Window/barrier stand-off

[deadlyfire]

Mr. Falla,

Why is it commonly taught in both a tactical and sporting environment to throw your barrels over windows?
I'm not trying to rebuke any mindset on the matter or discredit anyone's experience. I was instructed to create a stand-off, especially when shooting from a window.
It was my understanding there were many dangers that come with being so close to your firing point to include exposing your position, offering your barrel to whatever dismounted elements are around your building, secondary effects from small arms impacts and explosions and increasing the chance of enfilading fire.

I have treated personnel for injuries due to secondary effects in the past.

[Wake27]

Mod Edit.

This thread is clearly posted as a stickied thread at the top of each Ask the SME section: http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=94831

4. This forum is not titled "Ask the M4C member."

This is clearly spelled out, has been from the start, and is not tolerated, regardless of whatever rationalization one conjures to justify it.

If one wishes to create a mirrored thread in another part of M4C (Training and Tactics, in this case) for general discussion of the topic, members are encouraged to do so.

[Jason Falla]

The Military has adopted many shooting techniques taken from civilian shooters over the years. It has been up to staff at training commands to determine the suitability of these techniques for military application.

At unit level it should be up to Senior Instructors and SME's to ensure that the techniques that are taught are appropriate for the needs of the unit and the student. The instructors teaching the lessons are responsible for the delivery of the information, the teaching points and tests of objectives to ensure that the students have correctly assimilated the instruction.

Here in the US there is an endless supply of 'tactical training' open to all comers from Mil/LE and civvies. As there are no standards to this type of training, trainers can teach whatever they want, good or bad.

This is where your question really lays. Students attending outside vendor training on an Open Enrollment course should be able to dissect the information and determine what is relevant to their job and forget about techniques that do not apply.

On a contracted Military course, training officers or SME's should be involved in determining the training objectives for the course. Outside Vendors may not have a thorough understanding of the tasks or nature of operations conducted by the unit and simply teach what they normally teach. At the completion of the training a comprehensive AAR and hot wash should be completed to determine relevancy of the training conducted. TTP's can be adjusted as required.

As for the actual technique of presenting your barrel beyond your piece of cover, that may or may not be relevant depending on the circumstances.

To us at RB1, it is about the complexity of the battle-space, number of enemy, speed v's security and even the type of cover/rest being employed. Ultimately it is Risk V's Reward.

Risk:
1. Muzzle flash
2. Report
3. Dust
4. Over exposing

Reward:
1. Accuracy

So when contemplating the technique, you have to take the risk into consideration and if you have multiple enemy in the battle space and you are in contact, you would be foolish to present your barrel. Conversely, if you are not in contact and you have a single enemy at a range beyond the capability of an unsupported position, you may assess the risk as low and present the hand guard to your cover to take a more accurate single shot.

Not forgetting that your rest may not be providing you any cover at all, just stability, such as a chain link fence.

Specifically relating to your question about windows. In an urban environment conducting MOUT operations, it is always taught to shoot from depth where possible, using angles and buffer rooms in order to avoid being directly targeted by the enemy or effects of secondary weapons, indirect support weapons (RPG's, Grenades etc).