@ Zhurdan: I would say good on the stance and presentation.
Your shots seemed to be bam,bambam,bambambam, etc
IMHO/IME if a shooters stance does not offer the propper support it sounds like bam,bambam,bambam,bam,bambam,bambam.
Most people IME, seem to be able to do 2 shots fine, but when you push longer 4-5rd strings the shoot it in pairs.
You did not appear to have that problem.
PJ
I feel the same way. Alot of these drills, when pushed to more distant ranges really force the shooter the hone in on a specific skill. With range, your faults are magnified.
Yes your times are slower, owell.
PJ
Been working on that for a long time. At local get togethers, we focus on someone calling the number of shots, randomly, so that the shooter has to to focus on good trigger control while maintaining accuracy and NOT getting trapped in the “fire two” mentality that is so pervasive. I really need to get the “scan and assess” into my head though. Seems it’s easier when shooting with others, but I forget about it when I’m out there all by myself.
Here’s another one from the same day…
El Prez… .357Sig, 7 yards, 7.82seconds but I dropped one shot, so that’s +.5 isn’t it? Seemed to be dropping a shot on target two all day. Might need to adjust my stance a little.
I understand. You can hold on the last target though and then scan for another threat after each “hard drill.”
I do and teach these same drills (El Pres, FAST, 1-5, etc) by the way and DO think that they are good ones to practice.
C4
Correct. 25-30yds, 1-5 drill with targets at least 4yds apart.
Here is me shooting it in 8.87: http://contour.com/node/101296
C4
Right. Being up close to a target does not show a lot of the flaws in ones shooting. Distance + accuracy requirements REALLY brings these things to the surface.
C4
Maybe after a couple of beers I am having a hard time, but the camera movement and angles, plus the camera guy was annoying as all heck. I want to reach through my monitor and kick your camera guy in the nuts. Others have critiqued some things, but overall you shoot very well. 
I will say that when I shoot video and if I post it, I will not go through all the motions as I do not want my ugly mug on the internet, so I wont do much movement or scanning in vids. It is actually hard to remember not to move or scan. I like the idea of video as it can show quite a bit and allows for self teaching, provided you know what your looking for.
Zhurdan, I like to run the 1-5 drill also. It is a good drill for learning split pace and transition to transition pace. This is what I benefited most from this drill. As mentioned keeping it in the circle is necessary. While I might agree that a further distance may have some benefits, depending on your applications, up close (CQB range) within 7-10 yards is practical for many shooters. So in essence practicing both near and far would be ideal IMO.
I know that was a cold run and overall very nice. Your a big guy, but you still look like your rocking back on your heels a bit on the return trip with longer strings. Snapping (driving) the gun more with your support hand will help also. Getting your splits and transitions in the .16 or so range would be excellent IMO. You knew that it was sloppy for what your norm or warmed up ability is so that is a good thing. 
Talking a lot is a good thing when going dynamic. Far be it from me to give any more critique than LAV, but I have the benefit of an overhead view and video.
I just want to say that nitpicking is good. That means that there are no major issues to address.
Room #1.
Would prefer to see the #2 man a bit quicker on the entry, closer on the heels of #1 and would prefer that he run his wall a bit further on the entry to create space from the funnel. As a reference point for depth of entry (staying on the wall) progress just past the door knob. This will prevent over penetration from length of wall and often depth into the room. This will also create enough room to enter the room no matter if it is a side fed or middle fed room, especially in full kit. I will also say that in a dynamic (other than stealth) we actually like the guy on the door side to ride the door with sharp brush of the door forcing it to swing hard. If there is someone behind the door they will get a face full of door.
Middle corner middle is ideal unless if a threat is encountered, or on a closed door like this first room. #1 guy quickly sees the wall as the door swings, knowing he has only middle left to check for his AOR. No need to go back to his corner as there is none and it isn’t the deep corner of the room. #2 man, threat first (if identified), but then we must not neglect our deep corner or checking behind the door before advancing. Behind the door was not checked.
In force on force training we like to purposely ingrain checking behind the door with placing someone there and having pain penalties from a perp. Also in many small houses that we go into, it is not uncommon to have a closet behind the sweep area of the door.
I know that is a shoot house without realistic obstacles / furnishings but we should not call a room clear until running our walls and checking or playing the room for real. Shoothouses and lack of realism on the interior can make bad habits. Calling the room clear only after advancing and checking the condition of the threat and the weapon. Nothing like a half dead guy picking up his weapon and shooting you in the ass. We prefer that our guys play it with some realism and run the walls to advance in the room. The 2 shooters line up and progress the room. Again the room is not realistic, but advancing in a line cuts down on angles and fields of fire for potentially 2 guns being in the fight if something pops up.
Looked like guy in gear needed to watch his muzzle a bit when white shirt left the room. Hard to tell from camera view.
Room #2
Prior to room (open door). Like that the room was pie’d as much as possible without exposure to rear hallway. With only 2 guys sometimes we must give up a little and chose the lesser of evils. I like that both shooters upon entry, did not get sucked into a direct threat mindset where the shooters b-line it directly to the suspect with hostage.
At least in this room and target configuration a direct threat concept should not be done and it wasn’t, however, I would prefer, especially for training that the shooters use a flanking movement by running walls to create angles. Static targets will not react the same and it is good to ingrain running the walls to open up an angle in an HRT situation with a perp directly behind the hostage. There will be a lot of movement happening in real life. A reliable shot with a pistol isn’t going to happen at that distance with movement of perp and hostage. Running walls will make it very difficult for the perp to stay behind the hostage without giving up a shot to one of the shooters on either flank as they progress the walls. Running FoF training with say SIMS will show the necessity of flanking. Static targets not so much, so I would prefer to see this done in training.
Again room was called clear to quickly. I understand possible time constraints, but I would like to see a room finished off properly. Also a quick check of behind the door is a good habit no matter how small the gap may seem.
Nitpicking again but upon leaving (white shirt) could have held an angle and maintained a hall coverage (towards room #1) as guy in gear pied the downrange hall and around to the hall where you guys eventually go. Guy in gear clears hallway towards room #1, but gives it up as the 2 of you stack to exit. I don’t like to give up real estate. If you do, it should be re-checked again. I understand his main purposes was the long hall, not towards room #1.
Room #3.
OK LAV covers depth of penetration along the wall for man #1. Just past the door knob is an ideal depth. Also allows for a quick peek behind the door after our middle, corner, middle.
T-Intersection, outside of room #3.
Looks like both guys set up forward and did a flip on their own respective sides of the hallway. I would prefer cross down hall coverage to see as much as possible and then a coordinated flip of both guys to address the hall on their own respective side. By doing cross down hall coverage you see more hallway prior to the flip.
Both shooters give up their own respective halls to formulate a plan to enter room #4. I don’t like to give up real estate, especially if I shot someone and have to cross over it again. At the minimum I would re-peek the halls and the down perp before committing into room #4. If he is not DRT he may follow you into room #4. You guys are in a tough spot no doubt in that hallway set up.
Room #4
Hard to see the entry. Perp whacked!
Again you guys stack up and progress. Guy in gear who takes the deep corner, slides to his left and takes point as you guys stack up on the left side of the door for entry into room #5. After entry into room #4 the guy in gear has the top corner of the room and shoots the perp. He already has the entire length of the wall that runs into the connecting room #5 and already “owns” a good portion of room #5. Again I don’t like to give up what I already own. He will need to re-take it again from the left side (door knob side) stack on the door to room #5. As you guys stack up, someone could have gone from room #5’s deep corner to the area that the point man just gave up.
Room #5
Instead the team can progress forward running respective walls from within room #4. In essence gear guy will be pieing the upcoming room without giving up any real estate that he already owns. This can be done pretty rapidly. He will have a good pie and stand off position as he progresses. He could probably have achieved a position to be able to pop the last terrorist long before an entry was forced or necessary. His depth and offset from within room #4 would have been a better advantage for him to have seen the perp, before the perp saw him and able to get off a good kill shot without committing to the room. If he progressed to a certain point, he was basically set up for a natural crossing entry, without needing to get too close to the door. This can be very smooth with training.
All in all good stuff! Again just nitpicking and it is definitely hard when 2 guys are not exactly on the same page or familiar with one another. Shoothouses are always a hoot!
I opened the door for shooter 1 so that was the lag. As you know, the 3rd or 4th guy would open the door and there would be no delay with entering the room. I like to open the door for first timers so they can concentrate on going to their known, concentrating on the threat and keeping their gun up (with a two handed grip).
We do a strong wall technique for safety reasons. Most of the guys in classes like this have never shot with another person (in a shoothouse) so they have little to no established pattern. KISS is the motto for Civy HD training.
Behind the door was not checked as there was a target stand there blocking it. Because of this, we treated the door as fully open and did not check it. If the target stand was not there, the door would have been pinned against the wall as I entered the room and no would would have been able to fit behind it.
I know that is a shoot house without realistic obstacles / furnishings but we should not call a room clear until running our walls and checking or playing the room for real. Shoothouses and lack of realism on the interior can make bad habits. Calling the room clear only after advancing and checking the condition of the threat and the weapon. Nothing like a half dead guy picking up his weapon and shooting you in the ass. We prefer that our guys play it with some realism and run the walls to advance in the room. The 2 shooters line up and progress the room. Again the room is not realistic, but advancing in a line cuts down on angles and fields of fire for potentially 2 guns being in the fight if something pops up.
Looked like guy in gear needed to watch his muzzle a bit when white shirt left the room. Hard to tell from camera view.
Understand what you are saying. As a civy HD class, going down a wall or poking a paper target to see if it is dead is not practiced. More focus is put on safety, hitting their targets, IDing the threat, pieing corners, etc.
Room #2
Prior to room (open door). Like that the room was pie’d as much as possible without exposure to rear hallway. With only 2 guys sometimes we must give up a little and chose the lesser of evils. I like that both shooters upon entry, did not get sucked into a direct threat mindset where the shooters b-line it directly to the suspect with hostage.At least in this room and target configuration a direct threat concept should not be done and it wasn’t, however, I would prefer, especially for training that the shooters use a flanking movement by running walls to create angles. Static targets will not react the same and it is good to ingrain running the walls to open up an angle in an HRT situation with a perp directly behind the hostage. There will be a lot of movement happening in real life. A reliable shot with a pistol isn’t going to happen at that distance with movement of perp and hostage. Running walls will make it very difficult for the perp to stay behind the hostage without giving up a shot to one of the shooters on either flank as they progress the walls. Running FoF training with say SIMS will show the necessity of flanking. Static targets not so much, so I would prefer to see this done in training.
Same as above. Strong wall technique is applied.
Nitpicking again but upon leaving (white shirt) could have held an angle and maintained a hall coverage (towards room #1) as guy in gear pied the downrange hall and around to the hall where you guys eventually go. Guy in gear clears hallway towards room #1, but gives it up as the 2 of you stack to exit. I don’t like to give up real estate. If you do, it should be re-checked again. I understand his main purposes was the long hall, not towards room #1.
Understand about holding cleared ground. LAV puts a lot of importance of NOT spending much/any time in the hallway. So he wanted us to pie the hallway quickly and then move out to the next room and get in ASAP.
Room #3.
OK LAV covers depth of penetration along the wall for man #1. Just past the door knob is an ideal depth. Also allows for a quick peek behind the door after our middle, corner, middle.
T-Intersection, outside of room #3.
Looks like both guys set up forward and did a flip on their own respective sides of the hallway. I would prefer cross down hall coverage to see as much as possible and then a coordinated flip of both guys to address the hall on their own respective side. By doing cross down hall coverage you see more hallway prior to the flip.
Normally in T intersections, we do a cross pie and then turn and engage the threat on our sides.
Both shooters give up their own respective halls to formulate a plan to enter room #4. I don’t like to give up real estate, especially if I shot someone and have to cross over it again. At the minimum I would re-peek the halls and the down perp before committing into room #4. If he is not DRT he may follow you into room #4. You guys are in a tough spot no doubt in that hallway set up.
Understand. Once you have engaged and or cleared a hallway, stay there until you move out of it to the next room or hallway.
Room #4
Hard to see the entry. Perp whacked!Again you guys stack up and progress. Guy in gear who takes the deep corner, slides to his left and takes point as you guys stack up on the left side of the door for entry into room #5. After entry into room #4 the guy in gear has the top corner of the room and shoots the perp. He already has the entire length of the wall that runs into the connecting room #5 and already “owns” a good portion of room #5. Again I don’t like to give up what I already own. He will need to re-take it again from the left side (door knob side) stack on the door to room #5. As you guys stack up, someone could have gone from room #5’s deep corner to the area that the point man just gave up.
Room #5
Instead the team can progress forward running respective walls from within room #4. In essence gear guy will be pieing the upcoming room without giving up any real estate that he already owns. This can be done pretty rapidly. He will have a good pie and stand off position as he progresses. He could probably have achieved a position to be able to pop the last terrorist long before an entry was forced or necessary. His depth and offset from within room #4 would have been a better advantage for him to have seen the perp, before the perp saw him and able to get off a good kill shot without committing to the room. If he progressed to a certain point, he was basically set up for a natural crossing entry, without needing to get too close to the door. This can be very smooth with training.All in all good stuff! Again just nitpicking and it is definitely hard when 2 guys are not exactly on the same page or familiar with one another. Shoothouses are always a hoot!
Understand. We are using a strong wall technique and cannot apply that logic to those room configurations.
Thanks for yoru input. It is always nice to read another (experienced) shooters take on CQB type stuff.
C4
a little something that may or may not be advice for you- i’m not familiar with this drill specifically, and it’s obviously one shot per target… but on that last hole at the bottom, i think you probably could have gotten your hit faster if you’d just plopped into full urban prone.
i don’t think i’ve ever tried to fire sideways from a deck-level shooting position on my knees before, but it seems awkward as hell by watching you.
I have a couple CQC classes under my belt, Let me ask you …What I was taught is to slice the pie. Get off of the corners and back as far as you can . Not to go blasting into rooms. I think the last room was a perfect example of what I am talking about. The guy in first would of been a dead man.
Is there a reason for not slicing the room up before going in?
Durning the 18 hole sprint drill
And other videos I have seen from alot of people . I see people forgetting to scan and access. The reason I see this is because I am VERY guilty of it as well. I think (and I may be wrong so please give me feed back) that if you are not doing your after action drills during these type of drills timed or not you are cheating your self out of a good drill.
Anyone agree?
i would scan and assess at the end of the drill… the premise of the drill is basically that you’re engaging 18 knownish targets and having to move from varied position to varied position to engage… you only scan and assess when you’re “done” engaging, and looking for more targets.
Copy that…Thank you.
You are thinking of one man clears. They are defensive in nature (and slow). Two man, four man, swat team, etc are offensive in nature. So you hit rooms hard and fast. This isn’t to say that you don’t pie certain things in certain situations.
C4
Usually, “broke back prone” is faster for me. USUALLY.
It is also faster for me to drop to my knees than to go all the way to my belly in terms of movement.
PJ
[b]1-5 Compilation at 25m[/b] Each run had 1 “C” zone hit that was about 1" from the A zone.
Once again I need to work on S&A and incorporate that into all my actions.
PJ
Your absolutely right , my only experience is doing single man clears… Thank you for the input…
So what did you think of doing this drill at a farther distance? Little bit harder?
C4
no doubt it should be slower… but i don’t think it would have been for that last “hole.”
i’ve been doing a lot of urban prone work lately, as i’ve been finding more and more application for it. i guess the more used to that firing position i get, the faster i get in and out of position. for me, without additional instruction, i would have simply gone straight to urban prone on those bottom holes, since you’re generally not just firing one shot and moving on from a given firing position.
but like everything, more tools is more tools… i’ll have to incorporate some “broke back prone” into my CoFs. but i’m not gonna call it that. :no: