Setting up rifles for NVGs.

[GTF425]

Another video showing the M620V. Plate rack is at 50y.

[Defaultmp3]

Compared to the MAWL-C1+, obviously the LA-5 eclipses it with regards to IR performance.

I'm not sure I'd agree with that assessment, based off of the reading I've done, at least with an LA-5B. While the LA-5B does on paper push out up to 80 mW of illumination on high, the MAWL-C1+ comes fairly close at 67 mW, and because it's VCSEL, the output is consistently clean, while the edge-emitting illuminator of the LA-5B can be dirty and thus less useful, even if in theory it has more power.

Now, if you wanted to talk about the pointer, then yes, the LA-5B definitely has the edge there. That being said, all the reading I've done suggests that 0.7 mW is more than enough for a pointer; I've had to bump up my pointer power before (using a RAID-X), but that was primarily due to excessive IR illumination by other folks and trying to help differentiate between different pointers (was running The Scrambler drill under NODs with quite a few other other folks, including those running LA-5Bs and MAWL-DAs, so lot of energy was being pumped down range).

[GTF425]

I've shot them side by side and found my LA-5 illuminator throws much further than the MAWL-C1 and stays sharp. I've heard a lot about the illuminators being "dirty" on PEQs and LA-5s, but I must be incredibly fortunate because all of my issued samples have been a perfect circle.

I agree with your assessment about pointer output. The issue with most of the legacy lasers is that the illuminator is so powerful, it can wash out the pointer at low output. I like the MAWL because of how it's "optimized" with balancing the illumination output and pointer to be visible at most realistic distances. I do find the C1 to wash out the pointer against white walls indoors. Like; the illuminator of the MAWL-C1 is too good for the neutered laser pointer.

The MAWL-C1 is the current cream of the crop of commercial lasers and the price reflects that. If someone is starting out on their way into NV, they can be well served with a few other commercial products like the DBAL-D2 while they figure out how all of this works.

*Also, my LA-5 is 100mW. I don't know what it's called, I just know the sound it makes when it melts retinas.

[Alex V]

This is just a sample size of one, but this is how I set up my gun for working with NODs:

I swapped to a 1.93" Scalarworks mount for my MRO to make passive aiming easier. Running a DBAL A3 and a Streamlight Railmount 1. I have been told that the illuminator on the DBAL isn't enough but I have not really had any problems illuminating things with it. Would a MAWL be better? I'm sure it would, but it's also more than double the price. I am thinking of switching the light to a Surefire Vampire but have not convinced mys

In my experience the Mro is horrible under nods. The M5 and T2 are hard to beat, although the larger viewing window of the eotech is pretty sweet. The vortex UH-1 is another great option that’s I’ve used.

I don't seem to have a problem using my MRO under NODs. What problems did you experience?

I am not sure a larger window really makes a difference since the optic is so out of focus. I can barely make out the optic at all when shooting passively under NODs, all I really see is the dot.

[Lowdown3]

Haven't had an issue with MROs also. Would like to hear more of what the problem was.

This was running BNVDs , poster may have issues with the 14 i.e, one aided one unaided eye. Sometimes folks have trouble reconciling the two while passive aiming.

[Defaultmp3]

I am not sure a larger window really makes a difference since the optic is so out of focus. I can barely make out the optic at all when shooting passively under NODs, all I really see is the dot.

The larger viewing window makes it easier to see the reticle under NODs, as you have more leeway to line up the tube with the optic. Not a huge deal for flat range stuff, but once you start getting into unorthodox shooting positions, larger windows make it easier to find the reticle.

[Alex V]

Haven't had an issue with MROs also. Would like to hear more of what the problem was.

This was running BNVDs , poster may have issues with the 14 i.e, one aided one unaided eye. Sometimes folks have trouble reconciling the two while passive aiming.

Fair point, I was using duals as well.

The larger viewing window makes it easier to see the reticle under NODs, as you have more leeway to line up the tube with the optic. Not a huge deal for flat range stuff, but once you start getting into unorthodox shooting positions, larger windows make it easier to find the reticle.

That sounds like it makes sense...

[VIP3R 237]

I don't seem to have a problem using my MRO under NODs. What problems did you experience

Haven't had an issue with MROs also. Would like to hear more of what the problem was.

This was running BNVDs , poster may have issues with the 14 i.e, one aided one unaided eye. Sometimes folks have trouble reconciling the two while passive aiming.

Yeah I was only running a PVS14, I haven’t used the mro with BNVD’s. My issue I think stems from the slight magnification of the MRO. I had to focus the nods on either the red dot through the mro or the target, i could not get it focused where I could see both. It was either crisp dot and blurry everything else, or crisp target and a blown out dot. I didn’t have this problem with a T2.

[WS6]

I like a T-series at the correct height.

[TehLlama]

I guess I'm just an idiot in that I'm so much happier running a PVS-14 on my non-dominant side, leaning hard on the PEQ, and that I can still basically do the accupoint and binocular reconstruction techniques and just run a normal T1 at a lower1/3-CW height and stuff just works. If I was running binocular NVDs it would be a totally different question.
Even when I got to play with clip on thermals, I still ultimately found the FOV restrictions of rifle mounting it to be too much, even just standing post, so I just rigged it up to where I could do broadly the same thing, with a contingency option of being able to slap that onto a mount. The T1 and T2 are remarkably good optics to run alongside - if I wanted to run a dedicated NV setup on a rifle I'd pair an EOTech with a QD magnifier and QD side-flip ring for the PVS and run that, but practically I didn't find any opportunities where having to take a shot through optics mattered enough... and if I could live with major focus issues, I can usually just go stupid long on LOP, swap to non-dominant side, and fire from any supported position through the optic that way... the real limitation was that I'm now choosing to shoot non-dominant eye, non-dominant hand, and I was grabbing with an exaggerated over-hold to keep the PVS-T-1 spacing consistent, and I did learn the hard way not to come in too low because that's where the brass comes out.

Some of this just comes out of having to live with PVS-14 and PEQ-15 along with a TA31 that I didn't want to remove, and I haven't really reevaluated my overall approach since then, but what I've done still works pretty acceptably.

I have spent a fair bit of time training myself to make the unaided eye useful, but once I got that sorted out, things actually just kinda work, to the point where I had people asking me why I was running drills 'wrong', until they say the targets and that I had the luxury of thinking about tight groups during all of the manipulations and firing steps, and could function just off their sloppy light management to see everything I needed.

It also helps a fair bit to rehearse this for pistol transitions - that was what really sealed the deal for me, in a hard worst-case what I'm able to do is a partial transition keeping off-hand on the carbine handguard to activate the IR Illuminator as normal, bring the handgun up/over/around with a 45° cant, acquire H3 sights through that with dominant eye, and actually get usable shot placement out of that dorky looking setup. For bonus points, I can still get to the white light on the pistol as needed. It's not particularly fast or elegant, but in any situation where NV is a potentially decisive advantage, this would get it done.