My CQB training is VERY limited (0311), can some SMEs or those otherwise qualified comment on this? Is this guy just taking videos and pointing out poor training/training scars? He states in the comments:
I would like to hear from legitimate instructors who disagree or agree with me. Am I missing something or misrepresenting something with this video? Please let me know. I am simply trying to save lives.
It’s easy to find mistakes. Where in the training timeline are these guys, early on, or close to graduating?
You run students through multiple times at multiple speeds so they can make their mistakes in the shoot house and not on the two-way live-fire range.
Personally, I think most of the folks putting these videos up are doing it to promote their buisness. See, the other guys suck, go to my school instead.
Just my .02.
https://www.facebook.com/pages/IACT-Tactical/180015202771#!/pages/IACT-Tactical/180015202771?sk=wall
http://www.iacttactical.com/iacttactical.com/Contact.html
i concur.
It gets on my nerves when people post a video talking about all of the negatives without ever saying or showing how to do it “correctly” (in their opinion anyways).
First let me state that I am NOT an expert in this field and am not ex-tier 1, 2 or 3.
With that said, I have received quite a bit of instruction from Former Tier 1 shooters and instructors that have taught Tier 1 groups. I am also very interested in this type of training and attend it as often as can (several times a year generally). So please take my comments with a grain of salt.
I watched some of the video.
With the first group, the number 1 guy didn’t go to his “known.” He button hooked to his left. This always causes delays as he has to do a complete 90 degree turn before he can get out of the doorway so that the number 2 guy can get in. This slows everything down. Also, the number one guy was either moving to fast or the number 2 guys was not keeping up (hard to say as don’t see them in the stack prior to entering the room).
The person hosting the video, missed the above fact (which concerns me).
The argument that this guy is trying to make is that bad guys in the center of rooms cause big problems for entry teams. This is correct. Depending on the number of people entering the room AND the proximity of the bad guy to the entrance way will define which person engages the threat first. So with the first group in the video, it appears that the bad guy in the center of the room is about 8-10ft from the door. This would generally mean that the number 2 or 3 man in the stack would take him (which man shoots at the center guy would/should be figured out long before going into the shoot house and will be different from team to team).
Ultimately, the person in position 1 will have to make that split second decision on whether or not to shoot the guy in the center of the room based off his position to the entrance way.
The other main topic that the host of the video points out is the danger of one of your teammates being shot because they wandered down the wall. This is true and is why the “Flow” technique is dangerous and needs to be practiced a lot before utilizing it. It is also my understanding that this method is mostly used for hostage rescue.
The more commonly used method is the strong wall technique. This limits the possibility of someone shooting their own teammate and is why it is the most commonly used technique with LE and .Mil units.
As others have pointed out, don’t poke holes in something without offering a solution.
C4
I would remind everyone participating in this thread that our active and future enemies also have access to the internet, and are actively mining it to better understand our tactics, techniques and procedures, and ask that descriptions are kept unspecific.
While no one can learn CQB via YouTube, one can begin to identify vulnerabilites if they are switched on and people share enough detail.
Don’t help them hurt us.
Good point. If we could control You Tube and all the other sites with videos and info., we would be in better shape.
No single raindrop believes it is responsible for the flood.
At least our little raindrop understands the consequence of it’s existence.
We can’t save the world, but we can do our part in support of those that are currently deep in harm’s guts.
From the video description:
There is a better way- High Threat CQB
Obviously selling something.
What he, or a friend of his, is apparently selling:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r53QZ3GrqAo&feature=channel_video_title
Doesn’t look too hot to me, especially having two guys stand shoulder-to-shoulder stationary in a doorway to engage a single threat, in my own poorly informed opinion.
That looks like a variation of a method I am very familiar with. I’ve never done the threshold entry (movement) in the manner they are, and I can’t say I really think it’s anything great, new, or cutting edge.
From my minor knowledge of CQB The first video shows what I have heard called “the wall”, it is taught as a basic CQB tactic to soldiers before being assigned for units (where they are re-trained). The reason why this is taught to new soliders from my understanding is that it reduces the risk of friendly fire since everyone ends up on the same wall. It is used as an into CQB before moving onto more advanced methods.
From my minor instruction I was instructed to stay 36" off the wall when coming to a stop so that other entry team members can move behind you and no one is tempted to move infront of you.
All of the videos seems to show the type of entry where entry is required. As others have said, “the mission dictates the tempo while the terrian dictates the tactics” so there are other options that I won’t address because of this being a public forum , these options would address the “issues” or atleast some of them.
Other thing is the guy is being critical of techniques from guys training, while I am sure the guys in the videos are all excellent at what they do , it really isn’t fair to “bad mouth” their technique when it seems these are training videos.
I have attended a shooting and tactics course with IMTT, and the “Wall” method wasnt taught. And I don’t carry a gun for living, nor was I in the military , or been overseas. From time to time I have worked as a paramedic alongside various SWAT teams doing medical standby which placed me in a role on “non-entry” so that really isnt applicable.
And yes it looks like they are either selling something and/or just stroking their ego to, if you check out their website, it is very vague, no instructor bios or backgrounds, which is suspect to me, they could still give a potential customer an idea of their background while maintaining security.
kary
I am not a fan of putting those types of entry tactics and other very specific law enforcement type techniques on the internet for the world to see just to try and sell what you think is a “better product.”
Atleast here you have to register.
There were some things that could have been done better of course. But, just picking out clips of videos where some one is doing something wrong is kinda dumb and im glad other pointed this out.
I was on swat. There is no fool proof way to do something with out being vulnerable at somepoint in time. The use of flashbangs is there to distract the person you are going after. If you have to bang every room before you go in, so be it. It definitely is a good distraction device.
During my swat training and cqb specifically, when you enter a room you dont just button hook or cross and completely ignore a threat that may be in the middle of the room. You enter that room muzzle up and as you enter you scan for threats while sweeping to cover that corner. First and second man should be able to put muzzle on every part of the room(i.e. square room) as they enter and move to cover their corner.
The guy behind you should have his muzzle on the room by the time you are on your second step in to the room. It should be that quick that you have a second muzzle in that room.
That is as detailed as i am going to get because there where a few other things I could elaborate on but I am reluctant to do so. Also this is a VERY watered down and basic explanation of how we were taught.
Focusing on the critical negatives of a particular technique without giving immediate answers and solutions invariably means advertisement of some sort. This is one of the main marketing techniques used by Front Sight.
Entry techniques should be incredibly flexible and variable for the number of reasons. Not every situation needs a frag and bang nor does every situation call for a sneak & creep (think 1980 FBI tactics versus Fallujah tactics of 04’).
Although the US military has had over a decade of actively fighting, the base (especially prior to 05’) came from predominantly LEO tactics. The reason was simple: SWAT teams had the most experience in CQB real-time. Problems were quickly discovered because (duhh) the foe LEO’s face is ≠ to what military forces face overseas (for instance, nary does a SWAT team have to be concerned with facing medium machine guns etc). Thankfully, the learning curve wasn’t quite as steep as say, ‘no hands in your pockets!’ 
In regards to CQB, one can and will fuckup. In real time, a, ‘perfect’ entry is exceedingly hard to recall (though I have witnessed and been a part of such; so long as the result is every bad guy killed and every good guy alive 
). The most pivotal thing is to have the violence of action. VOA will help cover even the most egregious mistakes. Having dynamic, free-thinking, and fluid men on your team are an extreme force-multiplier. Don’t take this to say that TTP’s don’t matter–they really really do. Just saying that a team with outdated tactics but containing tremendous VOA and elasticity can still win the day.
In regards to ignoring the guy in the center of the room–isn’t this why we practice drills with speed, intensity, and accuracy all as [mostly] equal players? It’s hard to give a single answer to this–hence why the word of the day is fluidity.
One thing that no one has mentioned is shoot house rules. Several of the places I’ve trained doesn’t allow you to shoot before you cross the threshold. Right, wrong, or indifferent those were the rules, and you’d frequently end up doing the sort of things seen in the video when you have a center target in the room.
-Jenrick
dont mean to derail, at am I going crazy or did the guy last guy to enter the house at the 2 minute mark also have a new cutting edge grip on his rifle? (His support hand) you see it better at 2:26, the second man
You mean the over hand “counter-supination” grip?
-Jenrick
yes I assume so, looking at other videos I guess its used for entry. Allows you to drive the gun a bit faster/support on door frame ect…just a guess
When I learned it, it wasn’t just for CQB. I’ve got mixed feelings about it for usage in most situations, though it does work extremely well in certain positions for recoil control. That be because I haven’t shot nearly as much as I have other styles. I still practice it when I go to the range, and I definitely keep it in my tool box.
-Jenrick
It’s a red herring.
Really, it’s just a bastardized support grip that was left on the gun.
It’s not something I recommend.
There are other ways to stabilize the front-end of the gun against support and move directly into a non-supported dynamic position with the same grip. Take a look at Vtac’s YouTube, it’s there, and it is waaaaay better than what 2:26 dude is doing.
State censorship of free speech and the media has worked so well for China, we should implement it here too!
Opsec is one thing, censorship is something else entirely.