Something just clicked about the people who're using two and three gun matches as training for combat.
The answer to many of the problems presented in the match, if you're an infantryman, is to toss in a frag.
Pull, ping, count, BOOM.
Alternatively, you simply light the place on fire.
While eminently fun, throwing grenades and burning things aren't the same kind of fun that 2-gun and 3-gun bring.
If you're sitting there thinking, "but Thag, I don't have any grenades!" You're not using your imagination. There's gobs and gobs of common household items that add up to grenade and incendiary device.
So common, in fact, that it's nigh impossible to take them away from a population to protect your own forces in a war zone.
Bear in mind, taking these common household items and making a grenade is manufacturing a destructive device and without an approved Form 1, you're making an illegal NFA item. One would expect, though, that should Warre be declared, niceties like ATF approval are going to be widely ignored.
Click here to submit $0.00 US for a lifetime subscription
Posts
All Comments
Showing posts with label Tactics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Tactics. Show all posts
22 October 2018
04 March 2014
Philosophical Differences
What to use to defend yourself? It's not a simple question.
We carry handguns about in public because most of us are forced by law or social convention to hide them from view. Even the staunch open carriers carry a handgun because it's small and light.
There's a great deal of truth to the statement, "you use a pistol to fight your way to your rifle." Handguns are underpowered compared to just about any rifle. Even the vaunted .44 Magnum is not bringing as much energy to the fight as the maligned .223.
Shotguns are fowling pieces. That they are used for other purposes is a matter of law not prowess. If you are choosing a shotgun for home defense and cite over-penetration by a rifle; see this link. This link too. 00 Buck is nine .36" round balls running about 1,300 fps. each. Combined it's quite a load, individually not so much. They conspire to be about the same damage as .223 or 7.62x39.
Pistol caliber carbines are really big pistols and not small rifles. Yes, the extra barrel length might boost a 9x19mm round's velocity to .357 magnum speeds; but .357 is still what? Yes, a pistol round. Cruise through that box-o-truth site and you're going to notice that you're not solving the over-penetration problem here either.
What are you gaining when you eschew the rifle?
Cost has been trotted out.
If you're able to afford a $500 Glock, you're also able to afford a $300 SKS. A $400 Kel-Tec is still $100 more than a $300 SKS. A $300 SKS is the same as a $300 Mossberg.
And they are all cheaper than a $1,200 Colt AR. But there are much cheaper examples of AR out there, hit up the pawn shops for examples. A Century M16A1 kit-bash refurb will be in the $500 range. It's not in a stylish tacticool configuration, but it's going to work.
Update: To show the relative bulk; and the stratospheric price of a well equipped AR.
Update 2: "What you've made with your shotgun is a long arm as handy as an M1 Garand with 1/10th the range with ammo that weighs twice as much." Thanks for the perspective, Willard!
We carry handguns about in public because most of us are forced by law or social convention to hide them from view. Even the staunch open carriers carry a handgun because it's small and light.
There's a great deal of truth to the statement, "you use a pistol to fight your way to your rifle." Handguns are underpowered compared to just about any rifle. Even the vaunted .44 Magnum is not bringing as much energy to the fight as the maligned .223.
Shotguns are fowling pieces. That they are used for other purposes is a matter of law not prowess. If you are choosing a shotgun for home defense and cite over-penetration by a rifle; see this link. This link too. 00 Buck is nine .36" round balls running about 1,300 fps. each. Combined it's quite a load, individually not so much. They conspire to be about the same damage as .223 or 7.62x39.
Pistol caliber carbines are really big pistols and not small rifles. Yes, the extra barrel length might boost a 9x19mm round's velocity to .357 magnum speeds; but .357 is still what? Yes, a pistol round. Cruise through that box-o-truth site and you're going to notice that you're not solving the over-penetration problem here either.
What are you gaining when you eschew the rifle?
Cost has been trotted out.
If you're able to afford a $500 Glock, you're also able to afford a $300 SKS. A $400 Kel-Tec is still $100 more than a $300 SKS. A $300 SKS is the same as a $300 Mossberg.
And they are all cheaper than a $1,200 Colt AR. But there are much cheaper examples of AR out there, hit up the pawn shops for examples. A Century M16A1 kit-bash refurb will be in the $500 range. It's not in a stylish tacticool configuration, but it's going to work.
Update: To show the relative bulk; and the stratospheric price of a well equipped AR.
 |
| Remington 870 with light, Magpul furniture, extended magazine and Sage sights. 10 lb. $750. 7+1 shots. Laconic Arms AR-15 with light, Magpul furniture and EOTech. 8.7 lb. $1,822. 30+1 shots. S&W Sigma SW40F. 2 lb. $500. 15+1 shots. |
 |
| The same $750 that bought the shotgun also bought this M16A2 clone. 8.2 lb. 30+1 shots. I've seen AR's in this configuration going for less if you're willing to accept some cosmetic dings and that it's not in a stylish configuration, like the carbine shown above. |
28 January 2014
They Are Both Right
...and they are both wrong.
I've been reading analyses of what went wrong with Operation Red Wings and where the mistakes were made.
It started for me reading this blog post: A Marine Corps View of Tactics in Operation Red Wings.
Then something of a rebuttal from: About Some Lone Survivor Controversies.
Then an additional retort from: Responses to Assessment of Lone Survivor.
I was a tank crewman, what do I know? Unlike the people post above; I know what I DON'T know!
I am not and was not infantry or special forces.
What I do have to hand is a Willard. He's a vet of the Rhodesian Army Regiment and should have a freaking doctorate in military history if he'd just go back to school and get the sheep-skin.
He was US Army infantry stationed in Korea (not Korean War) who then cast about looking for the action.
I linked him to the controversy and his assessment: Both sides are criticizing things based on how they would have done it.
He repeated a quote I'd seen in the comments, "We send big patrols out, they see nothing. We send small patrols out, they don't come back."
Willard is very critical of special forces, SEALs in particular; but he readily concedes that they can do things at all that conventional infantry can't just because of scale. But because of that scale, SF is boned if things go a little wrong where an infantry platoon simply has a small firefight.
Four guys hidden deep and not moving around can see things that a platoon sized LP/OP would never get a chance to see because they have too large a foot print.
Likewise, if a fight starts; I'd rather have a platoon of Marines than four SEALs. SF missions quite often hinge on not being discovered in the first place. SF is very often high risk - high return; and conventional infantry simply doesn't take such risks or reap such returns.
Having read up on the topic from an ignorant start...
The Rules of Engagement more than anything else is the problem here. Willard has a lengthy rant about it, I hope to get it transcribed soon. Shooting the goat-herds or not should not have been a spot decision. Willard points out that shooting them was irrelevant since the people WATCHING the herders were assuredly already giving warning while the debate about what to do was going on.
Then there's the carte blanche removal of proven weaponry from the inventory that greatly enhances the ability of a teeny unit to break contact and escape from a larger one.
It is almost as if the National Command Authority cares more for the well being of the enemy and strangers than its own citizens and soldiers.
I've been reading analyses of what went wrong with Operation Red Wings and where the mistakes were made.
It started for me reading this blog post: A Marine Corps View of Tactics in Operation Red Wings.
Then something of a rebuttal from: About Some Lone Survivor Controversies.
Then an additional retort from: Responses to Assessment of Lone Survivor.
I was a tank crewman, what do I know? Unlike the people post above; I know what I DON'T know!
I am not and was not infantry or special forces.
What I do have to hand is a Willard. He's a vet of the Rhodesian Army Regiment and should have a freaking doctorate in military history if he'd just go back to school and get the sheep-skin.
He was US Army infantry stationed in Korea (not Korean War) who then cast about looking for the action.
I linked him to the controversy and his assessment: Both sides are criticizing things based on how they would have done it.
He repeated a quote I'd seen in the comments, "We send big patrols out, they see nothing. We send small patrols out, they don't come back."
Willard is very critical of special forces, SEALs in particular; but he readily concedes that they can do things at all that conventional infantry can't just because of scale. But because of that scale, SF is boned if things go a little wrong where an infantry platoon simply has a small firefight.
Four guys hidden deep and not moving around can see things that a platoon sized LP/OP would never get a chance to see because they have too large a foot print.
Likewise, if a fight starts; I'd rather have a platoon of Marines than four SEALs. SF missions quite often hinge on not being discovered in the first place. SF is very often high risk - high return; and conventional infantry simply doesn't take such risks or reap such returns.
Having read up on the topic from an ignorant start...
The Rules of Engagement more than anything else is the problem here. Willard has a lengthy rant about it, I hope to get it transcribed soon. Shooting the goat-herds or not should not have been a spot decision. Willard points out that shooting them was irrelevant since the people WATCHING the herders were assuredly already giving warning while the debate about what to do was going on.
Then there's the carte blanche removal of proven weaponry from the inventory that greatly enhances the ability of a teeny unit to break contact and escape from a larger one.
It is almost as if the National Command Authority cares more for the well being of the enemy and strangers than its own citizens and soldiers.
10 September 2013
Dicta Boelcke
It works. It's about one hundred years old and the fundamental truths he discovered about air combat apply as much to an F-22A as they did to a Pfaltz.
It applies to combat flight simulators.
They even work if you're in an F-105D and your opponent is in a MiG-17 Fresco A.
Coming in from behind, getting close and giving him a gentle caress of 20mm means he's walking home.
It doesn't matter how maneuverable he is if he doesn't know you are there or see you coming.
The F-105D, when clean, runs at the speed of heat so it controls the engagement. A MiG-17F needs burner to keep up with a Thud on military. Just about the only thing that can catch up is a MiG-21 and we make note of that before we try to engage.
Remember your maneuvering flaps! The Thud has a combat flap setting that's good down from 455 kias. It cuts into your speed but it gives you a fighting chance to get guns on that MiG-21PF you can't outrun and has the advantage of keeping your ass pointed so his AA-2 can't lock.
It's not part of the Dicta, but it should have been: Do not fight how your opponent fights!
The MiGs like turning engagements, don't fall for it. Use the vertical.
The dicta are tactics, but they're tactics for pros. Pros study logistics, right? It's in Rule 7. Make sure you know your fuel state.
Aside: It really is spelled Boelcke not Bölcke. Quite often a German word with an 'oe' means someone didn't have the means to type umlauts.
It applies to combat flight simulators.
They even work if you're in an F-105D and your opponent is in a MiG-17 Fresco A.
Coming in from behind, getting close and giving him a gentle caress of 20mm means he's walking home.
It doesn't matter how maneuverable he is if he doesn't know you are there or see you coming.
The F-105D, when clean, runs at the speed of heat so it controls the engagement. A MiG-17F needs burner to keep up with a Thud on military. Just about the only thing that can catch up is a MiG-21 and we make note of that before we try to engage.
Remember your maneuvering flaps! The Thud has a combat flap setting that's good down from 455 kias. It cuts into your speed but it gives you a fighting chance to get guns on that MiG-21PF you can't outrun and has the advantage of keeping your ass pointed so his AA-2 can't lock.
It's not part of the Dicta, but it should have been: Do not fight how your opponent fights!
The MiGs like turning engagements, don't fall for it. Use the vertical.
The dicta are tactics, but they're tactics for pros. Pros study logistics, right? It's in Rule 7. Make sure you know your fuel state.
Aside: It really is spelled Boelcke not Bölcke. Quite often a German word with an 'oe' means someone didn't have the means to type umlauts.
22 December 2012
18 December 2012
On Bullies
The anti-gunners are bullies.
Trust me, I know from bully.
An important part of your response to bullying is that it be immediate.
If you back off and give them some time they come back worse and if you respond in between attacks they point out YOUR bullying.
The silence from the NRA is giving them this time.
Being respectful to the dead is nice, but we didn't break the moment, they did. Being silent after that is taken as acquiescing to their position.
I know we all want to do the right thing, but we also don't want to be the nice guy who finishes last.
Trust me, I know from bully.
An important part of your response to bullying is that it be immediate.
If you back off and give them some time they come back worse and if you respond in between attacks they point out YOUR bullying.
The silence from the NRA is giving them this time.
Being respectful to the dead is nice, but we didn't break the moment, they did. Being silent after that is taken as acquiescing to their position.
I know we all want to do the right thing, but we also don't want to be the nice guy who finishes last.
23 September 2012
Blame The Victim
There's how things should be and how things are.
If I left a bundle of $100 bills sitting on a table in my front yard and left for an hour, I don't expect that bundle to be there when I get back. The person who took the bundle is a thief. It was not their money and they had to trespass to reach it.
In should be world, my property is sacrosanct and people leave it alone even if it's easy to steal.
In real world... my money is gone. If I dared report the theft the police would admonish me for leaving the money out where it could just grow legs.
Sadly, this scenario does apply to some rapes.
In should be world, a woman is safe regardless of how she dresses.
In real world that slinky red dress is an invitation to the rapist, where baggy sweat pants and a loose t-shirt aren't.
And that's blaming the victim. I hate that. The victim didn't do anything wrong. The problem is that doesn't matter to the criminal. How many discrete crimes are there in forcible rape? Each and every one is wrong. All the victim did was dress in a way that caught his eye and become the selected target.
She SHOULD be safe to transit the area. But she isn't. I wish she was and I want her to be.
Criminals are opportunists. They take advantage of the situations that their victims allow to manifest around them.
Leaving the front door unlocked, for example, gives a burglar an opportunity to enter a house quickly and quietly.
Leaving the keys in a running, unattended car gives a thief an opportunity to just drive away.
Walking alone in the wrong neighborhood gives a rapist the opportunity to grab their victim. Wearing the slinky outfit caught their attention, but didn't create the opportunity.
While the blame should be fully on the criminal, it is incumbent on us to limit their opportunities to prey upon us.
PS:
I would like to add that at no point after the crime would I attempt to deflect the criminal's responsibility for their actions.
If I left a bundle of $100 bills sitting on a table in my front yard and left for an hour, I don't expect that bundle to be there when I get back. The person who took the bundle is a thief. It was not their money and they had to trespass to reach it.
In should be world, my property is sacrosanct and people leave it alone even if it's easy to steal.
In real world... my money is gone. If I dared report the theft the police would admonish me for leaving the money out where it could just grow legs.
Sadly, this scenario does apply to some rapes.
In should be world, a woman is safe regardless of how she dresses.
In real world that slinky red dress is an invitation to the rapist, where baggy sweat pants and a loose t-shirt aren't.
And that's blaming the victim. I hate that. The victim didn't do anything wrong. The problem is that doesn't matter to the criminal. How many discrete crimes are there in forcible rape? Each and every one is wrong. All the victim did was dress in a way that caught his eye and become the selected target.
She SHOULD be safe to transit the area. But she isn't. I wish she was and I want her to be.
Criminals are opportunists. They take advantage of the situations that their victims allow to manifest around them.
Leaving the front door unlocked, for example, gives a burglar an opportunity to enter a house quickly and quietly.
Leaving the keys in a running, unattended car gives a thief an opportunity to just drive away.
Walking alone in the wrong neighborhood gives a rapist the opportunity to grab their victim. Wearing the slinky outfit caught their attention, but didn't create the opportunity.
While the blame should be fully on the criminal, it is incumbent on us to limit their opportunities to prey upon us.
PS:
I would like to add that at no point after the crime would I attempt to deflect the criminal's responsibility for their actions.
18 September 2012
What Can You Do?
It seems to me that if attacking about twelve embassies and murdering an ambassador and some of the staff can't get people to stop mocking you openly on Twitter, you should pack it in.
LINK
We're not afraid of you. We're pissed and we're using black humor, but we're not afraid.
LINK
We're not afraid of you. We're pissed and we're using black humor, but we're not afraid.
15 May 2012
Bad Review
I read Penny Arcade.
Recently one of the authors posted what he thought of China Miéville's work.
I had never heard of him so I checked out the Wiki.
When the wiki page talks more about your politics than your work as an author; I think we know what's important to you.
That's why I will not be paying for Mr Miéville's works. If you choose to be a fucking socialist, you choose to receive not one guilder of my precious lucre. So, Mr Marxist Intellectual, you should be pleased that I will be looking for your works online for free. From ability to need don'tcha know.
No money to socialism!
Their hands are too damn bloody to trust with it.
Especially never trust an avowed socialist who is SELLING something.
Recently one of the authors posted what he thought of China Miéville's work.
I had never heard of him so I checked out the Wiki.
When the wiki page talks more about your politics than your work as an author; I think we know what's important to you.
That's why I will not be paying for Mr Miéville's works. If you choose to be a fucking socialist, you choose to receive not one guilder of my precious lucre. So, Mr Marxist Intellectual, you should be pleased that I will be looking for your works online for free. From ability to need don'tcha know.
No money to socialism!
Their hands are too damn bloody to trust with it.
Especially never trust an avowed socialist who is SELLING something.
22 August 2011
Full-Auto vs Semi-Auto
Weer'd is talking about the legality.
Be sure to watch the video!
He quotes the VPC about it too.
Semi-auto fire is more lethal than auto.
An aside, we have "full auto" because of the Browning Automatic Rifle. Some versions have a "Slow-Auto" position on the selector; so you had "Full" and "Slow".
What does full-auto do that semi doesn't?
It keeps heads down.
The North Hollywood bank robbery is a decent example. How long were those guys shooting? How many people were killed? In 44 minutes the robbers only managed to kill one person (one of themselves). The only other person killed was the other robber and the cops shot him. Eighteen people were wounded by the robbers, but not killed.
What they did manage was to hold up the police from arresting them for almost an hour!
This is what full-auto is good at in the real world. The military would have had someone flanking the cops while they were being pinned down.
In the video, Mr Hickok fires 30 rounds to take out three targets in auto and 4 rounds for four targets in semi.
Belt-fed type machine guns aren't even designed to be all that accurate in a rifle sense. They have dispersion built into them because a machine gun is an area weapon, like artillery and grenades, not a point weapon like a pistol or rifle. It's undesirable to have all of your rounds go through a small area at range, you want them spread out more than with a rifle. The good news about designing this in is an open bolt gun is shaking around a lot throwing off the aim pretty good and widening the pattern.
Be sure to watch the video!
He quotes the VPC about it too.
Semi-auto fire is more lethal than auto.
An aside, we have "full auto" because of the Browning Automatic Rifle. Some versions have a "Slow-Auto" position on the selector; so you had "Full" and "Slow".
What does full-auto do that semi doesn't?
It keeps heads down.
The North Hollywood bank robbery is a decent example. How long were those guys shooting? How many people were killed? In 44 minutes the robbers only managed to kill one person (one of themselves). The only other person killed was the other robber and the cops shot him. Eighteen people were wounded by the robbers, but not killed.
What they did manage was to hold up the police from arresting them for almost an hour!
This is what full-auto is good at in the real world. The military would have had someone flanking the cops while they were being pinned down.
In the video, Mr Hickok fires 30 rounds to take out three targets in auto and 4 rounds for four targets in semi.
Belt-fed type machine guns aren't even designed to be all that accurate in a rifle sense. They have dispersion built into them because a machine gun is an area weapon, like artillery and grenades, not a point weapon like a pistol or rifle. It's undesirable to have all of your rounds go through a small area at range, you want them spread out more than with a rifle. The good news about designing this in is an open bolt gun is shaking around a lot throwing off the aim pretty good and widening the pattern.
03 September 2010
Shooting Lefty
I practice wrong-handed for about 1/3 of my shooting. It's good practice for if your good arm stops working for some reason.
My biggest problem, I can see, will be getting the gun out of its holster and not the controls being set up for a right hander. All of my holsters are strong side, strong hand carry. Especially the pocket holsters.
Manipulating the safety wrong handed is the hardest part, because I am assuming no right hand to use. It requires holding it a bit wrong, but it's not too bad with the 1911 or P238. Those are the hardest guns to work left handed for me. Reloading the revolvers is irritating because the swing-out is sided.
Not a single semi-rifle I have is hard to operate lefty because they are all two handed guns anyway. The bolt guns, that's where the suckage really starts.
Bottom line: Learn to operate your firearms with the wrong paw! It could save your life.
My biggest problem, I can see, will be getting the gun out of its holster and not the controls being set up for a right hander. All of my holsters are strong side, strong hand carry. Especially the pocket holsters.
Manipulating the safety wrong handed is the hardest part, because I am assuming no right hand to use. It requires holding it a bit wrong, but it's not too bad with the 1911 or P238. Those are the hardest guns to work left handed for me. Reloading the revolvers is irritating because the swing-out is sided.
Not a single semi-rifle I have is hard to operate lefty because they are all two handed guns anyway. The bolt guns, that's where the suckage really starts.
Bottom line: Learn to operate your firearms with the wrong paw! It could save your life.
11 October 2006
Stupidity
When you make war, you take it to the enemy wherever they hide.
That means mosques and graveyards!
Never give the enemy a safe time or place.
If the poor oversensitive masses of Islam don't want their precious mosques and cemeteries blown up, then start shooting terrorists before they hide there. Or, even better, narq them out to allied forces so we can shoot them as they come out.
That means mosques and graveyards!
Never give the enemy a safe time or place.
If the poor oversensitive masses of Islam don't want their precious mosques and cemeteries blown up, then start shooting terrorists before they hide there. Or, even better, narq them out to allied forces so we can shoot them as they come out.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)