Driving the gun & head movement question

[M4Fundi]

When you are finding the next target to drive the gun towards it and the rifle is fully mounted do you swivel eyes only to next target then drive gun to eyes or do you actually swivel the head and drive gun to head? I know this will depend to some degree of distance between targets, but was just wondering if there was a conscious and deliberate method/methods that was used???

[Failure2Stop]

It depends on spacing and optic.
Eyes lock onto the next target before the gun stops moving, and usually before the gun even starts moving.
If you can see both targets within the tube, just drive the gun over and engage. If the threat(s) are outside the field of view through the optic, you will have to drop the gun anyway to see them.

Many people get sucked into the "fastest" way to shoot multiple targets, at the cost of thinking about fighting determined enemies that are actually trying to survive the engagement. People move in gunfights. The ones that don't won't make it to the next one. The OODA Loop demands Observation before Action to be a meaningful decision or action. You have to see the threat, identify the threat, and decide to engage the threat. It's one thing when all the targets are plainly visible and staked to the ground, it's something else entirely when those sationary cardboard are replaced with living, breathing, armed humans, with cover.

[M4Fundi]

I guess I should have stated with an Aimpoint at CQB distance. With a handgun my head snaps to target and my gun follows and I noticed that with a rifle if my targets are within my primary field of view that my eyes find them and rifle follows, but was concerned when I had targets more at my 90 right/left in peripheral vision and instead of swiveling my head like I use to do then following with rifle I have started doing the cyclops method of seeing in peripheral and "bringing gun with head". I have gone thru a transition from head to threat gun follows then to cyclops (gun & eyes are one) and back to find threat with head and snap gun to head. What has happened is I switched to a much lighter rifle and was wondering if I believe I have a threat at 90 degrees left or right do I snap head to the threat and a let the gun catch up or try to drive the head and gun as one. Head swivel would be faster for threat assessment, but cyclops might get gun to threat faster and can assess with rifle toward threat.
Maybe Im overthinking this as the different gun length and weight has me questioning how I drive it as I can drive the lighter shorter rifle so much faster and am afraid of creating training scars :confused:

[Failure2Stop]

Just like you say you are doing it: eyes/head then torso/gun.
You aren't going to reposition your body and go through the presentation process unless you actually see and identify a threat, are you?
There are tricks to get faster target to target transitions for competition/range use, but those aren't going to pan out in a gunfight.

Three simple steps to win a gunfight:
1- Identify threat.
2- Eliminate threat.
3- Repeat.

Unless you are outfitted with sonar, you gotta see what you want to shoot. Where the guy was when you started shooting his buddy is rarely where he will be when you finish. Expect to have to find him.

[M4Fundi]

Thanks

[Norone]

""There are tricks to get faster target to target transitions for competition/range use, but those aren't going to pan out in a gunfight.""


Fantastic thread and FTS made tried and true points as usual, excellent. But I respectfully disagree on one statement mentioned above.

These "tricks" that "don't pan out in a gun fight" have kept me breathing in very lousy situations. I say this because I do not have the powers of ESP and cant predict what the bad guy is gonna do all the time. But, I do know what I am going to do and that's the crux.
I had to rely on my own cognitive AND shooting skills.

Also, utilizing those training platforms or tricks as you say, I have seen students thrive and move on in confidence in there skills through solid performance. So they could now pay attention to the tactical decisions they will need to make once they leave the shoot-house and not worry if they can hit the target under the stress of sensory overload and moral judgment.

They are all not tricks, a select few are skill development tools that allow one to focus in training to develop that technique or dexterity or whatever.
Are there some lousy ones out there; Oh you betcha'. But, once in the field they can let the subconscious (body memory) flow uninhibitedly with the skills drilled/techniques developed in training so the conscious can separately make decisions. The conscious questions, as it is designed, too much. Its what makes us human beings so it rightfully for lack of better words, gauges our decision process's for what to do as right and wrong, etc...
To quiet this barrage of "What ifs" it brings you give the same answer over and over and soon it settles quietly and the sub conscious flows out that training.
I didn't do the content of that paragraph ANY justice for brevity sake, sorry if I lost ya.

I am not discussing the merits of certain techniques here or pros and cons. I am simply saying that anything that allows me to put bullets in armed assailants fast and accurately thus taking tactical advantage over them, is a good thing. That is tactical technique priority one- being ready to break many rounds if necessary.

Are drills fighting?
Absolutely not.
Are courses of fire to be your decision making process?
Gawd I hope not.
Are rehearsals and scenario and OPFOR how its gonna go out there?
If only.
That was FTS's point I believe. If you cant see AND identify it as a armed threat do not break a round on it.

Drills and courses of fire are typically set patterns that can stagnate and disguise the truth and the truth in combative situations is a living breathing thing.
But, if the topic is left in the training context of skill development, getting proper skills into the sub conscious/body memory so when the revelation appears that I may have to use those skills- well, not to be too philosophical, it will be welcomed with open eyes to see what is to be and not be shot, one millisecond at a time casting no undue judgment.

Wow, sound like Brian Enos there for a second... ;)

[Norone]

Sorry for the long windedness. Had local coffee this morning...:sarcastic:

[Failure2Stop]

Norone-

I am not opposed to the concept of getting bullets into targets fast. However, since I didn't mention exactly what "tricks" I was referring to (as I didn't want to talk about things I don't agree with), I am curious as to what skills you think I was talking about.

I am opposed to overlooking the truth (perhaps unintentionally or due to inexperience) that people move, that we need to see them to effectively engage them on a consistent basis, and that shooting the same drill over and over is not guaranteed to turn anybody into a gunfighter.

[Norone]

Indeed- I think a mix of me still trying to master the art of "do not type as you speak" and my indulgence on your interp on what tricks are was a bit out of scope.

Tricks for target acquisition that don't work in gunfights. I surmise, in most part can be using a technique in a shooting application, and taking it out of training context in order to claim its tactical merit based on its performance alone in a controlled arena.
I.E. Its a set up to promote a certain method.
Its just a stab as I haven't been privy to tricks on that topic. Didn't know there were any - yikes!

On other parts we are in accordance. You have to see it to shoot it.

[Failure2Stop]

The things I was more talking about was drill-specific training that will enable a person to shoot specific round counts at specific distances at specific targets with very fast times, but which drills are not really applicable to real fights. Therefore the shooter gets really good at appearing to be a dynamic shooter without actually being one, and not knowing what skill sets he is short-changing in order to appear to have them.

There are still many "gunfighter" schools within the military (and elsewhere) that will (most likely unwittingly) advocate some of these drills. For some reason most of these drills are about multiple target engagement and/or the standard response.

Pay attention to what people say about drills and skills, the problems with many of these are apparent if you don't self-impose a willing suspension of disbelief on your training guidance.

[BushmasterFanBoy]

The things I was more talking about was drill-specific training that will enable a person to shoot specific round counts at specific distances at specific targets with very fast times, but which drills are not really applicable to real fights. Therefore the shooter gets really good at appearing to be a dynamic shooter without actually being one, and not knowing what skill sets he is short-changing in order to appear to have them.

There are still many "gunfighter" schools within the military (and elsewhere) that will (most likely unwittingly) advocate some of these drills. For some reason most of these drills are about multiple target engagement and/or the standard response.

Pay attention to what people say about drills and skills, the problems with many of these are apparent if you don't self-impose a willing suspension of disbelief on your training guidance.

I have to agree, my time at the range has taught me that targets will appear at *roughly* known distances, in directions that I'm aware of, will always be a threat, remain still even when shot at, and most importantly, not shoot back.

If I'm correct, you seem to be referring to some drills that teach multiple target engagement with targets spaced evenly and all at the same distance. Well, short of the briefcase scene in Collateral, I don't think that's ever going to happen to anyone. It's easy to get sucked into drills, especially those that purport to estimate how "good" of a shooter someone is.

I think its helpful to practice shooting at multiple targets positioned at different ranges, orientations, and heights. Because in real life, I don't think its likely that 3 thugs will stand in the middle of an open alley, evenly spaced, while you mow them down with your carbine from a short distance. When I practice dry fire, I practice on pasters of different sizes, positioned at different heights, to show variation in elevation and distance for this reason.

[Failure2Stop]

BMFB-

Take the process behind that type of "Box Drill" (2 to chest on tgt 1, transition, 2 to chest on tgt 2, headsot to tgt 2, transition, headshot on tgt 1) or El Prez one or two steps further and you will be into the category I am opposed to. When most people (including myself a few years ago) talk about multiple target engagement they discuss drills like the El Prez (and/or any of a dozen or so variations on the El Pres), "Box Drill", and "Big Box Drill". Sometimes they get way down the rabbit hole on those drills, coming up with creative ways to break shots with the gun in motion, drive "unguided" to the next target, and focus more on drill time than what a shooter should be doing when facing multiple threats in to open, and how being alone versus being in a team can impact your options.

Now, if your goal is to be a more competitive competitor these skills may be of great service to you. If your goal is to win a gunfight you might want to ruminate on what exactly you are training for, and where you will make the most gain per hour/round toward your goal.

I am not saying that using an El Prez to monitor progression and skill is bad, or that shooting a few "Box Drills" to work on or track transition speed (though there are better drills for that skillset) means that you are living in Neverneverland. Keep drills in their place.

There are other competitive skills that occasionally creep into tactical training that really don't belong there. I am not one of those guys that believes/pretends that only the way we have done it in the past is the right way to do it, and if anyone is faster than me that they are gamers and are therefore irrelevant. Quite the contrary. Like I said before, put it to the smell test. Some things integrate, some things don't, some things will with time, some things won't.

Before worrying about shaving 0.2 seconds off of your Box Drill by shooting with the gun in motion for all 4 body shots, make sure you can draw with your support hand from uncomfortable positions and perform basic stoppage reductions. Before worrying if you are perfectly setup on the center target for a carbine El Prez, make sure that you are driving your line of sight to your intended POA before your sights get there. Before worrying about your pair split times, make sure that your training time supports the reality that it might take a lot more than 2 shots to the "C" Zone to actually neutralize the threat, and something as simple as moving laterally to cover would impair the ability of the other threats to engage you without shooting their buddy.

There are plenty of very skilled guys that have been gravely injured because they failed to make sure that the guys they were in the room with were actually down for the count before they turned their backs on them. How much would it suck to pull off a perfect 6 second El Prez, only to be shot by all three dudes because they were still all able to act for 10-15 seconds after being shot in the major vascular structures? How much would it suck to blast one dude in the corner as you entered, and when you swung your sights habitually to the threat on the opposite wall you put a bullet into your team-mate because you didn't bother to find and identify the threat before you transitioned and engaged?

Under stress, people have an amazing ability to do exactly what they habitually do in training and practice. Train right. Whatever that might mean to you, do in training exactly what you want yourself to do when the chips are down.

[Vinh]

Wow, nice post, F2S.

[rickp]

Yes, eyes then the gun to the next target. This will prevent you overshooting the target and having to go slightly back.

Vicking tactics teaches this too.

R.

[Failure2Stop]

Wow, nice post, F2S.

Thanks man.

For those of you that don't know, Vinh is one of those guys with an impressive skillset that performs well in sub-optimal conditions.

. . .and he is fast.