The OODA Loop as a Viral Tactical Tidbit

[Iraq Ninja]

I want to put forth the notion that within the tactical training community, there are certain concepts that are often discussed or taught, yet fail to be meaningful to the student due to its inherent complex nature.

These concepts are paid lip service on the internet and infect our vocabulary. Yet, few people really seem to understand them. Worse yet, instructors who don’t understand them feel obligated to mention them, further confusing the students and spreading it like a disease.

Some tactical concepts are easy to explain, such as the difference between cover and concealment.

While struggling to come up with a name, I settled on Viral Tactical Tidbits (VTT)- small chunks of complex concepts formed into bite sized chunks to easily fit on a Power Point slide. They become empty buzz words thrown around on ranges and internet forums.

In my opinion, the OODA loop is a VTT.

The OODA loop as originally created by Colonel Boyd related to air to air combat. This is in itself a very complex, multi dimensional and dynamic situation to fight in. If one is familiar with this form of combat, the OODA loop makes sense. But can it easily be understood when applied outside of it origin, for example to individual combat on terra firma, especially within the tactical shooting community?

For example, take the following quote that is probably one of the better explanations of the OODA Loop:

“The key is to obscure your intentions and make them unpredictable to your opponent while you simultaneously clarify his intentions. That is, operate at a faster tempo to generate rapidly changing conditions that inhibit your opponent from adapting or reacting to those changes and that suppress or destroy his awareness. Thus, a hodgepodge of confusion and disorder occur to cause him to over- or under-react to conditions or activities that appear to be uncertain, ambiguous, or incomprehensible”.

If you imagine yourself as a fighter pilot, it makes a sense. It might be understood in a military or business strategic situation. Now, if you think about it, you can see how it can apply to individual combat. But, it starts to get fuzzy. It is still possible, but not easy. Thus, should we as instructors even bother mentioning it, or do we run the risk of confusing the students?

That quote from a colleague of Boyd’s sums it up fairly well, and much better than many of the longer essays I see on the internet or in books. One of the biggest mistakes I see from instructors is that they limit the discussion of the OODA loop to what the student/shooter is going through. They are forgetting to mention that the other guy is going through his loop, and that your goal is to be ahead of his. Some instructors lump it in with Cooper’s Colors, further confusing the students.

I am currently of the belief that for small unit or individual training, properly structured training is possible without ever having to mention anything about OODA loops. If you do mention it, you better damn well back it up with meaningful training. Don’t expect your students to absorb it quickly.

Paper silhouettes do not have OODA loops. Thus, is force on force training a step in the right direction? Teaching from a Power Point slide is not training. How do you incorporate the OODA loop into your curriculum and train it?

Anyone have any Viral Tactical Tidbits?

[rob_s]

Viral Tactical Tidbits (VTT)- small chunks of complex concepts formed into bite sized chunks to easily fit on a Power Point slide. They become empty buzz words thrown around on ranges and internet forums.

I LOVE this term.

[John_Wayne777]

The OODA loop as it's been presented to me is usually packaged more as an "action vs. reaction" context. The most graphic example I've seen used is an instructor who started about 15 feet away from another instructor armed with a blue gun carried in concealment gear. Instructor 1 has a red marker in his hand. Instructor 1 charges instructor 2 with the marker, simulating a knife attack. Instructor 2 is supposed to draw and say "BANG" which simulates a shot and that will "stop" the attacker.

With both people knowing what was about to take place instructor 2 still ended up with red marks on his arms and chest, simulating a successful attack before a stop could be managed.

The goal was to get people to realize that distance is their friend, and that if they don't take any sort of action until the attack is in progress then they might be waiting until it is too late. The OODA loop was presented to make the student aware that it takes them a certain amount of time to observe that something is happening, figure out the appropriate response, and then actually execute the response.

While I'm sure the concept as originally crafted for fighter pilots does not translate completely to the armed citizen/LE officer/ground pounding grunt, I think the basics are useful and easy to understand. When a fighter pilot is in enemy airspace he's in a state of heightened awareness. Those on the ground should consider the space around them to be hostile air space.

When a fighter pilot sees a blip on his radar he doesn't ignore it. His mind instantly goes into high alert and he begins to try and position himself for maximum advantage should it come to a fight. The same should be true for us...if we are in a state of heightened awareness and we get a "blip", we ought to begin proactively investigating the threat and positioning ourselves for maximum advantage/safety/whatever.

The general point being that if you wait until someone is actually shooting at you to take action you're likely to be in real trouble.

The instruction I've received has emphasized that the legally armed individual is going to be at a disadvantage from the getgo because they aren't going to be the ones initiating the attack. (For most regular joes and most LE officers this holds true...military guys and sometimes SWAT type LEOs get to start gunfights, but most good guys don't have that luxury) The importance of being in a heightened state of awareness and being proactive the moment something that is potentially threatening appears on your radar is decreasing the inherent advantage your potential adversary possesses and it allows you more room to effectively respond.

That's how I've seen the OODA loop presented. The core of the OODA loop as originally conceived seems to have universal utility in my mind. Some of the finer points may not be as applicable to the citizen carrying concealed or the LE officer pulling over a speeder. The idea of confusing your opponent, for instance, probably isn't going to be something the average joe or LE officer can do once the shooting starts. They can, however, understand the disadvantage they operate in and take measures designed to minimize that disadvantage and to make the circumstances as favorable to them as they reasonably can.

[Heavy Metal]

The same should be true for us...if we are in a state of heightened awareness and we get a "blip", we ought to begin proactively investigating the threat and positioning ourselves for maximum advantage/safety/whatever.

The general point being that if you wait until someone is actually shooting at you to take action you're likely to be in real trouble.

This is exactly why I am in the habit of turning my vehicle back down the drive and leave the ignition running when I am doing an investigation where I might issue a Litter or Open Dump NOV. Even when I feel somewhat safe, I still try and do this.

This is something a Conservation Officer from the DNR I was once working with taught me.

I always try to have an escape plan. Distance is my friend.

[ToddG]

One of the biggest mistakes I see from instructors is that they limit the discussion of the OODA loop to what the student/shooter is going through. They are forgetting to mention that the other guy is going through his loop, and that your goal is to be ahead of his.

That's very interesting. My experience has been the exact opposite: a lot of instructors talk about the other guy's OODA loop only, or look at it as some kind of shared thing between both sides.

I see OODA not as a tactical plan but simply an explanation of how we, as humans, work. Understand that folks need to move through the OODA process and you can then incorporate that into training.

For example -- and tell me if you think I'm off the reservation here -- but I use it when students ask about pivots & turns. As anyone who's been to one of my classes will tell you, we do not practice pivots & turns. While these are staples of firearms training, they are IMHO silly beyond making sure people can keep track of a backstop on a square range. I tell people that you're going to be Observing and Orienting (without necessarily referencing OODA or bogging down into it) before you start Acting. If there is a danger behind you, you're going to LOOK before you ACT. No one gets a Spidey Sense and starts their attack before they find & identify the threat. People don't hear loud noises behind them and draw their guns -- or even decide to draw guns -- before the subconscious spins their heads around to see wtf made the loud noise.

Anyone have any Viral Tactical Tidbits?

How about "front sight, trigger press." Sorry, but I've watched scores of instructors spout that without really understanding it.

[thopkins22]

These concepts are paid lip service on the internet and infect our vocabulary. Yet, few people really seem to understand them. Worse yet, instructors who don’t understand them feel obligated to mention them, further confusing the students and spreading it like a disease.

Unfortunately, I think this applies to almost every aspect of "tactical" shooting, especially on the internet. As a community, I think M4C is pretty decent at separating the wheat from the chaff, but I know I'm often guilty of being able to regurgitate information(generally "the wheat" or correct information) without having a full understanding of the WHY.

It's very similar to people who watch 24HR news networks. At the end of it they may be able to talk ad nauseum about CPI, "pork spending," inflation, deflation, campaigning strategies, volume, market share, constitutional law, and so forth...and SOUND like they know what they're talking about. It may even be correct information. But without a civics class, or an economics class, or for a quick learner just reading a book on the subject, they're often talking out of their hind ends.

Perhaps it's just part of the human condition to recall what they heard other people say.

[Failure2Stop]

This was talked about for several pages on another tactical, bacon-oriented forum at great length. If you want to know where, PM me and I will direct you there.

To me the OODA loop is not something that really needs to be discussed in conjunction with basic skills. I view it as important in a few key areas in which it becomes highly relevant.

1- as a decision-maker in a gunfight. While it is applicable at the individual level, it becomes more important when dealing with small units and an enemy force. The decision cycle of the user is already set, there is no needc for him to consciously go through the cycle step by step, but rather subconsciously acting and reacting to the situation to gain advantage over the enemy. Understanding the decision cycle of the enemy does help though, by understanding the input needed to make effective actions a reality the leader can work to break or slow the enemy's ability to work efficiently or effectively. There are numerous ways in which one can do this once trained to identify the TTPs of the enemy and sufficient experince in locking horns with an actual determined enemy force.

Denial of observation and orientation grinds the enemy into reaction and defense. By making no decision beyond "stay and shoot" or "run elsewhere" the momentum and effectiveness of the enemy is broken.

When it comes to these concepts momentum is very important, and is what the OODA loop enables. "Keep pushing", while simple and effective, quickly turns into defensive fire from a covered position with limited or no movement if the opposing force is able to out-think and out-move the onslaught.

2- when creating a training program or conducting training. By reducing the time needed to decide and act one speeds up the process. Observation and orientation depend greatly on experience, and are really learned in actual use. Reducing the number of choices related to making the decision is one way in which training aids the process. I like Bruce Lee's perspective on this, "I fear not the man who has practiced 10,000 kicks once, but I fear the man who has practiced one kick 10,000 times. "

In JKD, one does not accumulate but eliminate. It is not daily increase but daily decrease. The height of cultivation always runs to simplicity.
Before I studied the art, a punch to me was just like a punch, a kick just like a kick. After I learned the art, a punch was no longer a punch, a kick no longer a kick. Now that I've understood the art, a punch is just like a punch, a kick just like a kick. The height of cultivation is really nothing special. It is merely simplicity; the ability to express the utmost with the minimum. It is the halfway cultivation that leads to ornamentation. Jeet Kune-Do is basically a sophisticated fighting style stripped to its essentials.
Art is the expression of the self. The more complicated and restricted the method, the less the opportunity for expression of one's original sense of freedom. Though they play an important role in the early stage, the techniques should not be too mechanical, complex or restrictive. If we cling blindly to them, we shall eventually become bound by their limitations. Remember, you are expressing the techniques and not doing the techniques. If somebody attacks you, your response is not Technique No.1, Stance No. 2, Section 4, Paragraph 5. Instead you simply move in like sound and echo, without any deliberation. It is as though when I call you, you answer me, or when I throw you something, you catch it. It's as simple as that - no fuss, no mess. In other words, when someone grabs you, punch him. To me a lot of this fancy stuff is not functional.
A martial artist who drills exclusively to a set pattern of combat is losing his freedom. He is actually becoming a slave to a choice pattern and feels that the pattern is the real thing. It leads to stagnation because the way of combat is never based on personal choice and fancies, but constantly changes from moment to moment, and the disappointed combatant will soon find out that his 'choice routine' lacks pliability. There must be a 'being' instead of a 'doing' in training. One must be free. Instead of complexity of form, there should be simplicity of expression.
To me, the extraordinary aspect of martial arts lies in its simplicity. The easy way is also the right way, and martial arts is nothing at all special; the closer to the true way of martial arts, the less wastage of expression there is.
In building a statue, a sculptor doesn't keep adding clay to his subject. Actually, he keeps chiselling away at the inessentials until the truth of its creation is revealed without obstructions. Thus, contrary to other styles, being wise in Jeet Kune-Do doesn't mean adding more; it means to minimize, in other words to hack away the unessential.
It is not daily increase but daily decrease; hack away the unessential.

Being efficient in the Act phase, whether conducting multiple target engagements or coordinating a SEAD is the primary drive of all training, and rarely needs to be explained. It doesn't take much imagination of the student to see why it is good to be efficient (fast), but without training the individual to come to the decision beyond simply flipping a target or yelling "Fire!", all that efficiency meeans nothing. When the smoke settles I can be slower in the Act phase by a few tenths of a second, as long as I was able to pass through the Decide phase faster and be the victor.

I also believe that an instructor should know exactly why he is teaching what he is teaching. I just sat through an awful period of instruction by a well-meaning but uninformed individual so this is fresh on my mind.

Just my thoughts.

ETA- I do like the VTT acronym.

[Littlelebowski]

The VTT sounds like a meme.

[NCPatrolAR]

For example -- and tell me if you think I'm off the reservation here -- but I use it when students ask about pivots & turns. As anyone who's been to one of my classes will tell you, we do not practice pivots & turns. While these are staples of firearms training, they are IMHO silly beyond making sure people can keep track of a backstop on a square range. I tell people that you're going to be Observing and Orienting (without necessarily referencing OODA or bogging down into it) before you start Acting. If there is a danger behind you, you're going to LOOK before you ACT. No one gets a Spidey Sense and starts their attack before they find & identify the threat. People don't hear loud noises behind them and draw their guns -- or even decide to draw guns -- before the subconscious spins their heads around to see wtf made the loud noise.

I'm confused. You don't teach turns and pivots at all?

[Failure2Stop]

I'm confused. You don't teach turns and pivots at all?

I don't pretend to speak for Todd here, though I agree with Todd's thought process on the matter.

I think that 90 degree pivots are silly, and for my application, no pivots need to be done with a pistol since the pistol only comes into play when the primary goes down.

There are other matters that are far more important than some ridiculous robotic ballerina turining method that is completely unnatural. I do agree with some other pivot training, but it is weapon and training-type dependant.

But back on topic-
Other VTTs-

"Search and assess" and "Failure Drills".

Searching and assessing/post shot sequence is, in my opinion, one of the most critical aspects of combat. All too often the technique is degraded to the point in which the shooters are simply weed-wacking their guns and dumbly waiting for the next command. Annoying.

The "2 to the body, 1 to the head" mantra drives me nuts as well. The drill, in and of itself is great, and I fully appreciate it's application. However- there is a definite segment of the training population that fails to understand the realities of shooting at actual living, breathing, moving, fighting opponents, including ones that have "seen" combat (as in, "yeah, I saw combat. It was over there. I shot my gun at it.").