Cadet rifles and foreign militaries

K

Kimio

New member
Other nations such as the UK's use cadet rifles for training their troops. This sounds like a good idea for the most part, financially it's cheaper, and teaches soldiers trigger discipline with less recoil (Not that the .556 recoils a lot in the first place)

So why doesn't the US do the same? With all the governmental budget cuts and what have you, you'd think the military would be trying to save as much as they can money wise.
 
If that means that the government would be buying .22 long rifle then I don't
think it would be a good idea. They are buying enough ammo as it is.
 
We are spending so much money on "defense" right now, especially for extremely hi-tech systems, that any savings using "cadet" rifles and less expensive ammo represents a mere pittance. There is so much wasteful spending it is a joke.
 
True, but if you make cuts like that everywhere to increase efficiency and cost savings, then it starts to add up.

Then again, the military has never been known to having the greatest business sense, let alone the government.
 
I'm not so sure that having 150,000 cadet rifles, another ammo caliber to stock, inventory, keep secure, inspect, surplus, spare parts, ordnance specialists to train and keep busy, recruits to train on care and feeding, maintenance, etc., etc., if it really isn't cheaper to just use the service rifle to train on from the beginning.

Every hour a recruit spends with a cadet rifle is an hour he will not spend with his service rifle.

It would have to be semi-auto and magazine fed or it's counter-productive. I guess you could put 150,000 Ruger 10/22s in AR stocks.

I would like to see a .22LR GE gatling, or a Sea Whiz, though !
 
Just gotta say,
I love my CZ 452 Trainer

With the AR-15, it doesn't seem like it would be as practical to have a .22 training version. With a large caliber bolt action it will help to familiarize oneself with the rifle, but I don't know I see that same necessity with a 5.56 semi auto.

That said, for the civilian market the S&W M&P15-22 is pretty cool.
 
I'm generally not one for trite sayings in regards to training; but in this case I believe the mantra of "train to fight and fight like you train" is applicable.

You get insuffecient time to practice with your issue weapon as is, no need to bring a glorified 10/22 into the mix.
 
The US military did, at one time, use .22 bolt action rifles for training.
But that was when the issue rifles were 30-06.
Maybe the heavier weight and harder recoil made the rimfire trainer a good idea.
Not so important, now.
 
If I remember Army thinking at all, if the Army ever did start using .22 LR for training purposes, they would try and use it to train artillerymen.
 
Hey, the Navy Admiral who won really big and was able to skillfully employ his battleships and radar off of Guadalcanal, ADM Lee, won various medals in smallbore shooting at the 1920s Olympics.
 
Though we hear so much about 22LR military "trainers" and "cadet" rifles, it seems to me they are few and far between and I don't know of too many countries that really used them for marksmanship training. "Cadet" rifles are usually slightly cut-down versions of the service rifle-or the DP versions of the Lee-Enfields used to teach weapons handling or Drill & Ceremony, not marksmanship.
 
I believe I've seen reference to US cadet rifles that were trapdoor 45-70s.

US didn't really need them as many of our soldiers used to be exposed to rifle before joining the military. And later with the M16 and 5.56 round no real advantage to training with something smaller and lighter except an M4.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top