Class review -- Gunsite, Advanced Tactical Problems (pistol)

[GJM]

I just finished up Gunsite's handgun Advanced Tactical Problems (ATP) class this week, at the Gunsite facility in Paulden, Arizona. There is enough that I want to say about the class, that I may break it up into different posts.

My wife and I first attended Gunsite in 1991, when we took API 270, their rifle class, in preparation for our honeymoon hunting trip to Botswana. Jeff Cooper was the instructor. Since then, we have taken many classes at Gunsite, and been friends with many Gunsite people. It has been about five years since I last took a class there. The Gunsite facility is world class, consisting of approximately 2,500 acres, scattered across the piñon-juniper terrain of northern Arizona. They have many indoor shoot houses, outdoor simulators, square ranges, rifle ranges to 2,000 yards, and almost everything imaginable to train on.

Gunsite's pistol offerings are, in order, 250, 350, 499 and ATP. ATP is three days, and their most advanced pistol offering. TD1 is a square range refresher in the morning, and both indoor and outdoor simulators in the afternoon. TD2 is about an hour of square range, followed by the rest of the day in simulators. TD2 includes a night shoot, conducted in the indoor and outdoor simulators. TD3 has force on force for part of the day, some square range work, and then various competitions on steel. We shot about 1,000 rounds of ball and about 250 rounds of frangible over the three days.

Our instructors were Cory Trapp and Ron Fielder. I have known Cory for nearly twenty years, and consider him a friend and resource. This is the first time I met Ron, but we share a mutual friend in Randy Cain. Ron is very knowledgeable and calm. Cory and Ron complemented each other very well. Due to some cancellations, there were six of us in class, which was awesome in terms of the flow through the simulators. Everyone attending could shoot, and backgrounds included military, LE, district attorney's office, and me. I think, given the choice, the Gunsite staff would rather have had my wife attend, as they like her. They made that clear by periodically calling me by her name during the week.

Wide range of pistols from the 1911, M&P, Glock, XDM and me mostly with a Beretta Brig Tac. I had exactly one stoppage during the course, and it was with a frangible round in a simulator. I think all the students had some stoppages with frangible ammo, and it is consider par for the course with frangible. The only persistent stoppages I saw other than with frangible were with the 1911 shooter. Both his pistols, one was a TRP and I believe the other was a Colt, had issues. Particularly concerning was his Colt carry 1911, as it is on his CA CCW, and it is apparently very hard to change to another gun.

I really enjoyed the course, seeing old friends, spending time at Gunsite, and look forward to returning soon. I am going to start with my suggestions for how Gunsite can improve this class, all of which I shared with my friend, Ken Campbell, the COO at Gunsite.

1) I would like to see an update of the technical shooting curriculum. It is fundamentally what was taught in my 250 class in 90's. I think it is possible to update the technical shooting curriculum while staying true to Gunsite's philosophy as a fighting school.

2) I would like to see more instructor demo's. Leatham, Bragg, Rogers, Langdon, Green - they all demo a lot and that is very helpful.

3) I think there was too much emphasis on 3 and 5 yard shooting for an Advanced class.

4) Gunsite is philosophically an open carry place, and has been for decades. Instructors and students open carry. However, OWB in a Blade Tech isn't real world, and especially when combined with fast 3-5 yard shooting, is not realistic. While students can shoot concealed, it isn't likely to happen if students on the line next to them shoot open, as the concealed guys will likely lag on drills. I think all or part of the course should be shot concealed by instructors and students.

5) The Gunsite standard paper target has an appropriate upper A section in the head box, but an eight inch circle in the main part of the target. However, the instructors wanted you to shoot the upper half of the eight inch circle. I would like to see a target that is more along the dimensions John Hearne advocates.

I plan to post additional sections focusing on the simulators and force on force exercises in the course, all of which I enjoyed a lot! I have had several discussions with Mr_White on the force on force, and hope that stimulates some discussion about force on force generally.

[JHC]

The fellow with his Colt 1911 issues, were they reloads?

I'm really anxious to hear details on the simulator work.

[MVS]

I just finished up Gunsite's handgun Advanced Tactical Problems (ATP) class this week, at the Gunsite facility in Paulden, Arizona. There is enough that I want to say about the class, that I may break it up into different posts.

.
.

.

4) Gunsite is philosophically an open carry place, and has been for decades. Instructors and students open carry. However, OWB in a Blade Tech isn't real world, and especially when combined with fast 3-5 yard shooting, is not realistic. While students can shoot concealed, it isn't likely to happen if students on the line next to them shoot open, as the concealed guys will likely lag on drills. I think all or part of the course should be shot concealed by instructors and students.

..

I have shot concealed in many classes were most of the people were open carrying and did not feel disadvantaged, I deo however get and agree with your point.

Thanks for the review. I have been to close to 50 firearms related classes so far, but have yet to make it to Gunsite so I enjoy reading what it is all about.

[Dave Williams]

Looking forward to your updates and the discussion GJM.

[Kyle Reese]

Pics aren't loading.:cool:

[JAD]

I haven't been since '97. I'm glad to hear that it's still a good experience, and there are some great people there.

[GJM]

TD1 started off with a very brief lecture, signing of releases, and off to the square range for some warm-up. Interestingly, in the brief lecture, our instructors (Cory carried a 1911 in .45 and Ron a G19) opined that there were not meaningful differences in the common service pistol calibers, that pistol rounds generally were not all that effective, and to expect to need a number of shots to get the job done. That in itself was a massive departure from the Jeff Coper days when I started attending Gunsite.

Right off, cold, we were put on the 3 yard range, where Cory ran pneumatic turning targets. They turned and disappeared very fast. I believe their exposure was one second, and you were expected to start hands up in a defensive posture, and take a big step "off line" as you drew. I pride myself on having a good draw, and I had to work at making the shot within the time allotted. To respond to a question by MVS, excepting Mr_White, it would have been very difficult to consistently make that shot from concealment. While it would turn out that there was a continuum of shooting ability represented in the class, at 3 yards, it was very hard to discern differences in ability. We know this, and it later was reinforced in force on force, but this was a great reminder that distance is your friend.

Besides stepping off the line, Gunsite is particular about the low ready, and not leaving the low ready until you have positively identified a target and made the decision to shoot. They want you shooting the target to the ground, scanning, and tac loading before holstering. They want eyes on the target not the magazine, even when speed reloading. They teach the overhand method for slide manipulation speed reloading and clearing malfunctions. Using the when in Rome approach, I tried hard to overhand, but I have so many repetitions sling shotting, that I gave up on the overhand, and they stopped bugging me about it. We worked through a series of drills, shooting from 3-25 yards, and finished with the dreaded "pivots and turns."

After a one hour lunch break, it was time for the indoor and outdoor simulators. Gunsite doesn't advocate an individual clearing an indoor structure by themselves, unless there was a real emergency like a family member at risk, but primarily uses the exercise to reinforce tactical principles like how to deal with doors, corners, multiple threat areas, etc. It was challenging entering an unfamiliar structure, with multiple doors and threat areas, and encountering a range of targets depicting bad guys, innocents and LE members. Cory had a technique of opening doors, and aggressively withdrawing to a position of cover, even if it was some distance away. Interestingly, they would locate a low target close to a higher one, and if you didn't get the muzzle depressed to a low ready after shooting the first target, you would miss the low bad guy. Apparently, a number of students missed the low bad guy.

I love outdoor simulators, probably because it feels like hunting. In the outdoor scenario, steel poppers were bad guys, except steel poppers with red on the bottom half were good guys. We were dodging thunderstorms on TD1, and I was happy that the donga, or outdoor simulator, didn't turn into a river. Following Gunsite doctrine, I shot the targets to the ground, and typically drove the steel over with three quick hits to the "head" portion of the popper.

TD1 finished off with some more square range shooting.

TD2, again with thunderstorms threatening, started with about an hour of square range shooting on the turning targets. We were doing failure drills of two to the body and one to the upper A zone, with tight time frames. Next, they brought a vehicle out to the range. After discussing how vehicles interface with bullets, we practiced dismounts, shooting on the move to cover, and taking positions behind the vehicle. Gunsite teaches a method of your left hand driving under the seat belt and hitting the release, your right hand drawing the pistol, with the muzzle traversing the steering wheel, shooting through the window, pushing the door open with one foot, and then exiting with both feet in the ground. This led to shooting on the move, forward and backwards. I have found that a tip I got from Bill Wilson in the Langdon Beretta class is very helpful -- worry less about timing the sights so exactly, and instead focus on a smooth trigger press, while accepting just general sight alignment.

After a one hour lunch break, it was off to two different indoor and outdoor simulators. The rules of the day were you only had your dominant hand in the outdoor simulator, and only your support hand in the indoor simulator. Taking a quick look at the sky and the radar on my phone, I volunteered for the outdoor sim first, figuring I would have a better chance of staying dry inside later. I was first through the outdoor sim, and really enjoyed it. The furthest engagement possible on a popper was 35 yards, and I got it and every other target, one shot/one hit with the Brig Tac. Unlike freestyle, I could only get one, or at most two hits on a plate before it went down, due to the slower one hand shooting cadence. I did one reload, between my knees, Rogers style, and was done. Having been to the Rogers School multiple times was a major stress reliever dealing with the one hand shooting, loading and manipulations.

Next it was off to the indoor sim, just as the rain started to come down hard. I had quite a wait, as it seemed like it took folks forever to get through the indoor sim, support hand only. Like the outdoor sim, I really enjoyed it support hand only, and given we had targets nailed to the wall, shot each bad guy three times through the head, for good measure. Another between the knees reload, part way through. I did notice the weight of the Brig Tac by the end of the exercise, as you were either shooting or at low ready throughout.

We stopped at 330 pm for an early dinner, before the night shoot. At the Mexican joint in Chino Valley, the folks at the next table asked if we were at Gunsite, then proudly announced they had attended class, then showed us rattlesnake photos (an Arizona thing). Said they could pick us out a mile away, although hopefully not me in my t shirt over a JM George! We hit Gunsite just before dark, and started with a briefing by Cory on flashlights, various aspects of night ops, and safety considerations. Except for long guns and teams, Cory is not a big fan of weapon mounted lights, or even tritium sights. His view is that you need a light to search (really two lights, since two is one), and that once the light is on, the tritium sights are superfluous. He favors a neck index, but also moves that light all around to search and illuminate different areas. He most commonly shoots with the light in his support hand, and one hand with the pistol, or a Harries. Once indoors, he favors leaving the light on. Outside, he uses the light, then goes dark and moves. Even though I was shooting a Brig Tac. I decided to use a Glock 17 with a Crimson Trace laser, and an X300 and DG switch to experiment with the technology. I also used a Surefire 6Z as my searching light, with my standard Pro Tac 1L in reserve. I also had a Petzl Tactikka + on my hat. The Tactikka is a 140 lumen on high, variable power headlamp that also has a red light option.

I ran the indoor simulator first. Right away, I realized I had an equipment deficiency, in that I really needed a short lanyard on my Surefire searching light, which would allow me to drop the light and let it dangle while shooting, reloading and doing other tasks with my support hand. What I ended up doing was using the light to search with my support hand, and then transitioning to a Rogers shooting technique. That gave me the 6Z and the X300 for light, but it seemed faster than trying to ditch the 6Z each time I engaged a target. I really didn't notice the green laser inside, as my iron sights (which were HD sights, although I couldn't see color or tritium) stood out so well. (Bill Rogers has commented that for students having trouble using the sights, a night session can often be helpful in getting them to use the sights, as they stand out so much.) The only issue I encountered, was I missed a small gun down low on one target, as it was just hard to see on the flat 2D target.

Next it was off to the outdoor sim. I was happy not to be first, as I figured my classmates would have run off any rattlers that might have been down in the donga. In a perfect world, I would have run the outdoor sim with my -14 on my left eye, leaving my dominant right eye to use white light, but I was traveling light this week. Outside, the green laser was incredible. I quickly figured out that the laser allowed me to shoot on near a dead run, and I think Ron was having to hustle to keep up with me shooting on the move. The laser also made it very easy to drive the targets down with successive shots. If I was a guy on the night shift, I would very much want a laser on my duty gun. After finishing, while waiting with my fellow students, it was wonderful to be out in the pitch dark of the large Gunsite property, watching stars and listening to coyotes. The night shoot ended all too soon, as I would have loved to run a half dozen more sims that night.

Hopefully tomorrow I can knock out TD3, which was the highlight of the course, the force on force sessions.

[orionz06]

Really interested to hear about the FoF.

[BCL]

Sounds like a great course, I can't wait to read about the FOF sessions!

[LSP552]

Great reviews, thanks.

[Clobbersaurus]

Good review, interested to read day three.

[GJM]

TD3

We started with some shooting at 15, 25 and 50 yards on the square range. Ron commented that they frequently observe students having trouble at 25, and especially 50 yards, with HD/Ameriglo style large front sights. I was still shooting my Glock 17 from the night before, as I wanted to use that holster for the simunition pistol. After my classmates left, Cory and I did draws to the steel at 50, followed by support hand only at 50. My 17 and HD sights worked fine.

Then it was off to a series of four force on force drills. Despite having about 800 hours of level D jet simulator time in my log book, I was feeling anxious, as it has been a while since I did force on force drills, and the only time involving a simunition gun was at NTI back at Gunsite eons ago. The lead up only intensified the experience -- safety briefing, remove all weapon like things, pat down, wand with a metal detector and segregation with a watcher to make sure we stayed un-weaponized. It continued when putting on the groin protector, heavy jacket, gloves and head/neck protector. Left over moisture from the prior days' weather gave all of us moisture and fogging in our goggles. We were told that if we successfully solved the problem, shooting might not be necessary, and at anytime if anyone involved said "marshmallow," the scenario was over. We were also given instructions to not intentionally shoot anyone in the face. Good news -- for a while, simunition rounds were unavailable, and they had to use an alternative, name escaping me, that really broke skin. I was also told Gunsite has a no flash bang rule after a SEAL team came through, and flash banged a number of the Gunsite staff role players.

FOF #1:

I was led over to an indoor simulator by Ron, and briefed that I was going in to buy a Powerball ticket in a convenience store in a bad part of town. I approached the counter, and the store clerk, noting a shady looking guy about 110 degrees to my right and behind me. Then I felt a big shove, and a gunman had run in the door from behind me, pointed a gun at the clerk, and announced it was a robbery. I backed to my left towards cover, put my hand on my sim gun, and tried to figure out who was who, what to do, and what my authority to do something was. I was weighing my legal or practical standing to shoot someone that was likely just robbing a store, what my responsibility would be if my intervention caused the clerk to be shot, and what the other guy was up to. I figured I needed to do something, so I drew and told the robber to freeze, and then drop the gun, all the while eye sprinting between the robber and the other guy. The bad guy dropped his gun on the counter. Then he started talking to me, and at the same time went for his gun. I shot him two or three times, but in the process he wracked off two shots, one of which hit at the junction of my groin protector and Safariland holster. As he literally grabbed and hail mary'd the shots, it reinforced the lesson that distance is your friend.

In the debrief, it was clear that I had missed my chance to go out the front door while the robber had his back to me, and that I was the reactor and not the actor. I was also told if I took my eyes off the other guy in the store, he would have joined the fight against me. A fellow student shot the bad guy, and in not promptly depressing his muzzle to a low ready, and scanning, lost eyes on the other guy who promptly shot him. My take away was that a decent plan quickly executed may well beat a phenomenal plan that takes time to formulate and execute.

FOF #2:

Next scenario was to go to lunch at a restaurant. I entered the structure, noted several others inside, and picked a seat with good visibility, minimal six o'clock exposure, and access to two exits. Interestingly, I felt calm. It was almost like one scenario filled in my fear of the unknown and allowed me to then draw on my years of simulator experience in the jet. Flight scenarios are very realistic, with one big exception, and that is a bad outcome in the sim is unlike to lead to death. That difference, in my experience, completely changes the pucker factor. You may be embarrassed, criticized, sweat, and on and on, but you will still be alive afterwards. Perhaps a gamer at heart, I also decided if I was about to be shot, I would yell "popcorn," (marshmallow was the actual surrender word) and see if that diversion would confuse my attacker.

As I was deciding what to have to eat, a scruffy guy barged in the front door of the restaurant, and grabbed someone. I started to try to figure out what was going down, stopped myself, and bolted while I had a chance. Out the door I went, and the scenario was over. No idea who was the good guy, who was the bad guy, what I should do, if at all to intervene, but I called 911 from outside and let them sort it out. Turns out the intruder shot the person inside, but I didn't hear that in their struggle.

FOF #3:

I was to exit the restaurant, get in my car, and drive away. My car was a white mini-van with tinted windows, that blocked my vision into the vehicle. As I approached the driver's door, I decided to check the sliding door to see if it was locked. As it wasn't, I pulled it open quickly, and sure enough a bad guy was crouched back to me with a big knife, ready to ambush the driver. I quickly drew my pistol, muzzle averted, poked my left index finger into his back, which caused him to yell "marshmallow." It was funny that he surrendered to my index finger, but he didn't want to be shot with a bunch of sim rounds at one foot. Turns out my classmates got to figure out what to do with a knife at their throat, from sitting in the driver's seat.

FOF #4:

This scenario was following a hiking trail, which I was looking forward to, as it would be like the donga but with thinking, moving adversaries. I sure was hoping to get to do some shooting, with or without "popcorn." As I went down the trail, two hikers passed me going the opposite direction without a problem. Around a corner, I came upon a guy sprawled on the ground, saying "help me." I stopped about thirty feet away, determined he was breathing, there were no puddles of blood, and stayed back while I called an ambulance. Turns out he had a large knife in his hand, hidden from my view.

I hope these scenarios lead to some discussion about the value of force on force generally, what I did, and how force on force compares to and differs from real life.

Next it was lunch time, and back to a range for an afternoon of challenging steel shooting. I was pretty happy as I was mostly one for one on steel, except on the runs I intentionally tried to burn down, and to which I announced in advance. It was interesting to see how others tried to balance speed and accuracy on difficult steel. On any drill involving difficult steel and transitions, I was significantly faster. However, on drills like a close draw to one large steel, or shooting that didn't involve transitions, the guy with the best grip, reaction to the timer, or maybe that was just lucky, won.

Next it was back to the classroom for closing remarks from Ken Campbell, COO of Gunsite, and then Cory and Ron. While the weather wasn't what I hoped for in October in Arizona, we had a great bunch of students, thoughtful instructors, and a superb facility to train on. Can't wait to get back there!

[GJM]

Fred, no pictures, as I was solo, and our small class size and pace didn't lend itself to taking pictures.

JHC, problems with both 1911 pistols. One had hammer follow, plus I think some stoppages. The other was choking. He was using Wolf ammo for at least part of the time, and I am not sure whether that contributed to his problems. He got really good at type three malfunction clearances. I feel like you really need to believe in the superiority of the 1911, .45 or both, to carry a heavy, low capacity pistol, that requires a higher level of competency to build nod maintain.

MVS, if you get the chance, I strongly recommend Gunsite. Tremendous facility, great folks, and next year is their 40th continuous year of operation. I believe Gunsite is the longest running firearms school in the US. They are also becoming more agnostic about some core doctrine, like the Modern Technique, as they evolve. They have many interesting specialty courses.

[JAD]

GJM, have you been exposed in depth to John Hearne's thinking on removing novelty? Not a setup, just seeing whether we have that for common context in the discussion.

[BCL]

I hope these scenarios lead to some discussion about the value of force on force generally, what I did, and how force on force compares to and differs from real life.

While I haven't done a ton of force on force, what I have done has shown me a couple of things:

1. Being explosive is very helpful, be it explosively moving towards an exit or drawing very quickly while the attacker(s) is distracted can make or break the outcome of the situation. More often than not, it is better to get out of the situation, as you noted with it taking too much time to figure out the nuances. The FoF training I have done wasn't geared towards CCW in the US, so the options available and subsequent ramifications of my actions were slightly different.

2. It showed me the value of having really good SA and the need to come to terms with what I am willing to do, or not do, in a given situation prior to actually being involved. Trying to figure out what to do while the situation is happening means you have already failed.

While FoF is very valuable to simulate real life, one of the pitfalls is gaming the scenario - namely, you (general you, no one specifically) might do things in FoF that you wouldn't do in real life since you don't actually die in FoF (as someone who tries to game everything for an advantage, I try to make sure I don't do this). Keeping that in mind, you can learn quite a bit about what to work on both at the range and with regards to mental preparation and stress innoculation.

With regards to how you did, I think you made the right decisions in scenarios 2-4, and learned a valuable lesson in scenario 1. Namely, that weighing your legal and practical standing to shoot someone while the robbery is in progress is a distraction that you can't afford to have. You did have good SA, by trying to keep eyes on both the guy with the gun and the suspicious looking dude at the other end of the store.

This is why FoF is invaluable training, if done correctly, because it can open your eyes to things you may not have considered before (not saying you haven't considered this stuff). It also shows that awareness is very important and that all of the square range training/practice makes up a very small part in dealing with these types of situations.

The best thing about FoF training, IMO, is the ability to expose ourselves to different situations and make mistakes in training instead of real life.

[GJM]

GJM, have you been exposed in depth to John Hearne's thinking on removing novelty? Not a setup, just seeing whether we have that for common context in the discussion.

Now I know what Sarah Palin felt like, when Charles Gibson asked her about the Bush doctrine.

[JAD]

Now I know what Sarah Palin felt like, when Charles Gibson asked her about the Bush doctrine.

Sarah Palin is pretty and from Alaska. You're from Alaska, so halfway there.

A) I buy what Hearne's selling.
B) it is well worth attending an in-depth lecture. I got eight or ten hours of it and it could have been twenty four.
C) it's awesome context for discussion of FoF.
D) don't sweat it, you're intensely knowledgeable on the subject. The vocabulary would have been convenient.

[GJM]

Sarah Palin is pretty and from Alaska. You're from Alaska, so halfway there.

A) I buy what Hearne's selling.
B) it is well worth attending an in-depth lecture. I got eight or ten hours of it and it could have been twenty four.
C) it's awesome context for discussion of FoF.
D) don't sweat it, you're intensely knowledgeable on the subject. The vocabulary would have been convenient.

Can you post a link -- if not, can you summarize the salient points?

[Dave J]

FWIW, Ballistic Radio had an interview with John Hearne on Aug 16th where he discussed some of this. I would love to hear the lecture.

[Erick Gelhaus]

George - If I'd have known you were coming in I would have stuck around. Am glad you enjoyed the three days. I really like that you noticed and acknowledged the software upgrades going on. Thank you for the quality AAR.

The FoF stuff for decent, normal humans runs differently from those who have an expectation of, or obligation to, getting involved. It has been interesting addressing the Be A Good Witness concept when teaching off-duty stuff.

Ron and I had talked at length the week before about things we were seeing during pre-engagement / assessment sequences.

If the Hearne material being referenced is what he presented at the Rangemaster conference back in February, it would be well worth your time George.

[Erick Gelhaus]

And, there are a whole bunch more plastic framed 9mms in staff holsters there than you'd probably imagine.
:cool:

[JAD]

If the Hearne material being referenced is what he presented at the Rangemaster conference back in February.

Probably, though I haven't been smart enough to attend an RTC yet. He taught an eight hour block that I was lucky enough to get into. I do hope he does it again, I would gladly retake it (and given his research OCD would expect there to be a lot of new material).

[John Hearne]

First, thanks for all the kind comments on my presentation. At least some folks were paying attention :). Oddly, GJM is an acknowledged contributor to the presentation but he's never attended. I'm not sure when I'll be presenting it again, I'll be doing something different at the RM Tactical Conference.

The next likely venue will be at a special 3-Day class that Tom Givens, Jim Higginbotham, and myself will teach in West Point, Kentucky on June 15-17, 2016. The class will be 8 hours of pistol work with Tom, 8 hours of carbine work with Jim, and 8 hours of me talking. It is listed as the "Comprehensive Skills Course" on the Rangemaster website.

[JAD]

The next likely venue will be at a special 3-Day class that Tom Givens, Jim Higginbotham, and myself will teach in West Point, Kentucky on June 15-17, 2016. The class will be 8 hours of pistol work with Tom, 8 hours of carbine work with Jim, and 8 hours of me talking. It is listed as the "Comprehensive Skills Course" on the Rangemaster website.

I have taken that course in that format. Strong recommend.

[Doc_Glock]

Bumping thread because it is good reading. Enjoy Y'all.

I am glad to see Gunsite continue to evolve, even though this was five years ago.