Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Multiple Threat Engagment

Collapse

300x250 Mobile

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • WillBrink
    replied
    Originally posted by markdh720 View Post
    This is one of my favorite drills now because it included moving white shooting, multiple threat engagement and use of cover while retreating. All these principles are rarely taught by my department.
    What about finding some IDPA matches in your area? Although it's handgun only, shooting on the move, multiple targets, use of cover, tactical reloads, shooting in low light, etc, etc is stressed in every match. It's a great way to sharpen skills/keep skills sharp for LEO and civi alike. A good course or two per year (via your dept or on your own $$$) and regular IDPA matches is a great general combo. IDPA is not perfect, but it WAY better then standing at the 10 yard line at the range static...
    Last edited by WillBrink; 09-12-2009, 07:04 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • markdh720
    replied
    I recently performed at training class what is now one of my favorite exercises. It was conducted with our sidearms and shotguns and three targets.
    The scenario was a warrant with forced entry. If you have the shotgun your are the first through the door. The instructor would yell out which direction the threat is as youadvanced and you engaged it with what you felt necessary. With my sidearm I fired two to center mass or just once with the shotgun. Sometimes the instructor would call a reason for retreat and we would retreat backwards from cover to cover and while he would yell out the direction of the threat. This is one of my favorite drills now because it included moving white shooting, multiple threat engagement and use of cover while retreating. All these principles are rarely taught by my department.

    Leave a comment:


  • David Hineline
    replied
    In real life I hope to be making them run for cover.

    Leave a comment:


  • yellowreef
    replied
    This is the difference between IDPA and real life. In real life you will be too busy running for cover, shooting, reloading, radioing for help, ect., to worry about who to shoot first and how many rounds to put in each one. You shoot and keep shooting until all threats are gone, there is no 1-1-2-1-2-1 or any of that lunacy. People interviewed in the six o'clock news will wonder why it took 57 shots to stop three threats, when three would have obviously sufficed to anyone that has watched any movie. In real life you will just draw and shoot, the conscious part of your brain won't know what happened until it's over.
    Last edited by yellowreef; 09-09-2009, 04:40 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • jwise
    replied
    Originally posted by GrayBlue View Post
    I've never seen of heard / read of any organization that properly teaches how to systematically do a tactical redeploy or retreat.
    At an Advanced Tactics class at my last department, we practiced doing 'tactical peels' with pairs.

    Not only was it a HELLUVA lot of fun, it taught us the very basic idea that sometimes getting the heck out of the situation is the right choice!

    Leave a comment:


  • Surf
    replied
    Originally posted by jwise View Post
    The question is difficult, because it is a hard question to ask what one would DO, rather than simply ask what one has been trained to do. What would I do? I don't know. Give me the WHOLE picture, and I'd most likely be able to tell you, but so much of what I perceive is non-verbal and even non-articulable. Like Blackdog said, "that's animal instinct."

    If I sensed weakness, I would attack furiously, with overwhelming force. If I sensed strength, I would put distance between us and continue to move while shooting, RACING for the nearest cover/escape. Who knows...
    In essence this is exactly what I am saying. It is difficult to give a game plan for such a dynamic and ever changing scenario, with endless possibilities. Basically you train the person to be as proficient with their weapon systems / gear that they use, teach them sound tactics, and give them as much realistic 360* training as possible. After that it will be up to the individual to assess the situation as it unfolds and react as they see fit for the situation. We all need to be thinking dogs and IMO not given too rigid of a game plan to follow.

    Leave a comment:


  • jwise
    replied
    Originally posted by Blackdog F4i View Post
    I realize that more than likely I will target fixate on the largest threat (that's animal instinct) and more than likely engage that threat until it is no longer a threat. Hopefully that will be quickly and I can move on to the next most prevalent threat.
    This is what I was thinking when I said the following...

    Originally posted by jwise
    If you have decided that a target needs to be serviced, then I would service that threat in a manner fitting the threat.
    The question is difficult, because it is a hard question to ask what one would DO, rather than simply ask what one has been trained to do. What would I do? I don't know. Give me the WHOLE picture, and I'd most likely be able to tell you, but so much of what I perceive is non-verbal and even non-articulable. Like Blackdog said, "that's animal instinct."

    If I sensed weakness, I would attack furiously, with overwhelming force. If I sensed strength, I would put distance between us and continue to move while shooting, RACING for the nearest cover/escape. Who knows...

    Leave a comment:


  • GrayBlue
    replied
    Tow major problems I see in multiple threat training.

    1. Little or no incorporation of utilization of cover.
    I would take cover, and reveal and attack one opponent at a time.

    2. Winning as objective.
    The objective of the training should be to survive. To survive does not always equate winning. "Never retreat" idea is what a military commander would want from their soldiers, and not particularly for that soldier's sake.
    A lot of training habitually do this. But, if tactical situation is not in your favor, systematic retreat or "tactical redeploy" should be in order. I've never seen of heard / read of any organization that properly teaches how to systematically do a tactical redeploy or retreat.

    If I'm out numbered, goal of me attacking with a firearm is to keep myself alive until I extract myself from danger rather than charging into an unfavorable battle.

    Target selection wise, keep an open mind. You may not want to keep sending rounds after rounds at an opponent with a shotgun only partially exposed and hard to hit spending precious seconds when there's a two exposed guys with a pistol you could have already downed.
    Last edited by GrayBlue; 09-08-2009, 09:01 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • MPM05
    replied
    I know WillBrink said with a handgun. But, I am going to cheat and say I'd have to go with a M67 or a M203, depending on distance.

    Really though, I am going to have to agree with Surf in that a real world situation will be a bit more complicated, and all the points he used to articulate such a point were valid (avenues of approach, cover and concealment, etc.) I am also going to agree with Jwise in that no two targets will have the same priority. One of them will stand out and ask for some special attention.

    Additionally, my perspective is different. You all have to go out there every day and face the world by yourself (until your back up arrives). My training and my experience is always as a member of a fire team, often a squad, with at least one and usually two crew served weapons (M249/M203) and everyone else having an M4 with three round burst available.

    If I try and answer this fairly, and all I've got is me and my Glock 22, I'd like to think I'd give everyone a love tap to buy some time, and then go back for more.

    Leave a comment:


  • WillBrink
    replied
    Helpful and interesting responses gents, thanx.

    Leave a comment:


  • Blackdog F4i
    replied
    Originally posted by Surf View Post
    In summary, I basically cannot give a set way in which we engage multiple threats, such as order, number of rounds and then come back in another order.
    I somewhat agree.

    I have gamed it in my mind many times. I know i will be moving and I can bet the targets will be moving. I realize that more than likely I will target fixate on the largest threat (that's animal instinct) and more than likely engage that threat until it is no longer a threat. Hopefully that will be quickly and I can move on to the next most prevalent threat.

    IDPA is a game. ALWAYS remember that. SIMS rock for training but if you do it enough you can start to game it as well, although not as easily as when the targets are cardboard and don't shoot back.

    Leave a comment:


  • Oddball-Six
    replied
    Originally posted by jwise View Post
    You know, if you gave that answer on the stand, I'd have to object - the answer is nonresponsive.

    Silly lawyer! You'd understand it if you were a cop!

    If god forbid i am caught in that scenario then. 1) I did something wrong and was not very aware. 2) I REALLY ****ed somebody off who I shouldn't have. 3) Im not engaging until i have a valid deadly force threat under CRS 18-1-704 so whichever one is the first to meet that criteria is likely the one that I will engage first.

    Im not LEO, im not facing an army, if its a multiple target scenario than I either got caught in some robbery or its a gang. Hopefully stand up to the first to present the threat, and then engage as necessary to stop the threat. Would then cycle based on opposing weapon and distance to target as best I could.

    If i have maintained any kind of awareness, and been a good witness rather than a dead hero, the only place I will ever have to practice this will be in an IDPA/IPSC practice or match.

    Now i need to go hide before jwise reads this and catches up with me.

    Leave a comment:


  • jwise
    replied
    Originally posted by Surf View Post
    ...<SNIP>...
    You know, if you gave that answer on the stand, I'd have to object - the answer is nonresponsive.

    You go ahead and discuss all the issues that MATTER, while disregarding (for the most part) the question asked. Cheater...

    Leave a comment:


  • Surf
    replied
    I will preface my response by saying, In regards to the original post, I do not necessarily believe that many trainers, or the particular trainers mentioned, are saying that one MUST ALWAYS address multiple threats in the manner which was described above. However, they may be giving a generalized response in an ideal situation. I think we all agree that anything worth shooting once, is worth shooting multiple times, as necessary.

    Good question Will, however the response that you will see in real life, or a truly dynamic 360*, force on force, SIMS or similar, type of situation will be much different than you might see on a paper punching one way range. While the many different firearms training companies / trainers try to incorporate as much realism as possible on a square range and paper targets, the true response in a 360* dynamic situation is almost always very different.

    I think we all understand and appreciate what IDPA as a sport brings to the table as being a pseudo realistic based shooting sport concept, however it can never really replicate (doesn't claim to fully replicate) the real deal, or a 360* force on force atmosphere. Obviously training is the key. IMO, without actually taking real lead, a pain reinforced type of 360* dynamic training scenarios (SIMUNITION etc), conducted in real life environments, are key to developing techniques and responses. You do not see much civilian firearm / defensive courses using pain reinfoced, force on force situations / training tools. We do quite a bit of this type of training and I can guarantee a couple of things......You and your opponents will be hauling ***, so you can throw out the idea of stationary paper targets, and second, your shooting platform will be less than ideal. Therefore the rigid notion of going down the line and giving each bad guy a single round or two, then coming back in reverse order for another combat accurate shot, or a coup de grace head shot for each of the bad guys is just not consistent with realism.

    Having said that, and without getting too much into combat tactics here, we need to take into account the availability of hard cover, avenues of escape that may also provide hard cover / concealment, all while perhaps engaging targets, maybe only being able to engage a single target. We also should be aware of the opportunity that our movement can create a situation where we are able to set up our targets in such a manner as to cut down on the lanes of fire, or the other threats ability to get a clear shot on us without having to go through one of their buddies to hit us. Kinda like a multiple attacker martial arts concept. Of course this is simplifying it, and again I really don't want to get too involved in such combat tactics here, however I will say that with multiple threats, you had best be moving your ***, looking for hard cover, an avenue of escape that may possibly set you up for a better tactical advantage, or all three. Then while doing all of this, you should be giving some semblance of accurate return fire. Not easy to do, and all in all this is definitely a suck *** situation.

    In summary, I basically cannot give a set way in which we engage multiple threats, such as order, number of rounds and then come back in another order. I think that doing so, creates more of a problem than a cure, as no two scenarios will be alike. With a dynamically evolving and changing scenario, we need to rely that our training and/or real life experiences in such situations, allows us to respond and adapt as the situation unfolds. The more realistic based force on force training that we can go through the better. I will try to give you the tools, teach you the techniques, provide you the best training and hopefully turn you into a master carpenter. Then it will be up to you to hammer the nails as you see fit.

    Leave a comment:


  • jwise
    replied
    Oh, and then there's the goose method. Hit the point-man (tip of the 'V') and watch the followers scatter.

    This also works the other way. If you want to get all of them, start picking them off from the back, first. That way they all think you're missing and won't scatter until you transition to them!

    Leave a comment:

MR300x250 Tablet

Collapse

What's Going On

Collapse

There are currently 4170 users online. 244 members and 3926 guests.

Most users ever online was 26,947 at 08:36 PM on 12-29-2019.

Welcome Ad

Collapse
Working...
X