soldier zeroes, his left-right and up-down adjustments will be on a cant. A simple tongue and groove design modification would fix the CCO from rotating.
Bore sighting the weapon's sensors and optics has been fully accepted. We heard anecdotal evidence of soldiers hitting 40/40 day and 32/40 at night with optics in training. Soldiers are purchasing Bullet Boresights from AccuSite. The borelight fits in the chamber of the weapon. This eliminates the steps required to boresight the borelight to the weapon.
ACOG: Many soldiers expressed a preference for the ACOG over the CCO because of its magnification and no need for batteries.
MGO: Soldiers were satisfied with the performance of the MGO on SAWs and M240Bs.
PAC4/PEQ2/PEQ6: Again, this equipment provided a significant advantage at night. A brigade commander commented that the enemy never seemed to grasp that we could see and hit them at night. The covers on the PAC4 are prone to fall off. Pressure switches were a common point of failure. The zero rails on the PEQ2 come unglued too easily. Some soldiers used the PEQ6 on their M4 because of the white-light capability. However, they felt the PEQ6 consumed batteries too quickly and was too easy to accidentally turn on. On the plus side, the visible red dot was effective at getting the attention of a person that was acting too aggressively.
Many soldiers purchased the SureFire Tactical Light and were very complimentary of its design and durability. The only problem with this light is that the IR cover falls off too easily. I received comments such as "our equipment should be as rugged."
82d M4 with SureFire Tactical Light
Vehicle crewman purchased hand-held laser pointers to orient the fire of more than one platform weapon.
Survivability
Interceptor Body Armor: Soldiers have great confidence in their body armor. As one battalion commander stated "soldiers felt comfortable 'trolling for contact' because they felt their body armor provided sufficient protection." There were numerous comments about comfort and weight but, in general, comments were positive.
The comfort comments dealt mainly with maneuverability. Soldiers indicated that it was difficult to maintain a good prone firing position while wearing the IBA with plates. Their Kevlar interfered with the back of the vest and it was difficult to keep your head up while prone. Also, the plates made it difficult to seat the stock of the weapon into the shoulder as soldiers are trained. The foam impact pad in the airborne soldier's Kevlar further exacerbated the problem of contact between Kevlar and vest.
Most importantly however, is the performance demonstrated by the IBA during the operation. There were numerous examples of impacts that could have been fatal that resulted in minor or no injury to the soldier.