Side bar conversation: Realistic training vs realism

(SIDE CONVERSATION MOVED FROM AMMO SUBFORUM THREAD - MOD)

@feudist

What you're describing is not that uncommon.

I highly doubt your ammo was your variable or even the gun for that matter.

You are describing a "vetting process" with ammo during normal conditions.

Your malfunctions appeared during "Oh SNAP!" moments (being charged by dogs). Watch a bunch of OIS body cam videos and you will frequently see malfunctions that I'm sure the involved officers seldom or never experienced in training. I can tell you from prior experience that your brain/body do weird things under stress and that combined psychological/physiological response commonly causes issues between your biological hand and your mechanical gun.

There is NO WAY to replicate real life lethal force scenarios in training....NONE! Why? Because your body only produces and discharges chemicals during those type of situations. I think the closest thing you can do is some type of SIMS that actually induces pain, but even that isn't quite the same. The only way to get inoculated to stress (combat) is equal stress (combat). Since that is very rare in civilized society chances are you will never reach that point. Even then there are other variables.

The only thing you can do is try to train as best you can. This is why malfunction clearance drills are important and should become mechanical second nature. As for your Gen2 Glock, I wouldn't trust the opinion of a "gunsmith." Back to Glock it would have gone.

For me the ammo choice is easy. I carry Federal HST. My department issues it. It works in everything. We know because we have tested it in damn near everything. I have always individually visually inspected each round of my carry ammo before it goes in the magazine and regularly check rounds that have been chambered for bullet setback, but in a 9mm it is pretty rare. I would have no qualms carrying Remington Golden Saber (I have in the past), Speer Gold-Dot, or any of the other reputable rounds.

Carrying and training with a back-up gun (and the transition to it) is sound practice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KevH

There is NO WAY to replicate real life lethal force scenarios in training....NONE!

Why? Because your body only produces and discharges chemicals during those type of situations. I think the closest thing you can do is some type of SIMS that actually induces pain, but even that isn't quite the same.

The only way to get inoculated to stress (combat) is equal stress (combat). Since that is very rare in civilized society chances are you will never reach that point. Even then there are other variables.

---

So that first sentence was pretty adamant and also pretty much flies in the face of everything we've learned about reality-based training over the last decade or so.

The fear of injury makes properly structured SIM training an emotionally significant event and anchors the proper response in the brain's amygdala (actually amygdalae, there are two). This anchors the response - as I said properly structured reality-based training anchors a proper response.

At the simplest level, think of it this way, after a gunfighter in the old west survived his first gunfight, he was probably less stressed about the second one, and thus performed better. The problem was surviving the first gunfight. Properly structured reality-based training means that officers experience and win that first gunfight without the risk of death.

You are probably getting tired of me saying properly structured, but, it's damn important. Many well-meaning instructors put officers through scenarios that can actually hamper their survival skills by increasing their fear or anxiety because of negative outcomes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KevH

The only thing you can do is try to train as best you can. This is why malfunction clearance drills are important and should become mechanical second nature. As for your Gen2 Glock, I wouldn't trust the opinion of a "gunsmith." Back to Glock it would have gone.

For me the ammo choice is easy. I carry Federal HST. My department issues it. It works in everything. We know because we have tested it in damn near everything. I have always individually visually inspected each round of my carry ammo before it goes in the magazine and regularly check rounds that have been chambered for bullet setback, but in a 9mm it is pretty rare. I would have no qualms carrying Remington Golden Saber (I have in the past), Speer Gold-Dot, or any of the other reputable rounds.

Carrying and training with a back-up gun (and the transition to it) is sound practice.

---

Have you ever heard of plunk testing carry rounds? In addition to visual inspection, field strip your pistol and 'plunk' each duty round into the chamber to make sure they will chamber.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Lehr

So that first sentence was pretty adamant and also pretty much flies in the face of everything we've learned about reality-based training over the last decade or so.

---

Who is the "we" you are referencing? I've been a California POST Firearms Instructor for over a decade and have attended plenty of private training on the matter including training provided by Force Science Institute and others. Nothing about that statement conflicts with any training I have had nor with my personal experience with lethal force or with my experience as a detective assigned to a Major Crimes Unit that investigates officer involved shootings.

SIMS and the like, no matter how well structured and with some risk/pain, cannot truly replicate a real life lethal force encounter. The true "fight or flight" that kicks in knowing...

a) You may die
b) You are likely about to kill another human being
c) Your life may never be the same (arrest, lawsuits, etc.)

...causes your body to dump a huge amount of cortisol, as well as other hormones, into you system that have a number of physiological effects, which include but are not limited to, increased strength, jittering for hours to days, lack of sleep, and an interrupted gastrointestinal tract. That cortisol dump and the changes it causes cannot be replicated. Some trainers have tried by experimentally injecting steroids during training scenarios. It cannot truly replicate real life therefore you cannot inoculate yourself to the stresses of actual combat through training.

I've counseled about a dozen cops about these effects or about how they feel they screwed something up during a lethal force encounter when in fact they did everything right or the best way their body would allow them to function at the time.

The answer is to train as realistically and as best that you can and also train for eventualities such as equipment malfunctions. Having a solid foundation of skills, the ability to function near perfect under normal circumstances and the ability to problem solve in the moment is typically the best that we can get unless we have exposure to the real thing. Prolonged exposure to the real thing causes other issues, but that is another topic.

This all is applicable to the OP who experienced a weapon malfunction during an actual event. What I am saying is that it is fairly common, and likely due to the nature of the event and human response rather than the ammunition he was using.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Lehr

Have you ever heard of plunk testing carry rounds? In addition to visual inspection, field strip your pistol and 'plunk' each duty round into the chamber to make sure they will chamber.

---

I have heard of it and don't find it necessary with quality factory ammo. If you want to get really fancy you can use a gauge for all your ammo, but it isn't necessary. I'm more worried about flipped primers (which I have seen).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KevH

Who is the "we" you are referencing? I've been a California POST Firearms Instructor for over a decade and have attended plenty of private training on the matter including training provided by Force Science Institute and others. Nothing about that statement conflicts with any training I have had nor with my personal experience with lethal force or with my experience as a detective assigned to a Major Crimes Unit that investigates officer involved shootings.

SIMS and the like, no matter how well structured and with some risk/pain, cannot truly replicate a real life lethal force encounter. The true "fight or flight" that kicks in knowing...

a) You may die
b) You are likely about to kill another human being
c) Your life may never be the same (arrest, lawsuits, etc.)

...causes your body to dump a huge amount of cortisol, as well as other hormones, into you system that have a number of physiological effects, which include but are not limited to, increased strength, jittering for hours to days, lack of sleep, and an interrupted gastrointestinal tract. That cortisol dump and the changes it causes cannot be replicated. Some trainers have tried by experimentally injecting steroids during training scenarios. It cannot truly replicate real life therefore you cannot inoculate yourself to the stresses of actual combat through training.

---

Are we talking about inculcating a proper response? Or, the psychological and physiological after effects of the event? There is a difference.

In terms of getting a sub-optimal grip during a use-of-force encounter, your statement below is entirely correct.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KevH

The answer is to train as realistically and as best that you can and also train for eventualities such as equipment malfunctions. Having a solid foundation of skills, the ability to function near perfect under normal circumstances and the ability to problem solve in the moment is typically the best that we can get unless we have exposure to the real thing. Prolonged exposure to the real thing causes other issues, but that is another topic.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Lehr

Are we talking about inculcating a proper response? Or, the psychological and physiological after effects of the event? There is a difference.

---

I'm speaking with regards to what the original poster, @feudist, asked about.

He described a malfunction that did not occur in a controlled setting, but that did occur during an event of somewhat extreme stress.

As humans under extreme stress, we have a physiological response during the event. This effects how we perform during the event and how we cope with it post-event, both psychologically and physiologically. It's been studied extensively by people much smarter than me and I have experienced it multiple times and have seen it over and over again in others.

I've mentioned several times that in my shooting during my internal monologue with myself I said "this is just like the Sims course..." and it was calming. I know I, and many others, have gotten "lost" in the VATS machine and had to be brought back to reality when we moved forward to handcuff what was actually light projected on a screen and not a real bad guy.

I can't say it's the same level of response, but in the heat of the moment it felt pretty similar to me. Just more so.

Aftermath is, of course, nothing alike. After the real shooting everything was boring, nothing held my attention, it took awhile to adjust back to the mundane world and mundane concerns and mundane entertainments. SIMs you just laugh it off, learn something, and do it again.

I spent 33 years in the field of Instructional Systems Design.

I've led development teams involving a wide range of Live/Virtual/Constructive simulations, ranging from immersive battlespace training at Brigade Level Armored/Armored Infantry units involving 1,000+ soldiers in real-time, to complex Submarine Combat Systems to ab initio elementary flying training. Over that period I also worked with ISD experts in conducting Training Needs Analysis to develop Training Performance Standards as well as Terminal (Performance) and Enabling (Supporting) Learning Objectives. One point that's critical is understanding the Target Population, in terms of background of the user set and where they start in the learning contiuum.

Training simulations can have a very very highly developed degree of "realiism". What's key however is to determine how much "realisim" matters. This is obviously constrained by budget and development resources.

A simulation can be "highly realistic" and yet fail spectacularly in training effectiveness. And a simple solution can sometimes be of measurable benefit to the training population. One has to quantify this with data, before and after, and measure with achievement against objective performance standards.

Obviously I'm not anywhere familiar with what happens in a "real" gunfight. On this forum, I'm just some retired dude trying to avoid ending up on YouTube. But this is a pretty interesting topic to me; I'm looking forward to hearing what folks think and, if I can, add something to the discussion. Will be following this thread.

Training with a handgun is very difficult to make realistic. It's very constrained by the downrange hazard from shooting at many angles and positions.

Dry fire can help but most people find it boring.FATS and Sims take a lot of resources and is not available to most people and pretty limited even to LEO.

Shoot houses have the same issues with the added liability/danger of live fire.

This really leaves flat ranges as the default solution. This is even more restrictive on indoor ranges, which according to Werner is where most people are forced to shoot.

Targets are another issue. 99.9 % of shooting is done at paper targets with an abstract shape. Awerbuck made a point about penetration angles on 3d targets vs 1d.

There are 3d balloon targets that can be bought. I fashion my own. Again, only very low repetitions can be obtained due to set up hassles.

Even simple shoot/no shoot training is resource intensive and requires having someone else set your target. Same same malfunction training.

It's really not a mystery where 15-20% hit rates come from.

What to do?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by feudist

Targets are another issue. 99.9 % of shooting is done at paper targets with an abstract shape. Awerbuck made a point about penetration angles on 3d targets vs 1d.

---

Gawd, but I loved Louie. Training under him was a privilege, getting to simply sit and visit with him (and Snake, of course!) was an honor.

He taught me this: If you're a dog owner, save your empty dog food bags.
Cut the open end off evenly, then cut it in half lengthwise and presto, two diy 3D targets.
Bend the frame of a wire coat hanger to support the bag half and poke the hook through the top. Hang it in front of a safe backstop and get to work.

When I had regular access to private property for my range time, I shot up a shit ton of dog food bags. The bags themselves were great targets in that they're usually multicolored with weird patterns and were very useful for helping people learn to shoot center of mass instead of just chasing the damn bullseye.

When I ran bars and nightclubs for a living, I had a nearly unlimited supply of free t-shirts from vendors and with a little effort & tape, you could put a t-shirt over the dog food bag and have a torso & head target.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by feudist

Training with a handgun is very difficult to make realistic. It's very constrained by the downrange hazard from shooting at many angles and positions.

Dry fire can help but most people find it boring.FATS and Sims take a lot of resources and is not available to most people and pretty limited even to LEO.

Shoot houses have the same issues with the added liability/danger of live fire.

This really leaves flat ranges as the default solution. This is even more restrictive on indoor ranges, which according to Werner is where most people are forced to shoot.

Targets are another issue. 99.9 % of shooting is done at paper targets with an abstract shape. Awerbuck made a point about penetration angles on 3d targets vs 1d.

There are 3d balloon targets that can be bought. I fashion my own. Again, only very low repetitions can be obtained due to set up hassles.

Even simple shoot/no shoot training is resource intensive and requires having someone else set your target. Same same malfunction training.

It's really not a mystery where 15-20% hit rates come from.

What to do?

---

I'm lucky to have access to a much better training facility then most and also have private land I can shoot on alone and move around safely. Even with that, I *very* seldom get to shoot a moving target while on the move myself. I don't think I've ever shot a 3D moving target, period. There's definitely limitations and no one thing makes up the totality of a real event.

I can attest that it is possible to design some training scenarios, that in the moment result in more actual stress on the trainee than some actual shootings.

As others have pointed out, the aftermath is quite different.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gun Mutt

Gawd, but I loved Louie. Training under him was a privilege, getting to simply sit and visit with him (and Snake, of course!) was an honor.

He taught me this: If you're a dog owner, save your empty dog food bags.
Cut the open end off evenly, then cut it in half lengthwise and presto, two diy 3D targets.
Bend the frame of a wire coat hanger to support the bag half and poke the hook through the top. Hang it in front of a safe backstop and get to work.

When I had regular access to private property for my range time, I shot up a shit ton of dog food bags. The bags themselves were great targets in that they're usually multicolored with weird patterns and were very useful for helping people learn to shoot center of mass instead of just chasing the damn bullseye.

When I ran bars and nightclubs for a living, I had a nearly unlimited supply of free t-shirts from vendors and with a little effort & tape, you could put a t-shirt over the dog food bag and have a torso & head target.

---

I made myself a 3-d packing tape target (of myself) for airsoft in the yard when I lived in a house where I had enough privacy to set up and shoot scenarios without the neighbors noticing. The main caveat is you need some paper to attach to scoring zones, but the targets themselves last forever and can be repaired with tape.

Attachment 62940

A google search of packing tape sculpture should bring up some how-to’s.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BehindBlueI's

I'm lucky to have access to a much better training facility then most and also have private land I can shoot on alone and move around safely. Even with that, I *very* seldom get to shoot a moving target while on the move myself. I don't think I've ever shot a 3D moving target, period. There's definitely limitations and no one thing makes up the totality of a real event.

---

You can make 3d balloon reaction targets out of boxes. Take a USPSA/IDPA cardboard target and tape to it's back a cardboard box in whatever dimension you want your

stop zone to be:4-6-8-10", Then blow up a balloon and slide it into the box. Tie a string to the knot and hang it up. Take an old long sleeve shirt( dark patterned is best)and stuff the arms with paper

and wrap it around the target(the USPSA target will fill it out nicely).

I stole this idea from the Action Targets from the nineties. But they were very expensive. These will last a couple of sessions easily.

Get a 33 gallon garbage sack and fill it with inflated balloons and have some fun. It's involved but very instructive.

The first time I shot one of these my partner went first. Beep! Bang flop. Huh.

My turn: BEEP! bang...nothing! Bangbangbangbangbang! Panic dump finally drops it. Light goes on in my head. All of my shooting buddies shot it and everyone had

the same reaction. If the target didn't react(and you can't see the bullet's impact on loose cloth-another lesson) the reaction is going cyclic.

Very easily trained out...much better to find out on the range instead of the street.

Note: if you've got a partner then you can string 2 balloons together to make it harder to drop or use different sized balloons and you can do shoot/no shoot scenarios

with simple props.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by feudist

You can make 3d balloon reaction targets out of boxes.

---

I've shot stationary 3D targets. Just never a moving one while also moving.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BehindBlueI's

I've shot stationary 3D targets. Just never a moving one while also moving.

---

You said you have private land. Have you looked into helium balloons and balloons attached to an RC controlled vehicle?

I got the idea from a show featuring a smaller department SWAT team. They used colored balloons and an RC vehicle for their snipers as it was cheaper than other training options/systems.

https://targetsonline.com/index.php?...index&cPath=21

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DMWINCLE

You said you have private land. Have you looked into helium balloons and balloons attached to an RC controlled vehicle?

I got the idea from a show featuring a smaller department SWAT team. They used colored balloons and an RC vehicle for their snipers as it was cheaper than other training options/systems.

---

Hadn't considered it, but it's a neat idea. Maybe a kite, though, helium would get pricey plus I don't want popped balloon debris in my field or trees.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BehindBlueI's

Hadn't considered it, but it's a neat idea. Maybe a kite, though, helium would get pricey plus I don't want popped balloon debris in my field or trees.

---

I never thought of a kite, good idea. If you try it, please let me know how it works out.

IIRC, the SWAT team used the helium balloons for more static "hostage" situation type shots. Don't remember what they used on the RC.

We never used helium, just regular air balloons taped to a thin pole mounted on the RC truck. It was a little messy so definitely a concern, but cleaning up wasn't too bad.

We ran force on force (Sims) evolutions at my old job starting in '95, I can't recall when we started incorporating them at Gunsite. Did FATS, I-CAT in or at our local academy for years. My old org has its own Virtra system. And when I'd gone back to the NG, spent a fair amount of time in the Army's Engagement Skills Training (M4 and rifle squad weapons centric).

While I've seen plenty of Sims stoppages, they appear to be far more mechanically induced by the design and a tremendous need for regular cleaning - than the referenced stoppages in the original thread.

I'm not poo-poo'ing the benefits of these training experiences, I was involved in starting them at my old org or proposing, arguing for their adoption there.

However, i'm curious, why is BWC footage showing stoppages and malfunctions during actual events that we aren't seeing in these training evolutions? Or, are we and it's being chocked up to really lousy equipment?

Following.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BehindBlueI's

I've shot stationary 3D targets. Just never a moving one while also moving.

---

How much time/work are you willing to invest? Do you have someone to help when you shoot?

Easiest answer - two of the tallest t-posts you can get; four t-post clamps; a joint of pvc pipe with two tees; four pieces of thick rebar or steel rod two feet long; four cheap ratcheting motorcycle tie down straps; a 250 foot roll of mason/surveyor twine; a roll of clothesline cable; a couple of cable clamps and a turnbuckle; a piece of lathe - not furring strips; four binder clamps; zip-ties.

Build target holder: pvc cut to width of target, solvent weld t to each end - two stubs of pvc solvent welded down - one hole for zip-tie drilled in each stub - hole drilled for mason twine in each end of t the doesn't have stub; cut lathe strip a little longer than target, drill hole in end for zip tie; xip tie lathe strips to pvc stubs, attach target using four binding clamps.

Place t-posts distance of your run apart. Realistically, with this set-up we are talking 50 to 60 feet max. Drive rebar stakes at a sharp angle (so tie downs don't slip off) approximatel 45 degrees front and rear of each post - get as far out from post as possible within limitations of you straps. Attach tie downs to t-post, use a t-post clamp to limit downward movement, snug tie-downs - don't pull post one way or another.

Attach end of cable to t-post clamp using cable clamps; slide PVC target holder onto cable - at this point the lathe strips should not yet be attached; attach partially extended turnbuckle to end of cable, SLIGHTLY short of reaching post; stretch cable to reach clamping/attachment point on post - extend the turnbuckle if need be; check tie downs on posts, make sure they are snug, using turnbuckle tighten cable, then re-snug tie downs until posts are straight.

Place target holder at one end of cable, attach mason twine to end of holder furthest from post at that end; run twine through closed end of a tie-down hook at far end of cable, then attach the twine to the closest end of target holder; run twine back (up range) ensuring the 'pulling' end of the twine is up range of your furthest shooting location; repeat with other side. In this manner you assure that the your helper is always up range when operating the mover.

Works best with shooter and two pullers, goes without saying you take turns. You could leave everthing but the twine and straps in place if have a remote location, or you own the property.

I've also seen and old garage door opener with extended tracks used as a mover - short run, about 20-25 feet. Maybe visit a garage door installation company to see if they would let you have some old track and chain.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Erick Gelhaus

However, i'm curious, why is BWC footage showing stoppages and malfunctions during actual events that we aren't seeing in these training evolutions? Or, are we and it's being chocked up to really lousy equipment?

---

If you are talking training evolutions with sim gear, we had stoppages galore with our basic students, despite the bores being cleaned after every time they'd been shot.

I think a big difference between competition/range training (as an example) and an actual encounter is that in competition /range training if you get a sub-optimal grip on the pistol you are more concerned about that than a guy shooting at you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Erick Gelhaus

We ran force on force (Sims) evolutions at my old job starting in '95, I can't recall when we started incorporating them at Gunsite. Did FATS, I-CAT in or at our local academy for years. My old org has its own Virtra system. And when I'd gone back to the NG, spent a fair amount of time in the Army's Engagement Skills Training (M4 and rifle squad weapons centric).

While I've seen plenty of Sims stoppages, they appear to be far more mechanically induced by the design and a tremendous need for regular cleaning - than the referenced stoppages in the original thread.

I'm not poo-poo'ing the benefits of these training experiences, I was involved in starting them at my old org or proposing, arguing for their adoption there.

However, i'm curious, why is BWC footage showing stoppages and malfunctions during actual events that we aren't seeing in these training evolutions? Or, are we and it's being chocked up to really lousy equipment?

---

That's kind of the known unknown isn't it?

We had several malfs in OIS over the years but no one had the wit or interest to investigate.

I think(guess) that they're operator induced by some body alarm reaction factor not seen in training.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lester Polfus

I can attest that it is possible to design some training scenarios, that in the moment result in more actual stress on the trainee than some actual shootings.

---

I can't footstomp this hard enough, because it's so so true and it's so misunderstood. For ages we've had this completely incorrect idea in the "firearms community" that the stress of a gunfight was somehow different than the stress of any other life or death situation, or in fact basically any stressful situation. I have a friend who is deathly afraid of public speaking, and her list of symptoms before any public speaking were exactly the same as KevH described as being unique to combat.

What we have learned over the years from actual science is that your body has one stress response, and that's to dump the aforementioned "oh shit hormones" into your system. What does vary is how much of a hormone dump your brain does, and that's controlled by your familiarity with that stressful situation. That's why you're super nervous for your first blind date, but after 4 months on Tinder it barely raises your blood pressure. Your brain goes "this is familiar, I can deal with it."

This is why scenario based training (when done well) has proven to be effective at helping people manage stress in life or death situations. It's also tangentially why competition shooting can be an effective stress training trick for people who may not have access to FATS, MILO, or quality force on force training. The brain doesn't like the stress of losing a match, and associates "stressed out while holding a gun in my hand," helping build coping mechanisms for if you need to use a gun in a different kind of stressful situation.

As a last aside, this is also why I roll my eyes when tactibros have people run 50m sprints or do pushups to "induce stress." Physical strain and psychological stress aren't the same thing, my dude. But enjoy flipping sandbags or whatever.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Lehr

If you are talking training evolutions with sim gear, we had stoppages galore with our basic students, despite the bores being cleaned after every time they'd been shot.

I think a big difference between competition (as an example) and an actual encounter is that in competition if you get a sub-optimal grip on the pistol you are more concerned about that than a guy shooting at you.

---

Dan, I specifically asked about stoppages in actual events - officer involved shootings - that have been captured on BWC footage versus force-on-force scenarios and why we aren't seeing the real world event stoppages occuring there.

Am not saying competition isn't beneficial, but it's not relevant to the question I asked.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Erick Gelhaus

I specifically asked about stoppages in actual events - officer involved shootings - that have been captured on BWC footage versus force-on-force scenarios and why we aren't seeing the real world event stoppages occuring there.

---

If you look at the big 3 FBI studies on officer murders/assualts, they note that the incidents they studied had weapon malfunctions at a much higher rate than the flat range would predict. I heard the same thing from the folks who ran the NTI - guns puked a lot more when shot under duress. Another friend ran shoothouse exercises for various agencies from the state they were based in. He reported lots more malfunctions than the flat range would predict.

My guess is shitty grips on polymer frame pistols being pulled from high retention holsters as the main reason. The secondary reason is firing from awkward positions that don't allow the shooter's whole mass to be behind the gun. Again, think polymer framed pistols without any reinforcement. There's probably a reason that the product improved Glocks (M&Ps and P320s) used a metal structure to minimize frame flex.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jetfire

I can't footstomp this hard enough, because it's so so true and it's so misunderstood. For ages we've had this completely incorrect idea in the "firearms community" that the stress of a gunfight was somehow different than the stress of any other life or death situation, or in fact basically any stressful situation. I have a friend who is deathly afraid of public speaking, and her list of symptoms before any public speaking were exactly the same as KevH described as being unique to combat.

What we have learned over the years from actual science is that your body has one stress response, and that's to dump the aforementioned "oh shit hormones" into your system. What does vary is how much of a hormone dump your brain does, and that's controlled by your familiarity with that stressful situation. That's why you're super nervous for your first blind date, but after 4 months on Tinder it barely raises your blood pressure. Your brain goes "this is familiar, I can deal with it."

This is why scenario based training (when done well) has proven to be effective at helping people manage stress in life or death situations. It's also tangentially why competition shooting can be an effective stress training trick for people who may not have access to FATS, MILO, or quality force on force training. The brain doesn't like the stress of losing a match, and associates "stressed out while holding a gun in my hand," helping build coping mechanisms for if you need to use a gun in a different kind of stressful situation.

As a last aside, this is also why I roll my eyes when tactibros have people run 50m sprints or do pushups to "induce stress." Physical strain and psychological stress aren't the same thing, my dude. But enjoy flipping sandbags or whatever.

---

Dis here.

The first several months I had in BJJ were basically me hyperventilating and feeling a huge dump of adrenaline that basically ruined my energy levels long before it came time to roll.

I'd drive to class in my car with a resting HR of 140. It was basically pure stress/fear response. By the time rolling came around, I was tired. Exhausted actually. As the parasympathetic nervous system took over I realized that fear defeated me long before I had locked up with someone.

I've found BJJ gives me a taste of that stress response, because at some level, I know what's at stake if I lose.

Not actually.

Like I don't logically fear that my partner will break my limbs or strangle me to death.

At least, not a skilled partner.

If you get a relatively new partner, they'll crank the volume all the way to 11 when they get a submission locked in, and that's why rolling with white belts is the best way to train self defense. There is much less control of the impulse to destroy you. Because the fear is affecting them as well. Amplifying aggression and deadening thoughtful consideration of your health.

Again though, logically, even in a BJJ tournament, you have no reason to fear death. There are referees, medical personnel, coaches to stop you from being killed or maimed.

But beneath that logic is the fear all the same.

It's probably not the same as combat. I wouldn't not know personally. I've never had to fight for my life. But I've definitely been worried about grievous injury more than a few times.

Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Erick Gelhaus

Dan, I specifically asked about stoppages in actual events - officer involved shootings - that have been captured on BWC footage versus force-on-force scenarios and why we aren't seeing the real world event stoppages occuring there.

Am not saying competition isn't beneficial, but it's not relevant to the question I asked.

---

Sorry I was off course.

I think that one of the things we have to understand in order to make an informed hypothesis is the context of the events we are talking about. Are these officers who have been caught by surprise and, therefore, coming from behind? Or, are these officers who have already prepared with the appropriate force (firearm in this case)?

One thing that I think is dramatically different between simulations and real-life is the point at which the officer becomes immersed in the event.

As an example, regardless of how well your scenario is designed, the participant stopping a vehicle while wearing sim gear has an inkling something is going to happen, therefore their preparation has already begun. My experience, during both f-on-f and 'FATS' scenarios is that once the scenario starts it quickly becomes the officers reality, but the officer was somewhat prepared.

In the case of an officer making his third traffic stop of the day, the situation can be different. He may have been completely caught off-guard, and as I said, coming from behind.

Additionally, what is the skill level of the officer? Is he attempting a .7 draw when he has only 1.2 skills? Had these officers been involved in f-on-f training that was a close replication of what they were experiencing?

A lot of unknowns. If I had to name the malfunctions you are talking about, I would choose something like 'situational tolerance stacking malfunctions.'

Regarding malfunctions with Simunitions weapons - probably 90% of my experience with Simunitions was with student officers - around 250 to 300 a year - and we saw numerous FTEject and FTExtract malfunctions, even with freshly cleaned weapons with those student officers, not so much with in-service officers in my experience.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jetfire

I can't footstomp this hard enough, because it's so so true and it's so misunderstood. For ages we've had this completely incorrect idea in the "firearms community" that the stress of a gunfight was somehow different than the stress of any other life or death situation, or in fact basically any stressful situation. I have a friend who is deathly afraid of public speaking, and her list of symptoms before any public speaking were exactly the same as KevH described as being unique to combat.

What we have learned over the years from actual science is that your body has one stress response, and that's to dump the aforementioned "oh shit hormones" into your system. What does vary is how much of a hormone dump your brain does, and that's controlled by your familiarity with that stressful situation. That's why you're super nervous for your first blind date, but after 4 months on Tinder it barely raises your blood pressure. Your brain goes "this is familiar, I can deal with it."

This is why scenario based training (when done well) has proven to be effective at helping people manage stress in life or death situations. It's also tangentially why competition shooting can be an effective stress training trick for people who may not have access to FATS, MILO, or quality force on force training. The brain doesn't like the stress of losing a match, and associates "stressed out while holding a gun in my hand," helping build coping mechanisms for if you need to use a gun in a different kind of stressful situation.

As a last aside, this is also why I roll my eyes when tactibros have people run 50m sprints or do pushups to "induce stress." Physical strain and psychological stress aren't the same thing, my dude. But enjoy flipping sandbags or whatever.

---

Agreed. I would argue though that difference between fear-induced physiological response varies dependent upon event.

The subconscious or conscious fear of death and consequence induced from combat, a car crash, violent sexual assault, or say the events of 9/11, are going to differ based on the magnitude versus other severely stress inducing events. It may be a similar physiological response in terms of symptoms, but the severity of the symptoms may differ greatly...dependent upon the individual and any number of variables.

SIMS, FATS, Virtra 360, and any of the other force-on-force training tools are great for giving you "a little taste" of that type of stress, but they fall very very short of the real thing no matter how detailed and sever you try to make them. They are useful for teaching "fighting through it" or and "problem solving." I think there is a misconception that they somehow inoculate you to the physiological response and stresses that occur during an actual critical incident. They are great tools, but they are no substitute for properly mentally preparing your people or helping them unwind post event. Over reliance on them as a "cure-all" is a fallacy by trainers and police admin with regards to post-event debrief and analysis.

One typically doesn't relive SIMS or Virtra in the subconscious expressed through dreams and random thoughts. The real thing has that effect because they are vastly different. Combat varies too. I have a close friend at my department who was a Marine in Iraq in 2003-2006 in combat. He then was involved in an OIS at our agency. He describes the stress and after-effects of the OIS as being vastly different from what he experienced overseas.

Before I became a cop I had lots of "training" (including late-90's Simmunitions) with much of it focused on at the time was called "combat marksmanship." I had also been in a severe roll-over car accident where I was nearly killed when I was a teenager.

When I was a newbie cop I was on a call where a cop about thirty feet from me was getting shot at (thankfully only his patrol car was hit) on a court in a densely populated not-so-nice area. It was about 3 am, I could see the muzzle flashes, but none of us felt we had the ability to shoot at the guy (and honestly it happened extremely fast and the guy ran away before we could really start processing a response).

The physiological response my body felt was akin to the car accident, but somewhat magnified. About ten years later, after experiencing a number of much more severe incidents at work (typically involving guns or cars), I again was on a call where cops near me (but not me) were being shot at. The situation was quite similar to the first one described only this time my own physiological response was quite different with the "oh snap" feelings being much less severe and me feeling much more in control. After debriefing with people smarter than me, this is inoculation (very similar to jetfire's Tinder example). Sometimes it helps our performance and sometimes it causes us other problems (PTSD, TBI, etc.).

Maybe what I wasn't articulating well enough earlier is that this physiological response we experience in these true life-or-death "OH SNAP!" moments often causes performance issues which frequently manifest themselves in weapons malfunctions. You can have all the range training in the world and have shot all the SIMS and been through all the simulators imaginable and you will still experience them. This is why ingraining weapons clearance and transitions drills to the point where they are mindlessly automatic is so important...much more so than fooling yourself into thinking that simulated exercises equal the real thing. You must accept the fact you likely won't have the perfect grip, you will short stroke your shotgun, you will induce a malfunction, and nothing will go your way. Training for everything to go wrong and being pleasantly surprised when it doesn't is much better and sounder than the reverse.

Don't create overconfidence by having your guys master a simulator like they would a video game. If simulators worked to inoculate you to real life physiological response we could all ride a gnarly roller-coaster a dozen times and that would inoculate us to a severe car crash, right? We all realize that doesn't work. Why? They both give us a degree of an "oh snap" feeling. The difference is the severity of the physiological response they induce. This variance is tied to how our minds process the fact that one is real and has real consequences and one does not.

...and I'm not by any means saying that SIMS, FATS, Virtra and other scenario-based training isn't important. It's absolutely vital, especially at developing critical decision-making, threat recognition, and building other tactical skills.

What I am saying is that I've heard too often that it's the instant answer by the training community and police management to fix all problems. Including equipment malfunctions during a critical incident.

You can't treat the disease if you don't recognize the symptom and prescribe the right medication.

Quote:

---

I heard the same thing from the folks who ran the NTI - guns puked a lot more when shot under duress.

---

Just anecdotally for the stress discussion, IIRC at the NTI, I was told that they had one guy after his shoothouse run, turn blue from not breathing. Another was so stressed and 'into it', that they had to gently disarm him as he couldn't come down.

My reliable Glock 19 puked out at Given's. Bad mag? Changed mag - still screwed. Was it me? Transitioned to a pocket G26 for a total CF performance.

I'm reading

Policing the Second Amendment: Guns, Law Enforcement, and the Politics of Race
Jennifer Carlson

Standoff: Race, Policing, and a Deadly Assault That Gripped a Nation
Thompson, Jamie

They mention the common officer dream of malfunctioning guns. This is a pretty standard anxiety dream. I used and still get an academic failure dream of not getting tenure, losing my position, etc. The dream is in your major life paradigm and how that fails.

They mention that so many officers had the dream of guns not working, esp. after the rampages like in Florida or Dallas.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Glenn E. Meyer

This is a pretty standard anxiety dream.

---

What if officers don't have such dreams? Do you think they having those thoughts at a subconscious level?

Here’s a few OIS videos with malfunctions, for reference:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zG1z...ature=emb_logo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cG29d5vrXxs&feature=emb_logo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aXpYqjKd8cE&feature=emb_logo&bpctr=1605061 213

On a couple of those do you think it was a compromised shooting grip with the support hand not offering much help in controlling the pistol?

What was the outcome of the Miami-Dade incident, do you know?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Glenn E. Meyer

They mention the common officer dream of malfunctioning guns. This is a pretty standard anxiety dream. I used and still get an academic failure dream of not getting tenure, losing my position, etc. The dream is in your major life paradigm and how that fails.

They mention that so many officers had the dream of guns not working, esp. after the rampages like in Florida or Dallas.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Lehr

What if officers don't have such dreams? Do you think they having those thoughts at a subconscious level?

---

I've mentioned it before, but it bares repeating. I used to have that dream all the time from when I started working for DynCorp. Gun wouldn't work, bullets just ooze out of the barrel, no affect on target. I was told that to "cure" the dream, as soon as it wakes you up immediately replay the dream in your head but this time everything works as it should. You pull the trigger, the guy falls, you win. I don't have that dream any longer, and haven't for years. Or if I do it doesn't wake me up and I don't remember it.

The funny thing is I almost never have cop dreams. I figured I'd have some dreams about it after my shooting, but I never did. I suspect partly because I avoided anything that would humanize him. I never learned his name, for example. What I do have is Army dreams, and I never did anything of interest in the Army and have been out for two decades. But I'll dream I'm somehow back in the service doing things that are still of no interest and wondering WTF I'm back in the Army.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Glenn E. Meyer

They mention the common officer dream of malfunctioning guns. This is a pretty standard anxiety dream. I used and still get an academic failure dream of not getting tenure, losing my position, etc. The dream is in your major life paradigm and how that fails.

They mention that so many officers had the dream of guns not working, esp. after the rampages like in Florida or Dallas.

---

I've never had the gun dream. I typically don't remember my dreams much past waking...except for one. I was one of the first cars on scene to a "mass casualty" drunk driver crash. The drunk was driving a car full of kids (all of whom were injured) and hit a family head on. The mom was instantly decapitated, the dad broken all over (but lived) and the 18 month old in the backseat was deceased in her carseat. Me and a couple other cops performed CPR on that little girl for what felt like an eternity, but to no avail. I later had the pleasure of giving testimony at the drunk driver's murder trial (he is an illegal alien with prior drunk driving convictions...yay California).

I tried to help that poor little girl in real life one time. I've tried helping her my dreams about 100+ over the years. I've come to accept I'll probably have it until the day I leave this earth.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TC215

Here’s a few OIS videos with malfunctions, for reference:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zG1zeqpAbR4&feature=emb_logo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cG29d5vrXxs&feature=emb_logo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aXpYqjKd8cE&feature=emb_logo&bpctr=1605061 213

---

Maybe one of our well known members could reach out to John Correia of Active Self Protection. With all the videos he's viewed he probably has the best info on

the subject.

So just a couple observations from one of my projects. I was the lead I&T engineer for this system in the UK:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combin...ctical_Trainer

UK CATT was leveraged from the US Army CATT system. It is based on the IEEE 488 DIS protocol. You basically have a "box" with crew, representing a variety of "actual" Army vehicles; tanks, APCs, etc. We also had "generic" simulators which you could role-assign on the fly that didn't need high physical fidelity, such as AVLBs, Apache helos, etc. Plus virtual units which would also move around the battlefield. We used standard .gov databases like Fort Irwin, the UK, and Germany.

You could also "guise" or represent yourself as OPFOR, which made things interesting for force on force training. You might be driving a CR2 inside, but you'd "appear" as a T80 to the other team. Or a BMP if you were in a Warrior APC.

Our system was centered around Bde/Battlegroup level. We had simulations of Challenger 2 MBTs, Warrior IFVs, dismounted infantry, engineers, etc. all in a very large simulator hall (about the size of a football field). One was in Warminster UK on Salisbury Plain, and one was in Sennelager Germany at the British Army barracks near Paderborn. Both were connected via a WAN. We had upwards of 400-500 soldiers training simultaneously/concurrently at each site.

Each "box" was internally a static representation of the actual vehicle. So the CR2 was pretty much like the inside of the tank.

Everything we specced was driven by the Training Needs Analysis (TNA).

It had suggested that training for the loader position was better assigned to a Part Task Trainer, so we had a Driver, a Gunner, and a Commander. The "Loader" was represented by an audio cue of crash/bang of the breech closing and a loader screaming LOADED!!!! (I forgot who that guy was we recorded, but he's famous lol).

You would generally engage with the hatches shut; we provided all the vision blocks with an E&S visual system and a realistic audio/auditory simulation of gunfire, rounds impacting etc. The "box" didn't move per se. We had a seat shaker for the driver, but the turret basket did not swing aound (we did provide the sound of the electric drive). The gun sights were very true to actual.

I mention this because you would think perhaps the lack of physical realism, in terms of vibratory or motion, or physical interior, would negatively affect the training. That was not the case.

During work ups, with real troops serving as test cases, listening to the digital radio traffic as they fought, it was pretty clear they were taking it very seriously; it was literally life or death for them. They'd come out of the box after a four hour engagement literally drenched with sweat, and completely spent.

After we were declared in service, I remember the Commanding General of 1 UK Armd Div come by to talk to all of us and thank us for the job. I was very proud my system worked so well, and that the guys train with it, screw up and get yelled at in the box, but not on the battlefield, where they could get killed.

This is an example of what I mean when I say you have to pick the right set of things to focus on in designing the instructional media at the point where you do the TNA. Not "everything" needs to be as realistic as possible to achieve the training.


*Amusing follow up anecdote.

We noticed that we were going through replacement gun sight brow-pads at a higher than predicted LSA rate. Our stocks were getting low. We conducted an investigation, and all of the take-off pads had bite marks and chunks missing.

Bite...marks?! WTF??

Turns out we'd had a unit of Royal Scots Dragoon Guards through the sim bays. Apparently one of the crew's pastimes to occupy themselves on the phase lines before advancing is...to chew on the browpads. I am not making this up.

This was not in the TNA. :cool: