"Don't Outrun Your Headlights"

[blues]

I'm going to see if Mrs. CF will run around and let me shoot her with airsoft

I can see it now...Phoebe Snow comes out of retirement...

"Killing me softly with airsoft,
Ending my life with pellets,
Killing me softly...with airsoft"

[Glenn E. Meyer]

EX MS. CF visits her attorney.

Anyway, the idea of realistic simulation is to give folks stress innoculation to enable them not to fall into panic immobility and builds quick perceptual appreciation of the situation. Perception is a constructive act of the actual stimulus interacting with your analysis routines and expectations. These latter are built through experience. These then connect to the cognitive decision routes and motor action patterns. For example, I've read that experienced fire chiefs can look at a fire and immediately appreciate the situation, paths of fire, routes of action, etc. that need to be executed. That sort of thing is in the literature for the critical simulation folks - fire, trains, ships, planes, power plants, law, military, etc.

You don't want to waste cognitive resources on the basics. Those are automatic and launched from your analysis of the problem.

[revchuck38]

I'm going to see if Mrs. CF will run around and let me shoot her with airsoft

I hope you have a comfy couch.

[feudist]

I'm going to see if Mrs. CF will run around and let me shoot her with airsoft

"Divorce attorneys Love this one weird trick!

[RoyGBiv]

I'm going to see if Mrs. CF will run around and let me shoot her with airsoft

My son and his friends definitely would, but would require reciprocity.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Airsoft can hurt you know, close up. Been there. Have to have layers. Welts on a wife, it's a remake of Lysistrata.

Also, who gets to pick up the pellets from all over? Use a SIRT with laser goggles.

[Odin Bravo One]

I'm going to see if Mrs. CF will run around and let me shoot her with airsoft

Not the route I’d go for a first choice, but let us know how that works out for you?

Training that isn’t realistic, relevant, and based on recent historical events/trends is not training. I don’t know what you call it. Doesn’t really matter. Fact is, it is not training. Most firearms “training” these days isn’t training so much as it is instruction.

With the introduction of inexpensive green gas AirSoft replicas that work with gear for its firearm counterpart, Force on Force & scenario based training don’t have to wait for a formal block of instruction. For $50, you have a reusable training tool that allows realistic FoF engagements with minimal risk to persons or property. Anywhere becomes your dojo, Range, rolling mat, whatever.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

One thing about FOF, most professional FOF is tightly scripted and refereed. If it's just a bunch of folks, it just becomes a shoot'em up fun fest. Most scenarios have a point and the trainers/opponent role players are instructed how to act towards the trainees to teach them something. There's usually more to the scenario then just a draw and hits. Should you draw, should you go there, what to do after the shot, etc.?

Also have to leave your ego at the door as you will do something stupid and get killed on DA STREEZ. That usually doesn't happen in a match.* Nor does the law show up and you have to deal with them. It can get real as folks have had stress reactions. A fellow psychologist had to be told to breathe as he was turning blue after a scenario. Another fellow had to be disarmed (sim gun) gently as he was flashing back to something, had to be talked down. Need a good after action summary and evaluation.

One NTI rule was NO WHINING.

* Guy robs jewelry store. I must save the diamonds. Oh - dear, nice blonde lady in the corner is the secret backup and shoots me three times in the back close up! OUCH! I whirl and shoot her. AAR debate on whether I was dead and couldn't whirl or I had enough time in me to do that. Who knows. Next time, take the diamonds.

PS - nice blonde lady decided to shoot me three times as revenge for another run where I was in an office in a bank negotiating a loan. She runs in with an evil spouse after her. I vault the table and out the door. I suppose she dies. She said, I didn't save her so Bang, bang, bang later. We laugh. My fleeing was efficient for me, though. I've noticed in similar FOF, about half the participants don't save the female. Some do, get entangled shot - some were shot by arriving police (who were scripted to do that - they rush in when good guy shoots and shoot him).

Funny, I'm hijacking a car (being a bad guy). What do the drivers and passengers? This is the fun part. There is a car in front of the target car. Now it should just drive away. However, the driver of that car sticks his head out the window to see what is happening. I sez: Oh, hello! Then I shoot him.

None of this is new to folks who have done good FOF.

[Odin Bravo One]

That’s why you choose who you train with versus enrolling in someone else’s course……

Got a douche canoe that doesn’t want to play by the rules to keep it effective training? Boot his ass out.

Not a luxury as a student in a FoF class.

[Erick Gelhaus]

The Mozambique has a return to the guard after the two center body shots prior to transitioning to the head.

The Failure Drill was an LAPD adaptation of the Mozambique. It removed the return to the guard in favor of a direct transition to the head along with a two part assessment: 1- Is the head still there? 2- Is this person still a deadly force threat?

The above came directly from one of the two LAPD guys responsible for it.

If one is shooting two to the chest and then making the transition and head shot as fast as possible without the assessment, one is simply shooting two to the chest and one to the head and not a Failure Drill.

Thank you! Words do have meaning. One of my 1275 pet peeves is when people give old things new names or screw up the names intentionally for their own reasons.

The problem I have with the assessment on Mozambique is the head is stationary, and I am not sure how you assess on a flat target that doesn't move.

Would working split target arrays be beneficial for this - in your mind? The distances at which shooters think they can, or can't, pull this off is of interest. Does a moving shooter and split target array make it a wee bit more realistic? Relevant?

Especially when you "air gun" the distance between the chest and head to preload how much movement the gun needs...

Ah, yeah, would more Cold or at least Cool stages help with this? If no walk throughs or only the stage brief was allowed, would it give "us" better perspectives?

... Being a super fan of the level of firearms skill that special forces have trained to, the amount of skill they have that allows them to engage heads preferentially (at least per the delta memoirs) while moving and hostages nearby without misses is incredible. I think something to strive for from a technical shooting standpoint.

... Certain units start and end with heads if available as I understand it. But there’s a price to pay in skill investment.

-AND-

I try and keep and eye of xrayalpha's stuff. And I may miss something in the abbreviated and cryptic IG commentary but I get the impression he is a proponent of shooting in combat far faster than what is often termed assessment speed. In fact I've seen him explicitly mock assessment speed in IG posts.

Below Ben's notes xrayalpha makes a comment about how fast gunfights are.
...

Reference the current or former Tiered shooters, do enough people take the time to process just how different they are from us? I'm not even talking the number of rounds they've gotten to fire. Consider the number of selection processes most of them go through over a career. If the 0.45% of the population served during the GWOT number is right and these guys/gals are a fraction of the best 1% of the mil, where is everyone else "processor speed" wise? There are times I'm pretty sure they aren't really aware of just how different, exceptional they are in comparison to even the other 99.55%.

Yes, gunfights are all of the things that were in that paragraph. And they also vary in terms of circumstances and who's accompanying you. may or may not be changes as a result there as well.

But, hey, I could be completely wrong.