PDA

View Full Version : AAR: Tigerswan 3 Day Rifle/Pistol July 8-10



vmi-mo
07-14-2011, 09:28 PM
3 Day, Tigerswan Rifle/Pistol July 8-10

Instructor: We had Brian and Paul taking turns as the primary for this course. The reputation of TS instructors is well known. This class was no different. They are both top notch guys and as a friend of mine would say they are “good people”. They can break the complex down into the simple and speak the student language.

Location: This class was conducted at the Tigerswan Training Collaboration center. The facility is down right impressive. I have never been on a civilian range that had the actual SDZ’s for the weapons being fired. The range was easy to get to. Well kept/maintained. Offered shaded overhangs for students to chill out under. Overall it had all necessary commendations for successful training to be conducted.

Outline: Pistol in the morning. Rifle in the afternoon. The minute by minute replay can be found in the numerous other TS AAR’s. If anyone wants the minute by minute breakdown, Ill be glad to send it your way however I feel it is mostly irrelevant given the numerous other open sources detailing the course outline

Lessons Learned & Light Bulb Moments

“The engagement is not over till everyone is dead”. A big training point hit on by both Brian and Paul is to ensure a shooter is keeping his weapon in the fight until he is sure all those deserving are dead. The habit of speed reholstering and throwing the gun on safe the instance the last round is fired were broken. We train on the range for real life. Training typically has us put a set number of rounds into a target. In the world, it could take a lot of rounds to do the job. Always be prepared to put that next shot into the target. A very common command heard on the range was “follow through, 2 Shots, 3 Sight pictures” This helps to imbue the mindset of “I am always ready/able to put one more round into him”

“Brilliance at the Basics” & “Building Block Approach”. We started with basic pistol and rifle marksmanship. Once we had a grasp of the fundamentals under zero pressure, friction was added in order to push the shooters to become proficient at applying the fundamentals under whatever conditions they may encounter. It was easy to follow the logical progression of the skill sets being taught to students. It was a very crawl-walk-run style rather than sprint-trip-fall.

“It all starts with putting one killing shot on a bad guy” You cannot miss fast enough to effect the fight. I think that learning point is mostly self explanatory

Gun Games: Brian ENCOURAGED them. Don’t let the talk of tactics and all that crap get involved. Gun games are about shooting. Not tactics. There are some negatives one can get from certain gun games and the shooter must be cognizant of those and separate the game from life.

Repeatable, score able events: You must be able to track your progress as you progress with shooting. You need to establish base lines and standards for yourself so that you know how you stand at any one point in time and you can identify what you need to work on and what you are doing ok at.

Shooting vs. Tactics: This was a shooting course. Not a tactics course. It is important not to get the two confused. This was not about how to clear corners, or fire and maneuver. It was about technical weapon manipulations and the fundamentals of shooting.

Training methodology: TS preaches a building block approach and brilliance at the basics. Of EVERY training event I have done whether on my own or for the military I have never seen a course that demonstrates those to principles as much as this course. Everything started at the ground level and built up in a logical easy to follow progression that allowed shooters to truly enhance the capability.
Plates to the front: I am still surrounded by individuals that preach the idea of “giving your plates to the enemy” and squaring up to the threat. Talking to Brian in a one on one gave me a lot convincing arguments to bring up with higher in order to get away from this habit that “smells of amateur”

Accountability: Every hit you get helps you. Every miss you shoot hurts. In comes in time penalties, or points or whatever in training. In real life it comes in the form of loosing a fight or team mate potentially. Make your shots count. Lives are counting on it.

Guns/Gear: I used a BCM Middie/BCM Lower. SOPMOD stock. 13” Larue rail. EO Tech XPS 2-0 (???). M855 for ammo. The day before the class started I sheared off the trigger pin. I was able to take to Shooters Supply in Fayettnam and they fixed it free of charge. From my limited interactions with them they seem like top notch guys. The rifle ran like always. Reliable to the point of boring.

I ran a Glock 17 with a Warren FO front sight and plain black rear. It has an extended slide release, extended mag catch and a 3.5lb connector. Gun was boring reliable also.

As a note, neither weapon had been cleaned in the span of 10-12,000rds. Still no problems.

I used Blade tech mag pouches run of a stiff leather belt . Boring, but it works.

I also ran the VTAC sling. I still love this sling for its ease of adjustment and length of adjustment. I have found the Multi-cam version of the sling has a much more comfortable padding area than the other slings. I took the multicam padded part and put it on the coyote adjuster portion of one of my other VTAC slings. Set up is might comfy and just what I wanted.

I highly recommend this course for anyone. From the basics to a shooter with a few rounds through his gun. This course will offer something of value to anyone who attends. I consider myself a decent rifle shooter, and an ok pistol shooter. After this course my skill level was dramatically improved with both weapon systems.

A TS employee took some pictures that I believe are posted on facebook if anyone is interested.


PJ

Kyle Reese
07-14-2011, 09:33 PM
Great AAR, PJ.

Tiger Swan is GTG and I recommend them 100%.

fuse
07-15-2011, 12:56 AM
.
Plates to the front: I am still surrounded by individuals that preach the idea of “giving your plates to the enemy” and squaring up to the threat. Talking to Brian in a one on one gave me a lot convincing arguments to bring up with higher in order to get away from this habit that “smells of amateur”




Would you mind elaborating a bit?


sent via Android 3.1

Kyle Reese
07-15-2011, 01:29 AM
Would you mind elaborating a bit?


sent via Android 3.1

Not speaking for PJ, but I think what this means is the shooter (wearing hard plates) engaging a threat in an isosceles style stance, presumably to afford maximum protection from enemy fire with the plates, as opposed to employing a more aggressive fighting style stance.

vmi-mo
07-15-2011, 06:40 AM
Would you mind elaborating a bit?


sent via Android 3.1

1)In his experience, it was never the guy to your front that shot you. It was usually fire coming from your flanks/rear that got you

2)Build your position around being able to deliever rapid accurate fire to destroy the threat rather than relying on the threat to shoot your plates.

3)The "squared up stance" is not very compatable with rapid movement, nor is it very natural or stable.


PJ

fuse
07-15-2011, 11:34 AM
Thanks. I have basically no (real or imagined) experience in these matters, but I have watched and enjoyed a number of wildly successful dvds made by a certain also wildly successful company (if you get my drift) and this seems to be a least somewhat counter to them.

I have sort of noticed it myself...with a squared up stance I may be able to get a couple more rounds on target in a BSA drill, but at the expense of agility and speed, and with much less longer term stability (at least outside a 2 second drill.)

Sounds like an awesome class.

sent via Android 3.1

vmi-mo
07-15-2011, 11:57 AM
Thanks. I have basically no (real or imagined) experience in these matters, but I have watched and enjoyed a number of wildly successful dvds made by a certain also wildly successful company (if you get my drift) and this seems to be a least somewhat counter to them.

I have sort of noticed it myself...with a squared up stance I may be able to get a couple more rounds on target in a BSA drill, but at the expense of agility and speed, and with much less longer term stability (at least outside a 2 second drill.)

Sounds like an awesome class.

sent via Android 3.1

When you start or stop from a dead sprint, or even moderate paced movement are you squared up?

When someone tells you, that you are about to get run over by a 200lb dude are you squared up?

When you get pushed do you square up?

No. Usually you drop your dominant side foot back. Lower your COG. Put the wegiht on the balls of your feet and have a solid bend in the knees.


PJ

SouthNarc
07-15-2011, 02:13 PM
When you start or stop from a dead sprint, or even moderate paced movement are you squared up?

When someone tells you, that you are about to get run over by a 200lb dude are you squared up?

When you get pushed do you square up?

No. Usually you drop your dominant side foot back. Lower your COG. Put the wegiht on the balls of your feet and have a solid bend in the knees.


PJ


I teach squaring up but not from the sense of the feet being side by side ala' 80s style Phil Singleton MP5 stuff. You are in a lead with a lowered center of gravity and the pelvis is squared. Squaring up to me has always meant hips not feet.

And I've never bought the whole armor to the point of fire thing either. I'm not a Bradley.....

SLG
07-15-2011, 06:52 PM
I think this thread has started some confusion about what "squared up" means. VMI-MO, could you elaborate on this a bit? There is a distinct difference in my mind between a fighting stance and a shooting only stance, but I also consider both to be "squared up".

Also, though I know some people who use what I would consider a shooting only stance, in most gun games that I'm familiar with, I think a fighting stance is more appropriate, given the movement needed. Others who are better at gun games than me may disagree.

Add a rifle to the mix (especially beyond 25m), and the equation changes again.

vmi-mo
07-15-2011, 07:54 PM
This is what I have always considered "squared up" (http://www.everycitizenasoldier.org/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/positions/.pond/S_UFP.jpg.w300h400.jpg)

A fighting stance thats a shooting stance (http://media.photobucket.com/image/tigerswan/va_dinger/TigerSwanMilPhoto1.jpg)


PJ

SLG
07-15-2011, 08:34 PM
Thanks!

I would say that the first picture is pretty useless because of the feet, though the mount is effective for CQB distances.

The bottom is closer to my rifle stance, especially for using it at rifle distances, rather than sub-gun distances.

Very similar to what LAV/SDH/Hackathorn and others teach. (the bottom picture, that is)

Prdator
07-16-2011, 10:01 PM
The stance in the bottom pic is what Jason Falla teaches. He had some really good reasons why he preferred that stance as it allowed more range of motion wile standing in the same spot, and in a Team entry were every one has a sector it has some real benefits I prefer a stance with my feet more square than that, I guess that goes back to my Defensive Lineman days, I'd argue that no one takes a harder hit than they do and they stay square. I know a few guys that like the "Squared up" stance for in close and then transition to a more traditional rifle man stance for long range stuff, I prefer to stay squared up even for the long range stuff. But I do find it very interesting that several top tier guys are going to the stance with the offset feet position.

Excellent AAR!!!!!!!

AbnArtyguy
01-08-2012, 07:48 PM
PJ,

Great AAR, and good pics showing the differences in shooting positions.