following conclusions: (1) Hit effectiveness with the M-1 rifle is satisfactory only up to 100 yds. and declines rapidly to low order at 300 yds., the general limit for battlefield rifle engagements; (2) a pattern-dispersion principle in the hand weapon would tend to compensate for human aiming errors and increase hits at ranges up to 300 yds.; and (3) missiles with smaller caliber than standard could be used without loss in wounding effects and with logistical advantage..."

 Let's explore these observations. 


1. Hit effectiveness with the M-1 rifle is satisfactory only up to 100 yds. and declines rapidly to low order at 300 yds.
There are several reasons this is true. The first, and primary reason is "pucker factor." Doing anything under duress will reduce the effectiveness and the precision of the task at hand.

Though old fashioned training taught the shooters to shoot out to 500 yards, the shooting itself was flawed on several levels.

A) The Marksmanship program used by the military for the 1903, M1 and M14 was designed by competitive shooters, and bears strong resemblance to competition shooting. Though the difference between shooting in combat and in competition is minute, it exists. Similar to martial arts practiced as sports - techniques will differ in application.

B) Military tactics differed from the training. Officers were taught to wait until the enemy was close before giving the fire command (most often, the enemy was within 100 yards). This was to maximize the likelihood of the soldiers hitting the enemy targets. This small fact led the whole program to practice one way, and actually fight another way.

C) Military rifles were not up to the task. While most M1's and M14's could be accurate up to 2 MOA (2 MOA = 10 inches at 500 yards), the fact was that most were only accurate to 4 MOA within normal combat use (less than perfect conditions, rifles, and ammo). This translates to a mechanical margin of error of 20 inches at 500 yards. Add in any margin of error on behalf of the shooter, and it becomes quickly apparent why so few soldiers and Marines could score "expert" on the qualifications of the day... much less shoot accurately beyond 300 yards in combat.

D) An overlooked part of the lack of accuracy, is in one of the fundamental facts - drawn from two others I've pointed out. First - we already know that officers were trained to wait until the enemy was close before ordering troops to fire. Second - we already know that the weapons platforms were accurate enough only under 300 yards. Weapons designers and military intelligence knew this, too.

So front sight posts were designed to be the same width as an average sized man at the limits of the ranges that soldiers might find themselves firing. An M1 front sight post is about the same width, in appearance, as a man at 275 yards. An M14 front sight post is about the same width, in appearance, as a man at 250 meters (approximately 275 yards).

To hit a target smaller than one's sighting device (the front sight post) is a skill that is rarely accomplished by a shooter with only a few weeks of training. Add to that difficulty, the pucker factor as mentioned above, and you see why hits beyond 300 yards in combat are so rare.

To be fair, the M16 has similar sights, too. However, it was designed to be a 300 yard and under weapon.

Match shooters will often use front sight posts that are slimmer than regular USGI issue. (I do!)


2. A pattern-dispersion principle in the hand weapon would tend to compensate for human aiming errors and increase hits at ranges up to 300 yds.
"Pattern-dispersion" as mentioned here, refers to fully automatic, or burst fire. It was already known that higher recoil rounds will pull the sights off target when fired in fully automatic fire. A more controllable round, with a burst option, would lend to the target being shot several times with a single trigger pull.

As taught now, three-shot burst fire is more effective against enemy targets than single shots - as there are so very few "one-shot-kills" in combat. This is true for the larger .30-caliber rounds, as well as the smaller .223-caliber rounds.


3. Missiles with smaller caliber than standard could be used without loss in wounding effects and with logistical advantage...
Here we see another advantage to a smaller round - the ability to carry more ammo for the same weight. With the 5.56 mm compared to the 7.62 mm, for the same weight, twice the amount  of 5.56 mm ammo can be carried.

I've never met a person who was in a gun fight that wished he had less ammo!