Range as laboratory

[rob_s]

Anyone else notice an increasing trend in this regard? From things like testing springs/buffers/gas-ports/brakes to developing specialized and unique drills, tests and quals...

We ran a monster stage this past week that involved everything from shoot house, to target ID, to potential shoot-throughs, to steel, to reactive targets, to use of cover, to shooting on the move, to transition to handgun... It made me realize that once things get past a certain point of complexity those laboratory things may matter, but they are still no substitute for the fundamentals, applied consistently, and thinking on one's feet. Brakes offered no real advantage and in fact became a blast issue in the house. None of the targets were equally spaced from one another at X yards. Many of the targets had to first be identified as targets before engaging, and then have any potential for over penetration evaluated as well.

Not sure I'm making a conclusion here, just curious to know if others have noticed a trend in this, and if you have an opinion on the effort:value of results and the emphasis paid on many forums and in some classes.

[Low Drag]

I'm really into drills,they test you and your weapon. When you find a reapeatable problem it's back to the laboratory.

I like to get some reasonably complex drills, not crazy but good base line tests. I think I requested a sticky for favorite drills a couple of years ago. (hint)
Once the fundamentals are learned as individual tasks it's time to put them together. Yup learned that method in the Corps and it’s necessary to advance your skill set, not to mention keeping it interesting and fun. Doing speed reloads/reloads with retention standing on the range is one thing. Doing it behind cover (in tight spaces) or while in an urban prone is another.
Running drills using obstacles/barricades etc give you the basics. Just be sure to put them in context and state/know what you’re doing, for instance shooting under a barricade to simulate shooting under a car etc. Know what you want to practice, e.g. set a goal.
If you time yourself and run the same drills over time you can track improvement. Not to mention did that new AFG or other new doo-dad actually help you run the gun better.

Just be sure you keep it all in its place. You’re still sparing in a controlled environment, it’s not a street fight.

[Harv]

Anyone else notice an increasing trend in this regard? From things like testing springs/buffers/gas-ports/brakes to developing specialized and unique drills, tests and quals...

We ran a monster stage this past week that involved everything from shoot house, to target ID, to potential shoot-throughs, to steel, to reactive targets, to use of cover, to shooting on the move, to transition to handgun... It made me realize that once things get past a certain point of complexity those laboratory things may matter, but they are still no substitute for the fundamentals, applied consistently, and thinking on one's feet. Brakes offered no real advantage and in fact became a blast issue in the house. None of the targets were equally spaced from one another at X yards. Many of the targets had to first be identified as targets before engaging, and then have any potential for over penetration evaluated as well.

Not sure I'm making a conclusion here, just curious to know if others have noticed a trend in this, and if you have an opinion on the effort:value of results and the emphasis paid on many forums and in some classes.

It took you this long to figure that out....


It reinforces what I have thought was accurate for many years..and has been reinforced in numerous classes..

The good shooters apply the fundamentals consistently... the gear is secondary..

I have never had an issue with accuracy... and gear has never been an issue.. what has consistently kicked my ass.. is manipulation and being able to make the gun do what I want when I want at the speed I want.

The "Flash Hider of the month" club has never had an attraction for me.. the benefits are mostly perceived along with the Buffer of the month club.. Which again are also perceived vs measured with tangible results.

Skill is not a part you order off the internet.......

[Failure2Stop]

One very important issue that cannot be simulated on a range is the ability to determine whether or not those shots you hear actually mean that you are in a gunfight and where the players are actually located.
Awareness and identification are more important than pretty much anything else.

[C4IGrant]

One very important issue that cannot be simulated on a range is the ability to determine whether or not those shots you hear actually mean that you are in a gunfight and where the players are actually located.
Awareness and identification are more important than pretty much anything else.

Very good point and makes me think a bout rigging some kind of game caller (one that I can load my own noises into) and record gun shots. Then place said caller in a shoot house while students are clearing it.

Hmmm.....

Rob,

Typically on the square range, all targets are bad guys. So people get very used to just shooting at whatever is in front of them.

We have been using full color shoot/no shoot targets lately (specifically in shoot houses) and people quickly learn that they ACTUALLY have to look at the target and see what is in their hands.

The other thing that these full color targets do is suck the shooter in. Very few people have actually seen a real gun pointed at them and they become target fixated. Because of this, they tend to point shoot and SNATCH THE LIVING HELL out of the trigger. I have seen people MISS full size targets from 6ft away.



C4

[threeheadeddog]

Disclaimer... I am pretty much just a pistol shooter/competitor who is dabbling into rifles, so my perspective comes from pistols.

I believe the thinking on ones feet thing is very important. I believe that all the stuff I learn and pratice is for the reason that when it comes time for something to happen I need to be thinking "what... not how".

I had my first doublefeed in my M&P a couple of months ago(only time I have ever shot WWB through it). I was on a timed stage with a downloaded first mag and a high round count. I had already done the required reloads for the stage and had no mags left in my belt. When it happened, without hesitation, I scaned the slide and saw that it was out of battery, then stripped the mag and placed it in my belt, cleard the malfunction, reloaded, then continued the stage. Prior to that I had practiced doublefeed clearing but had NEVER thought to practice it with retaining the mag. I was pleasantly surprised that I had the presence of mind to do this while under stress(though obviously only slight as no one was shooting at me). The thing was, since I knew how to clear it and was comfortable with that my mind was able be used on the importance part of "application" as opposed to "WTF". Also worth noting is that this was an IDPA match and my score was still solidly within 1 second of the fastest expert lvl shooters.

[Low Drag]

Get an air soft handgun and hit it with some of your shooting buddies. Work out a scenario(s) and go for it. Be sure to include some that do not give cause to shoot just to keep your training buddies on their toes.

It's an eye opener. Next to a gun fight there's very little more you can do. The best training I had in the Corps was with MILES gear, the best I've had since is air soft against thinking/moving people that don't want to get stung by the plastic BB.

[Mitch]

Anyone else notice an increasing trend in this regard? From things like testing springs/buffers/gas-ports/brakes to developing specialized and unique drills, tests and quals...

Which drills are you referring to?

... It made me realize that once things get past a certain point of complexity those laboratory things may matter, but they are still no substitute for the fundamentals, applied consistently, and thinking on one's feet. Brakes offered no real advantage and in fact became a blast issue in the house.

Equipment can only compensate for so much skill, and not much at that. As I believe you stated in another thread Rob, a comp. may only make a significant difference when top 3-gun competitors are shooting against one another, even then were only talking milliseconds. Not a direct quote but you get the point. Maybe you're driving towards the fact that equipment can only make up for a small amount of skill and that we may be seeing drills that validate a piece of equipments effectiveness. Or maybe I'm stretching it and assuming too much.

L.Drag makes a good point, the fundamentals can and should be used as benchmark to track improvement, even when new gadgets are added. This reenforces the "spend $ on training and ammo" view, as it'll make a larger impact on your performance than a piece of kit.

[rob_s]

Which drills are you referring to?

Rather than get into specifics of which drills and then get assaulted by the various followers of one religion or another, I'll simply say this...

Any drill that gets practiced and shot with the goal of increasing the score on the drill, or gets run as a test of one bit of gear over another, or gets chosen only because it is obvious that it will be biased towards one bit of gear or another.

This really is more about application than about specific drills, although I do think certain drills lend themselves to abuse more than others. The IDPA classifier is a good skills test of handgun proficiency but I've seen a ton of paper-tigers that practice the hell out of the classifier to attain a certain ranking but then never win a match at that ranking (and get beat by half the field of the ranking below). I also see IPSC wizards go over to IDPA and fail to place well (most often blaming "all those rules" while somehow ignoring all those misses ). If you have well-rounded skills you should be able to perform well on any drill/classifier/test or place well at any sort of competitive endeavor.

[Low Drag]

Rather than get into specifics of which drills and then get assaulted by the various followers of one religion or another, I'll simply say this...

Any drill that gets practiced and shot with the goal of increasing the score on the drill, or gets run as a test of one bit of gear over another, or gets chosen only because it is obvious that it will be biased towards one bit of gear or another.

This really is more about application than about specific drills, although I do think certain drills lend themselves to abuse more than others. The IDPA classifier is a good skills test of handgun proficiency but I've seen a ton of paper-tigers that practice the hell out of the classifier to attain a certain ranking but then never win a match at that ranking (and get beat by half the field of the ranking below). I also see IPSC wizards go over to IDPA and fail to place well (most often blaming "all those rules" while somehow ignoring all those misses ). If you have well-rounded skills you should be able to perform well on any drill/classifier/test or place well at any sort of competitive endeavor.

Any drill is better than no drill IMHO. In particular when using a timer. I'm a big fan of the Dynamic Marksmanship Index and the MEU SOC carbine/pistol course.
I like drills that are easy to set up and run so I spend my time shooting rather than jacking around with a complex course.
I like to practice shooting on the move and from various types of cover. To me drills are like diamonds to a woman, I like them all.