Truly Realistic Training

One problem with most sims/airsoft/paintball training is it teaches you to use concealment as cover.
Click to expand...
While this is true, from what I've seen in real-world shooting videos, concealment used as cover obviously isn't as good as cover but it's surprisingly useful. I don't know why, exactly--maybe people, when they get really stressed have trouble aiming for center of mass through concealment and only aim for the visible part of the assailant. Anyway, for whatever reason, it works way better than intuition suggests.

If you have a choice between concealment and cover, definitely choose the cover. But if there's no cover, take the concealment--from what I can tell it's likely going to be almost as effective, in practice, as actual cover.
... there needs to be a system that can provide a significant consequence for getting "killed" and I'm not aware of any of those.
Click to expand...
Simunitions may not be perfect (nothing is) but it's certainly good enough to allow the premiere elite special forces/anti-terrorist groups around the world to develop virtually super-human abilities through continued training. The problem isn't that effective training techniques don't exist, the problem is that they are expensive and not widely available.
I agree, the basics are important before FOF. Otherwise, it becomes paintball!
Click to expand...
I think that FOF is valuable as long as participants and instructors are careful to interpret the results. I say that because from what I've seen, FOF scenarios tend to result in "mutual suicide" FAR more often than is seen in the real world. Probably part of this has to do with what hdwhit has pointed out--there's not quite the same incentive to remain unshot that would be seen with live-fire and therefore people spend more time shooting than freaking out and trying to get out of the line of fire.
 
Do listen to this:

Bartholomew Roberts said:
One problem with most sims/airsoft/paintball training is it teaches you to use concealment as cover. Sims are a definite step up from paintballs.
Click to expand...

Don't listen to this:

T. O'Heir said:
"...guns have no relation to real firearms..." Neither do Airsoft toys.
Click to expand...
I believe the above is referring to paintball guns. I posit he has never learned the value of proper use of cover/concealment when training in close quarters with a paintball gun.

One step up from simunitions is the UTM round (5.56mm). It's intended as a marking system when shooting targets in a shoothouse that's not rated for live ammo. It claims to be accurate to 75 yards. Far less stoppages and squibs than the simunitions garbage. It also gives better recoil feedback than simunitions, and only requires a bolt change, rather than changing the whole upper receiver - so you don't have to move your optics around.

It's not intended for FOF but that never stopped my unit from using them for that very purpose!
 
Truly realistic training?

Having thought about it, I think that truly realistic training would be made up of varying sessions into which the trainees enter without having any inkling at all that he or she may have to draw and fire.

That would mirror the real world.

Could a practical course of that kind be designed? Dunno.
 
Why not just go into a bikers bar and pick a fight.

Bet you get some 'realistic' training.

Folks, there is no such animal as 'Truly Realistic Training'. The only way to exactly simulate the real deal is the real deal.

Deaf
 
Realistic training can mean different things, to different people and in different contexts.

At its basic level, good training helps students learn the required skills faster, as well as helps make them better able to retain the lessons and skills developed in their training.

Good training can involve finding ways to create the learning and retention of the desired skills. That doesn't mean having to break the bank, though, nor invent new and complex methods to perform effective tasks.

Gotta have a solid, practical and relevant foundation upon which to build, though.

Eager lower skilled martial art students always want to jump ahead to the difficult techniques, yet they often fail to recognize when they haven't sufficiently prepared their basic foundation skillset and knowledge to let them properly learn, let alone use, the lessons of the more advanced training.

It's never a waste of time to invest attention in the practice of essential basics. Solid basics are always going to remain at the very heart of the more complex, or advanced, skills.
 
Yep! just walk into the alleys in downtown Seattle and start skipping and humming to yourself.
When the guys step out of the shadows and ask, "your money or your life?" you can practice the real thing.

That is not really the best way to practice. You need to know that what you are training for CAN happen and you have to know that you are ready to kill another person to defend your life. While it's happening is not time to ask yourself questions. You have to program your brain with every possible series of events and be ready to improvise for the one you missed. You have to respond to aggression with more aggression and the same amount of fore.

For instance if a guy walks up to you and says he's going to kick your tail, you just swing! Hit him as many times as you can until he walks away or is on the ground. Then you disengage while being ready for any kind of escalation. If you wait to see if he is serious you will be the one on the ground and he might not walk away.
 
Last edited:
For instance if a guy walks up to you and says he's going to kick your tail, you just swing!
Click to expand...
Verbal threats alone do not justify the use of force in self defense. You would be the aggressor, and you would have lost any lawful basis for defending yourself with force.
 
There is such a thing as a mutually agreed fight, You would have to disengage and let it be known that you were done before using more force would be excusable..
 
There is such a thing as a mutually agreed fight,
Click to expand...
Yes, and it is unlawful for both parties.

Of course. using force against someone in response to a mere verbal threat is something else. It is battery.
 
OldMarksman,
In Washington state it is not illegal. Agreeing to a physical confrontation is not considered assault or battery. I don't pretend to know about other States but I try to stay up on the laws in Washington.

It is not wise because if the fight is escalated to knives or guns it gets very gray quickly.
 
I used to have a commander at Ft Drum in NY who would have us run two miles to the range and then we had to qualify with our weapons without taking a break to simulate combat stress. We would also do a two mile run and at the end they would randomly pick 5 or 6 guys to stick a IV into their buddy. That is stress, finding a vein to stick while trying not to dry heave
 
I great way to learn to shoot under stress is to shoot competitively. The stress isn't identical to the stress of a gunfight but it's close enough to develop the skill.

When I participate in any professional training I go to find out what I need to practice on my own. I never expect to complete this or that training and be ready for the O.K. Corral.

Ultimately we are all self-trained.

http://http://www.anamericanwithagun.com/
 
Agreeing to a physical confrontation is not considered assault or battery.
Click to expand...
No, but striking someone solely in response to a verbal threat does not constitute agreed upon combat, and it is battery.

Do not enter into a fight in Seattle.
 
There is such a thing as a mutually agreed fight
Click to expand...

Here in Texas, as long as you join a dojo, boxing club, etc... and the 'fight' is there, it ain't mutually agreed combat. It's a 'class' and 'sparring'.

A few times when people wanted to fight me I invited them to a dojo to sign up and sign a release (it was my dojo!). Was amazing how that tended to cool the hot heads.

Deaf
 
Here in Texas, as long as you join a dojo, boxing club, etc... and the 'fight' is there, it ain't mutually agreed combat. It's a 'class' and 'sparring'.
Click to expand...
Are there jurisdictions in which that is not true?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top