The John Murphy Podcast with Lee Weems has a well rounded view of various hard and soft skills practice. It's in the subforum, easy to find.
The John Murphy Podcast with Lee Weems has a well rounded view of various hard and soft skills practice. It's in the subforum, easy to find.
Haven't listened to the podcast yet, but I've listened to similar ones involving other Tier 1 shooters who use practical shooting training methodology, and have trained with some of them. Had some minor success in BEGINNING to get my instructor staff to understand that practical shooting training methodology was the better way....but there was a great deal of resistance and sabotage as well. As others have said, it's very hard on some egos to learn that the red hat doesn't mean shit, and that overweight plumber and the Filipino grandma who shoot on the weekends can wipe the range floor with you.
In my opinion, it's beyond question that practical shooting training methodology is superior to traditionally used formats for, for example, law enforcement firearms training. That doesn't NOT mean that you train cops the exact same way a competitive shooter would train. There are legal and policy issues, and the reality of the 360° range to deal with. There needs to be more emphasis on certain things (use of cover) not relevant to practical shooting. But if you are not adapting the way that competive shooters develop the hard skills of weapon manipulation and accuracy at speed, you are missing out.
There are still limitations. In reality you have maybe 80 hrs to impart some level of skill to trainees in the Academy, and in most places zero maintenance training is conducted. Everything falls to the individual officer, who may or may not have any interest in the subject. I listened to Stoeger, Pranka and Pannone discuss this exact topic, and would've loved to hear how they would structure an 80 hr program (of which realistically only 50 hrs is handgun). That's something that has gone unaddressed by most trainers advocating for the change. It's a real challenge. By the way....I know that a properly structured Dry Fire training regimen is a HUGE part of the answer here. What to do when when the command staff bans dry fire practice because a previous instructor told a female officer to 'dry fire with a dime on her front sight. That's all you need'....and she promptly shot the mirror in the locker room?
Last edited by AMC; 02-01-2023 at 01:51 PM.
@AMC
Airsoft and SIRT for “dry training” an option instead?
We were looking into those ideas when I retired. The whole program has collapsed at this point. Range staff are being redeployed to patrol along with investigations personnel, traffic enforcement, etc in a desperate attempt to make up the shortfall. Isn't working. All a moot point now....there aren't sufficient personnel to run quals regularly anymore, and no one is applying for the job. Last written test 3 weeks ago had 7 people sign up. It's circling the drain.Originally Posted by JCN
Nope, I've got nothing to add to what you, ssb and others have said here.
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts, And men have lost their reason.
That is a significant question. I asked a related about the differences in processor speed (and other things) that are sought, screened for in various assessment & selection events and how different those decimal point % of people are from the decent, normal human concealed carry and L/E hiring pools. I haven't been able to get back through Pressburg's Q&A to hear his answer.
I grabbed the posted interview, will try listening to it tonight.
I started running some numbers on this question a few months ago and hit delete rather than post because I couldn’t really form a complete thought or come to any conclusions. So, I’ll just throw out some raw raw numbers here that maybe other forum members could run with re/split times and target reaction times.
I began by using an online calculator to see how long it took an object to simply fall a height of both 6 iinches and 1 foot, replicating a Nervous system strike. I got .173 sec for an object to fall 6” and .249 sec for an object to free fall 1 foot.
I used an online velocity calculator to find that a bullet at 1150 FPS takes .0182 seconds to travel 7 yards.
Adding those numbers up we have a total time of 0.1912 for a target hit at 7 yards to fall vertically 6 inches and .267 seconds for a vertical movement of 1 foot.
And this is where my train of though got stuck on the tracks.
I faced a great deal of pushback (and eventually sabotage) from some quarters of my own staff when we began pushing this. There was a great deal of "They won't be able to do this!", followed by my response of "Yes, they will. I'll show you." Emphasizing grip and trigger speed/control, emphasizing holster skills, really getting into the "see what you need to see" thing by examining the visual component, and just pushing trainees and cops to go faster. Instructors and students alike were surprised when it worked. But we're really talking incremental change over time. And the amount of resistance from some so called 'instructors' that I got to actually implementing in service training in conjunction with the twice a year qualification was disgusting. Most of the guys got it (even if in reality they would rather go back inside and play 'Call of Duty'), but a couple engaged in real sabotage.....going through backchannels to command staff personnel and claiming that I was crazy, and was instituting totally unrealistic standards, and was going to try to punish members for failing to meet them. Really eye opening regarding the lengths some people will go to avoid doing their jobs.
Regarding 'processor speed', we literally quadrupled the amount of discrimination based exercises we used with the recruits, and reintroduced it for Perishable Skills training. I really think conducting those types of exercises while maintaining tight time standards is a good way to build processor speed.
I think the split time / reaction time threads miss the point.
Basically there should rarely, rarely, rarely be a time where you’d want to split sub 20 in a defensive situation.
Just like you’d rarely, rarely, rarely be required to have a sub-second draw.
That’s not the point of training to a high standard. By having the skills to do it faster, doing single shots with narrower windows is cake compared to the person who can’t index and recoil control worth a shit.
Basically you’d only split fast if someone was almost on top of you with a knife or if you reasonably expected someone had protective armor and a long gun pointed at you.
Being able to see and hit fast and accurately gives you more command when you have more vision and time.
Me splitting at a 0.35 cadence will be a much different level of precision and accuracy than someone who can barely do that on a good day at max speed.
Trainers who don’t understand the role and benefit of true hit factor learning are behind the times and will get evolved away like iron sights.
@AMC you were / are ahead of your time. Shame they didn’t listen to you. In 10 years it’ll be very clear how right you were.
Reply With Quote