Recent conversations on the topic of weapons with interesting people led me to think. Can a shotgun be considered a combat weapon or not? Here are my thoughts on the matter.
First, let's dive into the history of the reluctant use of shotguns. The most famous use of shotguns in the US army and law enforcement agencies since the beginning of the twentieth century. Some models of store-bought shotguns were temporarily adopted by the American troops during the First and Second World Wars, the Vietnam campaign. Then it was urgently required to provide the units with weapons for conducting combat at short ranges and in cramped conditions, the so-called "trench guns". In police services and many special forces, shotguns have long become standard weapons. Often in American units, a shotgun is used in such a capacity in which another army would use another weapon. This is explained not by the qualitative superiority of the former, but still by the historical traditions of the Wild West and the development of new territories.
It should also be noted that quite recently, in the late nineties, the US Armed Forces operated the Joint Services Combat Shotgun Program, the purpose of which was to develop requirements for the shotgun of the future, and to adopt a single model for all armed forces. … But in reality, the new shotgun was adopted and purchased in large quantities only by the Marines. It was the Benelli M4 semiautomatic machine adapted to the needs of the military, which was put into service under the name M1014.
The Army, Navy, Air Force and Military Police (MP) continued to use the Mossberg 500 and 590 and Remington 870 pump-action shotguns in various configurations - both with a full-stock shotgun, both solid and folding, and short shotguns with a pistol grip without a stock at all (non full-stock shotgun).
The shotgun is used:
1. For breaking doors - door breaching; A shot for these purposes is a heavy self-destructive bullet, which, due to kinetic energy, can destroy the door lock or the hinge that holds the door, but also completely collapses itself. Such bullets are used from a distance of 10-15 cm. Their range is small, but when fired at point-blank range, such a bullet is deadly. Their plus is that they do not hit the space behind the door, which is why they are used by special forces of the civil police around the world. Ricochet of any fragments of such a bullet is excluded.
2. As a non-lethal weapon, or a weapon with “lower (reduced) lethality”. This refers to the situation when the troops and the police are forced to fight mass protests and riots in the streets - riots and firing to kill is undesirable. For these purposes, there are two types of non-lethal ammunition, for firing at individual targets and at group targets. Both of them are rubber striking elements (buckshot or feathered bullet) in a standard sleeve.
3. As an offensive weapon - offensive weapon;
Consider the use of shotguns in American Charters.
The main charter in which one would expect rules for the use of a shotgun is FM 3-06.11 COMBINED ARMS OPERATIONS IN URBAN TERRAIN.
This is a very well-developed manual, taking into account all possible aspects of combat in built-up areas, up to protecting troops from Russian jet flamethrowers.
In this charter, the use of a shotgun is stipulated only for one case - the need to break open the doors. This is done in CHAPTER 3. URBAN COMBAT SKILLS, section 3-20 BREACHING.
That's what it says.
The shotgun is used for the so-called "ballistic breaking" of doors, when the elements holding the door in the opening (lock and hinges) are destroyed by shots from a shotgun. The section says that for hacking, shot # 9, buckshot or a bullet are used. Special ammunition for breaking the door is not mentioned in the charter (this is strange, considering that they are in service).
It is indicated that with the correct execution technique, the door can be broken open in a few seconds. It is also stated that the shot will minimize the potential unwanted damage to those outside the door.
There are two types of burglary - burglary through the door handle and burglary through the hinges. In the first case, a soldier armed with a shotgun shoots into the space between the doorknob and the jamb. He must fire at least two shots, even if the castle is destroyed on the first. If after two shots the lock is still intact, then the procedure should be repeated. During all repetitions, two shots are fired. The shooter should be prepared for the fact that the broken door will have to be “knocked out” with his foot.
In the second case, when breaking through the hinges, the shooter fires a shot at the zones adjacent to the intended location of the hinges in order to separate the hinges and the door. First, the zone of the middle loop, if any, is affected, then the upper one, then the lower one.
Regardless of the method of hacking, after the end of the shooting, the shooter with a shotgun pushes or pulls the door towards himself and steps back, opening the way to the room for other fighters in the group who were previously behind him.
According to other provisions of the charter, combing the sectors of the building is carried out by fireteams, which ideally should consist of 4 people.
A fighter with a shotgun bursts into the room, the door into which he broke open, the last of them. Thus, in any case, he should not make contact with the enemy first. The charter does not mandatorily require you to continue using the shotgun for anything, either after hacking, or vice versa, to switch to using the main weapon.
The charter does not provide for any other methods of using the shotgun in urban combined arms combat.
I want to note that for Russia this instruction is mostly useless, given the huge number of metal doors opening outward.
There are two other points that this charter speaks of that may necessitate the use of shotguns. First, in urban battles, zones with the presence of non-combatants, that is, civilians not participating in hostilities, are possible.
The charter requires this to be taken into account when selecting weapons in a platoon in combat. The platoon leader must take into account this possibility and have weapons that would allow them to operate in such places without endangering civilians.
The second point is that you cannot use grenades in buildings with thin walls or in those that have received damage to supporting structures during battles, for example, due to artillery shelling, as this can lead to the collapse of part of the building or all of it.
Briefly, according to this statute, a shotgun in a street fight is a means for breaking doors, and although its other use is not directly prohibited, a situation is not allowed in which a fighter armed with it would rush into the room being cleaned first. This should be done by the submachine gunner.
Another charter that interests us is FM 3-19.15 CIVIL DISTURBANCE OPERATIONS from 2005
This charter regulates the actions of troops during civil unrest, riots and riots that take place in the territory controlled by a military unit or formation. It is also a very well-developed document that gives combat commanders a complete picture of the nature of riots, the stages of their development and effective measures of suppression. The charter describes a wide range of effects on crowds of rioting civilians, the purpose of which may be to disperse or control the crowd. The main emphasis in the actions of the troops is placed on the use of non-lethal ammunition while simultaneously holding back the crowd by forces of soldiers with shields, batons and protective equipment. The charter also regulates actions to open fire to kill if the commander considers that it is impossible to stop the riots by non-lethal means. At the same time, the opening of fire to kill civilians is defined as a last resort.
It, in particular, says the following about shotguns.
In Chapter 2 on Riot Control and Riot Control Operations, in Section 2-2 on Riot Conflict Preparation:
In squads, platoons and companies, the equipment with special equipment can be increased or decreased, if necessary. Some examples.
- Use M9 pistols to arm groups to identify and apprehend [riot participants]. The use of long-barreled weapons with non-lethal equipment (such as the M203 under-barrel grenade launchers with non-lethal rounds installed on M16 automatic rifles and M4 carbines, or 12-gauge shotguns) is also recommended, especially for support groups (the term owerwatch personnel is used here, these are those who follow the development of the actions of a crowd or groups of hostile people, observes them and, upon receipt of an order, or according to the situation, uses weapons against them, both to suppress actions and to protect other military personnel. lines or guarding groups of detention, and can use both lethal and non-lethal weapons and ammunition).
-Add custom weapons such as a 12 gauge shotgun to increase the ability to use non-lethal effects.
IMPORTANT. The shotgun is used to protect the shooter with the M203 grenade launcher when he is reloading the weapon.
Thus, this charter already provides for the use of a shotgun with non-lethal equipment to suppress unauthorized demonstrations. And further, in the same paragraph:
-Use non-lethal means to keep the crowd at the required distance from the formation.
It also states that soldiers using non-lethal ammunition against the crowd must be able to immediately use lethal ammunition. In the case of a shotgun, this indicates the need to either have live ammunition (bullet, buckshot), or an automatic rifle or carbine. In principle, for soldiers participating in hand-to-hand combat with rioters, it is required to carry a rifle behind their backs with a magazine removed, but for a fighter armed with a shotgun, such a requirement is not directly spelled out.
Chapter 4 in the list of equipment for non-lethal effects is a pump action shotgun chambered for a cartridge with a sleeve length of 76 mm. Non-lethal shots for a shotgun are also listed there - one with a rubber buckshot (M1013), the other with a feathered rubber bullet (M1012).
It is curious that in the previous version of the same charter, from 1985, the role of shotguns was defined differently. This is what happened in FM 19.15.
A shotgun (in the text - riot shotgun, a shotgun for eliminating riots, in fact, is the same weapon that is used in battle), an extremely versatile weapon, the appearance and capabilities of which have a strong psychological impact on the rebels. In some cases, it is a particularly suitable weapon for operations in civil unrest.
When used with Buckshot # 00, it is effective at limited range. However, the use of buckshot should be limited to special missions.
For example, it is an ideal "cover weapon" in an anti-sniper role, during room-by-room checks, or at important checkpoints that may be rammed by a speeding vehicle (if this refers to the search for a sniper - a poorly armed non-military combatant hiding in premises, then apparently this is so, if not, then this is an extremely controversial statement).
When varying ammunition from # 00 buckshot to # 7 1/2 (now not used, Russian counterpart # 7, 5) or # 9, the shotgun can be used with a significantly lower likelihood of serious injury or death. This gives the commander the flexibility to choose ammunition suitable for the conditions at hand.
When used with a # 7 1/2 or # 9 shot, the shotgun is suitable for single-target shooting, such as those encountered in anti-sniper operations. Due to the fact that the firing range of a shotgun is small, the danger of accidental losses at a distance of 60-70 meters is much less than from other types of weapons.
However, the shotgun's serious lethality at short ranges requires serious restraint in its use in operations against civil action.
Use of Dangerous Buckshot # 00 should be limited.
What the authors of the charter meant by the term anti-sniper struggle, I honestly did not understand.
In addition to these two statutes, shotguns are mentioned in the FM 22.6 GUARD DUTY statute, which states that guard units may be armed with shotguns. Also, the ceremonial charter allows the use of shotguns for ritual purposes. I have not come across any other mentions of shotguns in the statutes.
/ However, the theoretical research of the military in the United States goes beyond the charters.
Already not often, but still regularly one comes across statements that a shotgun can play the role of the main weapon. Some articles indicate that a full-fledged shotgun with a magazine of increased capacity (6-10 rounds), equipped with buckshot # 00, can be used for close combat with the enemy.
In the September issue of INFANTRY magazine (“Infantry”, the name of this magazine is often translated into Russian as “Infantry Magazine”) for 2006, retired sergeant first class D. Robert Clements published an article “Combat shotgun in the Brigade Combat Group (created on the basis of a brigade, which is part of a division, for participation in hostilities, may have a different composition, depending on the situation during the formation).
In this article, Sergeant Clements examines the possibilities of using a shotgun in combat in the qualities already mentioned - door breaking, non-lethal weapon, and a fighter's offensive weapon. Here's what he writes about the last opportunity (abbreviated):
During the war on terror, the shotgun found a second life in the infantry. In the transition to a "modular" structure, the Brigade Combat Group received 178 shotguns for service.
Unfortunately, there is no single information resource on the use of shotguns, and in the units they are forced to study different statutes, depend on the opinion of some experts, or just do as it turns out. As a result, shotguns are used incorrectly - for example, a short shotgun is used as a main weapon without the support of a spare pistol, and a full-fledged shotgun is used as an auxiliary weapon.
A soldier who fights between houses at close range can work well with a standard shotgun. However, he must have developed the skills of loading the cartridge with which he will now shoot and switching to a pistol.
With only six rounds of ammunition, the shooter can easily find that in an intense firefight, he has run out of ammunition. Recharging should happen at every convenient moment.
Switching to a pistol is another way to stay able to fight when the shotgun is out of ammo.
Simply put, when the shotgun is hanging, the pistol fires and vice versa. A soldier with a shotgun fights with a pistol until he can reload the shotgun.
As an offensive weapon, a shotgun must have a stock and a strap. Cartridges should be loaded with # 00 buckshot and there should be an M-9 pistol as an auxiliary weapon. With buckshot the effective firing range is 25-35 meters, if a short shotgun is used - 10 meters. The use of a bullet or future FRAG-12 shots (about them below) with improved sighting devices can raise this range to one hundred meters.
Frankly, such recommendations leave ambiguous impressions, and besides, in order for an infantryman to fight with a shotgun, he must leave his standard weapon somewhere - an M-16 rifled automatic rifle or an M-4 carbine. But then the shotgun should give a decisive advantage over this weapon in some way. And this is unlikely.
Perhaps Clements was simply trying to convey to the commanders the idea that if they take up a shotgun for some reason, then let them do it right, but there are no direct indications of such an attitude towards the subject in the article.
An interesting point is the use of standard weapons - a rifle or a carbine and a shotgun in turn, by quickly changing one weapon in the hands of another. Clements points out that soldiers learn this tactic in special courses on the use of a shotgun organized in the division. The changeover technique is described well enough. Apparently this is necessary so that a soldier with a shotgun in his hands would not be caught off guard by an enemy attack after breaking the door or in front of him.
The rest of the article describes door breaking, the use of non-lethal ammunition and training techniques, and also offers a qualification standard for handling a shotgun. Questions on these provisions of this article do not arise.
The certificate on the author indicates that he served in the 10th Mountain Division, in the training center. At the beginning of the article, he points out that these recommendations reflect the experience gained by units of the division in battles.
Clements can hardly be called a practitioner, since he did not participate in battles personally, at least there is nothing about this, and there are no references to personal examples and, in general, any examples of using a shotgun in battle in the article.
An extremely curious complaint by Sergeant Clements that there is no official qualification standard for using a shotgun as a weapon and separately as a special means for breaking doors in the Army does not exist.
This article is a typical example of how the idea of using a shotgun as a primary weapon is moving forward.
There is another persistent belief rooted in the jungle fighting between Japanese and Americans during World War II, through the war in British Malaya in the 1950s, and then through the Vietnam War.
This is the conviction that in rugged terrain, jungle, thickets, very dense buildings, when characteristic distances do not exceed twenty meters, a shotgun is capable of giving a decisive advantage in a collision with an enemy.
A short historical excursion is still needed here.
Often the jungle has such dense vegetation that a person simply cannot walk through it without using a machete. The line-of-sight range in such conditions can be less than ten meters, the speed of advance of a military unit will be measured in a few kilometers per day, or even less. In such conditions, specific methods of movement of the unit appeared in the troops of the Anglo-Saxon armies.
The soldiers move in such a situation in a very elongated formation, while the most experienced of them does what is called take point - "take a seat", that is, take the most risky, but key position for the unit. Such a soldier was called point man - point man. The Point Man moved in some separation from the rest of the group, albeit with the preservation of visual interaction, trying not to make noise. Sometimes he stopped and listened for a long time, examined the ground under his feet for traps, stretch marks, etc. The rest of the group followed slowly, guided by his signals. The Point Man generally did not use a night vision device to avoid interfering with night vision. He relied on hearing, smells, touch, and intuition. This was a very risky task, since in a sudden collision with the enemy, the point man was the first to come under fire. All the mines and booby traps were also given to him.
Under these conditions, the power of the first shot from the pointman's side often decided whether he survived or not. Since the usual distance during a sudden encounter with an enemy in the jungle of Asia was about 20-30 meters or even less, then a buckshot shot in a situation of shooting offhand actually increased the pointman's chances of surviving, compared to a semi-automatic rifle. Although it must be said that the popularity of shotguns among these soldiers during the Second World War and the war in Malaya is overestimated today.
Vietnam changed everything. At first, the American troops did not really need shotguns, as they were armed with an old M-14 automatic rifle, caliber 7.62 mm. A burst from this rifle made it possible to destroy one or more enemy soldiers through dense vegetation, and its reliability as a whole was comparable to the reliability of a Kalashnikov assault rifle.
But by the beginning of the Vietnam War, the days of this rifle were already numbered and it was massively replaced by a new weapon - the M-16 rifle. The latter did not have such reliability, and its 5.56 mm bullet could not always "reach" the enemy through the thickets, so some of the soldiers remembered about shotguns. By the end of the first year of the war, they were firmly established in the units fighting in the jungle, usually one or two per platoon. They were often used by the most experienced soldiers, who undertook to regularly go first, that is, act as a "point man".
Soon a single-shot M-79 grenade launcher appeared, comparable in weight to a shotgun and a buckshot shot to it, immediately followed by a shot with feathered swept striking elements (it was more effective when shooting at people, but it penetrated dense vegetation worse than buckshot). Then - the M203 underbarrel grenade launcher and a grapeshot shot to it too. All this, as well as the captured AKs, and the non-surrendered in spite of everything, the M-14 made it possible to conduct dense fire through the thickets, with a high chance of hitting the target first, with hasty aiming or without it at all.
The shotgun, moreover, did not require multiple cleanings a day. Some soldiers admitted to cleaning it a couple of times a month.
In proportion to the M-16, all other weapons accounted for a small percentage, and although the M-16 in most cases still justified itself, and there were many such commanders and soldiers who did not perceive the shotgun as a full-fledged weapon, since then behind the shotgun the glory of a weapon suitable for the first soldier in a column better than another was firmly entrenched. In the Army, Marines and National Guard there are still instructors who are fluent in the shotgun.
And even now, this point of view is often found in journalism and in propaganda photos of the Ministry of Defense.
Now let's compare how the actual use of shotguns in warheads looks against the background of the voiced theoretical conclusions.
The practice of using shotguns in the US Armed Forces.
In practical terms, everything is unambiguous. For commanders of all levels and soldiers, a shotgun is a special tool for breaking doors and firing non-lethal ammunition during police operations. The military police stand a bit apart, but this is a special case.
In the army, no soldier has any illusions about using a shotgun as the main weapon. And now no one uses it like that, unlike Vietnam.
First, let's take a look at the article by Captain Ryan J. Morgan, The tactical shotgun in urban operations by Ryan J. Morgan, which was published in the same magazine as the aforementioned article by Sergeant Clements, only in the November issue for 2004.
Unlike Sergeant Clements, Captain Morgan is a combat commander - he commanded companies from the 101st Air Assault Division, and personally led the soldiers into battle.
Its findings are summarized.
A shotgun is a door breaker, and as such it is in great demand. Morgan argues that the surprise factor is often achieved using a shotgun. Morgan believes that the troops should have at least one shotgun per squad, while in reality there were only two per company. Morgan also argues that the shotgun should have as short a barrel as possible, but also a strap for carrying and quickly changing from a shotgun to the main weapon. He says that a soldier can be caught off guard by the need to use a shotgun as a weapon, and must be prepared to do that too. Ryan considers the presence of special shots to break open the doors extremely important, and if they are not there, then you need to use shot # 9.
It is important to organize the familiarization of the soldiers with the shotgun. Morgan believes that all soldiers in a company should be able to use it, although not every soldier should have it.
The entire article is actually a confirmation of the thesis that a shotgun is a tool for hacking.
At the end of the article, Morgan mentions the extreme usefulness of the shotgun in operations to eliminate civil strife.
Morgan also claims that the lighting signals for the shotgun also worked very well and should be at the disposal of the units leading the battle.
There is an interesting point in the article. Since a fighter armed with a machine gun, according to Morgan, is the least useful in clearing a room, they give him a shotgun, and he enters the room last. This is a direct violation of the requirements of FM 3-06.11, which say that the machine gunner is the third in a row, and the fighter with a shotgun is the last. One of the reasons for the transition to such tactics Morgan calls the shortage of people in the troops, which is why there were seven people in the squad instead of nine.
One way or another, it clearly follows from Morgan's article that the military is not interested in the shotgun as a weapon, but at the same time it is very interested as a special means.
Also of interest is the opinion of an unnamed member of the 75th Ranger Infantry Regiment, who told the Soldier of Fortune reporters the following: “One thing I want to clarify, and there’s no confusion about it, is that we don’t use a shotgun for sweeps, or else somehow as a primary weapon. Only breaking the doors."
The Ranger goes on to explain that they have special ammunition for breaking doors - he calls them the old-fashioned "Bullet Hatton", and how the shotgun is used to break open. In general, there is the same as in the regulations, and the same as in the paratroopers, only the absence of problems with ammunition attracts itself.
If you dig around on the Internet, then on the American military forums you can find such references to the use of a shotgun by modern soldiers.
1. Soldier of the 82nd Airborne Division, Iraq: We had them, Mossberg 500, we broke down doors with them. Infrequently. We fired buckshot from a short distance, we had nothing else.
2. Soldier, Company I, 3rd Battalion, 5th Marine Regiment, Afghanistan: I was a grenade launcher with an M153 and my staff only had an M9 pistol. But when we stood at the bases and were used as security units, we took shotguns. We stood on the towers with m-4, below - with shotguns. At similar ranges, I would prefer a shotgun to a pistol.
3. Soldier, Iraq: I was not allowed by the company commander to take tools for burglary due to the fact that I did not recognize the shotgun as a suitable tool.
4. Soldier, Iraq, writes on a forum from a base in Iraq: Yesterday they were used mainly to break doors.
5. Soldier, Afghanistan: We always had them in our guns, we used them on guard duty, the commander did not want an extra ricochet.
6. Sailor, Warship: When we stood guard below deck, we always had shotguns and pistols. And those outside have M-4s and pistols.
7. Soldier, Iraq: I saw quite a few of them at others, it even happened that the guys carried full-fledged shotguns with butts, but no one used them as the main weapon, only to break doors. Even those who carried a full-fledged shotgun had an M-4.
The following comment is of interest:
eight. I was in the Philippines in the late eighties, and participated in many outings into the woods. We had Remingtons 870, with six rounds in the store, and spare ones in the compartments on the belt, like 16 pieces, I don't remember now. Each also had a pistol with two spare magazines. In the areas around the Clark and Subic bases, we always had pointmen with shotguns, 2 people per group.
This interesting moment is again associated with the jungle. If you work hard to find the same messages from Vietnam veterans, then the use of shotguns there was much wider than now.
There were several comments from former mercenaries "working" in South Africa and Latin America. Both of them constantly carried Remington 870s with them, for self-defense, but used machine guns in offensive battles.
All this was no later than the early nineties, in the jungle and bush.
There are actually many examples. And they all talk about this. Since the days of Vietnam, the role of a shotgun has been increasingly reduced to performing special tasks - hacking, firing signal and non-lethal ammunition. As a military weapon, it is now used only by the military police and there is an incompletely clear situation in the jungle.
What about the police, you ask. The movies regularly show how gallant cops at the ready with shotguns storm buildings with villains inside.
Alas, here the situation is somewhat different, and it is connected, again, not with the stunning properties of a shotgun.
First of all, it must be borne in mind that there is no single police department in the United States. All the forces of law and order are on the local balance sheet. And the balance, this one can be very scanty. Shotguns are cheap, and do not require a lot of weapons, and therefore are as favorite in the police as a weapon "amplification". This is the main reason, after "centuries of tradition".
However, at the moment, in connection with the improvement of financing in the framework of anti-terrorist activities, many departments have begun to switch to rifled automatic weapons (MP-5, AR-15, etc.). The century of shotguns ends here too, remaining only in the niche of "door burglars"
However, the FRAG-12 shot being developed now, which is being developed by the UK, in partnership with the US Marine Corps, can give impetus to the development of a shotgun. This is a feathered grenade with three types of warheads - high-explosive, fragmentation and armor-piercing. Initially, this shot is intended for arming small UAVs carrying smooth-bore weapons, which are much easier to give the necessary firepower than a small-caliber rifled one.
But this ammunition was tested in Iraq by ground forces. Their development is now at the completion stage.
Shot FRAG-12 turns any shotgun into a grenade launcher, moreover, into a multiply charged one. A fighter with such ammunition can inflict much more damage on the enemy than with a machine gun or rifle. With such ammunition, a shotgun is already difficult to call that word.
Shot FRAG-12 turns the underbarrel shotgun into a multiply charged underbarrel grenade launcher, and the firepower of the infantryman's personal weapons is increased by an order of magnitude. Of course, a standard grenade shot is more powerful, but 12-gauge grenades are larger.
