Originally Posted by Jason M
Can either of you summarize as a simple "yea" or "nay"? Shot through 1 box today, waiting to decide the fate of what remains.
Can either of you summarize as a simple "yea" or "nay"? Shot through 1 box today, waiting to decide the fate of what remains.
Apologize for the lag time. I am currently away from the office where that specific file lives. The short of it was that the sample tested had a wide SD for velocity. From memory approximately 7 rounds had a Velocity of 400-500 fps. The barely functioned the G19 test gun. The others were in the mid 800-900 range.
Win replaced the ammo. The tests on a sample from that lot revealed all upper 900 fps and matched the published specs.
With all that being said, we now carry Fed 147gr HST. The SD for Vel in those samples has a far lower SD and none of the rounds tested were below speced velocity.
We have no reason to return to RA9B. If RA9T was what we were given and samples tested out ok, I wouldn't sweat it. It's what it hits that makes the most difference.
No worries.Thanks for the info. Still doesn't give me huge confidence in the company... The box I shot yesterday did subjectively seem to have pretty variable recoil impulse/ejection from my G19. Il shoot through the rest- have plenty of 147HST to replace it with. thanks!
Do you have access to a chrono?
Unfortunately not - would be a good experiment though.
I'm a new firearms instructor (don't hate me) at my department we have 2 quals a year (one day and one night) we have a practice shoot before each quals and one 4 hour training block a year. We have pretty good latitude in our training but coming from a shooting background I was surprised by the amount of people who don't shoot on there own, don't come to our practice, and have no real desire to get better. I've seen some atrocious things at the range that are just ridiculous. I train on my own and all of the instructors make ourselves available to work with anyone that asks but it's few and far between. But I've decided that I will try my best to get my officers better and hope something sticks.
It comes back to the old saying of being able to lead a horse to water but you can't make them drink. This issue is common at a lot of agencies from what I read and hear and it likely won't change. Keep up the good fight by being available and keeping sharp yourself and put on good training for those that do show interest. I had success with a couple of poor shooters that showed little interest and didn't come to practice when available. I spoke with the officers alone after a range session where they performed poorly and had to re qualify at least once and still struggled. In speaking with them they said they didn't like shooting because they sucked. I asked if they feared looking bad in front of their peers and got a resounding yes as well as the feeling pressure of qualification and limited improvement by going to practice sessions etc... I offered some practice advice and dry fire basics to try on their own and a couple one on one sessions. This made all the difference to them. These officer improved and didn't have to requalify after that. It was a rewarding experience as a firearms instructor seeing people struggle and hate to shoot become reasonable shooters who no longer feared range days. It didn't cost me or the dept anything but a little time separate from a normal range or practice session. Good luck.
Updating this thread on two fronts...
First and foremost I was told that no matter the amount of info from other departments I provided nothing was going on change and that the design is "way above my pay grade". I love cliches.
I also happened to come in contact with a guy who was one of the range instructors when I went through the academy. He had left the range some time ago and back in patrol due to conflicts with the new management at the range (#1 reason for people to leave special assignments btw). We spoke for a bit and everything I was previously assuming was confirmed. He said that at the range they go out of their way to not transfer people who know what they are doing or any modern methods of training. The management does not like younger guys coming in and upsetting the flow of how things are done, even if the landscape changes. He said that it has always been SOP to change things a little after an officer is killed and even then just a little bit because too much would cause certain groups in the department to fail qualification, consistently. Thankfully he said he is on his way out and it won't be his problem anymore, he's leaving with 35 on the job in a few years.
Hopefully I'll be gone long before that, to a place that gives a damn.
VDMSR.com
Chief Developer for V Development Group
Everything I post I do so as a private individual who is not representing any company or organization.
Things heard on the range in the last 90 days:
1. Qualification is stupid. All we should do is train "run and gun" (whatever the fuck that means)
2. You spend too much time teaching accuracy. We need to be shooting faster. Any round on the (ridiculously huge) target is a good hit.
3. WRT the recent MHS selection. "Safeties on a striker pistol? That will get people killed, just wait and see..."
Another range day tomorrow, I'm sure there will be some more doozies...
Joking.....but sometimes booze and guns could be the answer. I think any instructor with a damn has heard stuff to make you want to bank your head, shoot tequila and say WTF are you talking about.
Reply With Quote