Thanks but I have never been in combat. I have been in a lot of high risk law enforcement situations where shots were being fired but I don't think those could be considered "combat".
It always amused me seeing a dozen guys join in on something like this, only to sit back and do nothing. Gives all the risks of opfor using grenades with none of the benefits of increased manpower. This seems a lot like working real estate. Location, location, location. Love the white board examples, gives me a workable concept of what you're talking about. As a student, thanks for helping me fix my tactical stupid.
Great content! Thanks a lot. I've one suggestion since we talk about airsoft and not the real life, I think it's worth including grenade usage in CQB tactics. The whole scenario would change if 30% of the people have a grenade ready, especially if you are forced to enter a room you haven't checked for enemies.
This is invaluable information. It is correct that you have serious casualties risk regarding the dynamic entry in the parallel doors hallway being hold down scenario. However, one would assume that, in real life, a 12 gauge bullpup be used to enforce the door and fortunately suppress the threat. while suppressive fire switch side with the man opposite whoever is forcing entry at the beginning of the hallway. Perhaps if possible, flash grenades could be used as well as door charges to avoid having to switch arm and to avoid momentarily posing the suppressive fire on your side (leaving only the man at the opposite side to provide it for the first room). Would I be correct to assume that?
There is a key difference between airsoft/MILES and real bullets. Bullets can go through walls and wall corners. In that context (real bullets), walls are an illusion.
Are you saying real bullets can go through walls?! No way. I guess the answer to that problem is to stack up and blindly run into rooms using "Speed, surprise and violence of action" right? They tried that in 2003 in Iraq. Turns out it doesn't work so well against prepared defenders. These methods have been used by American SWAT teams for over a decade. Thousands and thousands of high risk entries. I still haven't see the pile of bodies from officers getting "shot through the walls".
@@GunfatherMilsim I'm not criticizing you. In both Parkland and Uvalde the shooters shot through walls. Walls are generally plasterboard over studs. It does give you the opportunity to engage the shooter in some situations. It also might suggest different ideas for future school construction standards. And, maybe, evaluate various technologies to 'see' where the shooter is in a room. What if competent police knew all the students/teachers in 111 were on the floor? There are a variety of tests on various walls. ruclips.net/video/7VeqqNuQU_4/видео.html Cheers.
@@cwolf8841 Sorry, hard to read "tone" via text and most RUclips commenters are trolls. In Uvalde the walls were concrete and the doors were steel. Apparently the shooter shot through the steel doors as they were not thick enough to stop the bullets. However, the concrete on either side of the doors AND the windows was cover. I am not going to get into the multitude of issues with Uvalde but it was a failure of will not a lack of means to end the threat. When the right cops showed up they ended the stand off. I am not overly familiar with Parkland. I will have to get back to you. I think I see where you are going with your "if all the innocents were down on the floor scenario". Hard to say. Some law enforcement agencies do have weaponry capable of punching through significant barriers (ex. 50 cal sniper rifles with AP rounds) but they are not common. Lining up that kind of shot without any line of sight would be challenging and it would have to be a static event, not a dynamic one. I am not saying it couldn't happen just very unlikely. Having said that the BLM shooter in Dallas was killed by a disposal robot robot carrying a device so you never know.
@@GunfatherMilsim Dialogue is good. All the Uvalde doors had glass windows. The photos show bullet holes in doors. Steel doors are generally thin sheet steel over foam. ruclips.net/video/c28ttM1TaOo/видео.html Texas Chief, DPS, says the walls were drywall. The wounded teacher who survived stated the first gunfire was thru the classroom wall. The devil is in the details. Concrete block is very brittle and easily penetrated. Solid block is tougher, but still somewhat brittle. The 556 penetration tests show a single shot only penetrating one side of block. But they don't test multiple shots. All of which is why I emphasize live fire testing. Wall penetration works both ways. Should responders use Mk262, frangible, or Glaser ammo? Needs to be tested. I agree. The first 3 man breaching team got to the classroom door in minutes. But ran when they received fire. There are a very large array of issues which should become Lessons Learned to prevent/respond to future events. Apparently the Secret Service is the federal school shooting lead (see their reports).
It depends. On a breach and hold, a planned event, I prefer low high. It gives both people a better view and better use of the threshold for cover as the two man is over the top of the one man versus going around. However on an unplanned event I have found the first guy to the threshold will always go high and stay high. So the second is gonna be low by default.
At 5:56, there is only 1 man assaulting the room in the diagram. Would it not be beneficial to try to maintain fire from the other side of the hall, and then use some of the additional men you have to assault the room dynamically with a team of 2 or 3?
Lol. Technically, in a perfect world, yes. Especially on a room with a known threat. To be honest though fragging a known threat room prior to entry would be ideal. Unfortunately "ideal" rarely happens. Every time I have used this technique at an event I didn't have the man power to throw down the hall and most the rooms were empty. But you are correct. Ideally, 2 or 3 for a dynamic entry.
Pfft. In situation like in airsoft event, there's barely 1-2 guys who would even move into this corridor. You're speaking about 2-3 guys moving down the corridor and cleaning one room on one side, which kinda assumes there's even more people moving down the lane - and on my experience, this is NEVER a thing. If you excuse me sharing my video and my shallow editing, here's example of what I and my team usually deal with - ruclips.net/video/mHreevKKd9k/видео.html Scenes are mixed up, but story is - my team of four stack on entry to the corridor, clear the first side rooms with nades and blind aggressive entry, we got casualties, but keep coming back. Later on we got reinforcements of like 20 men, but still they achieve less then what we did in 4 - they just stack up at each possible point, at entry, in the rooms we cleared, but barely anyone even holding the lane and angles. It's again the same story - myself and my best partner I are trying to push forward and clear the exit, with mixed results.
You're channel is a gold mine. Thank you for providing civvies like me with your combat wisdom.
Thanks but I have never been in combat. I have been in a lot of high risk law enforcement situations where shots were being fired but I don't think those could be considered "combat".
Using this for our next playthrough on ground branch, I know it's a video game but these tactics you're teaching really helps a lot!
It always amused me seeing a dozen guys join in on something like this, only to sit back and do nothing. Gives all the risks of opfor using grenades with none of the benefits of increased manpower. This seems a lot like working real estate. Location, location, location. Love the white board examples, gives me a workable concept of what you're talking about.
As a student, thanks for helping me fix my tactical stupid.
Thanks for watching! I am glad you found it useful.
this is exactly what I'm looking for, I wanna get tactical training but im a broke teen and can't, this is perfect for teaching me what I wanna know.
I am glad you found it useful.
man this is really awesome.
Great content! Thanks a lot. I've one suggestion since we talk about airsoft and not the real life, I think it's worth including grenade usage in CQB tactics. The whole scenario would change if 30% of the people have a grenade ready, especially if you are forced to enter a room you haven't checked for enemies.
Pure gold mine channel!
This is invaluable information. It is correct that you have serious casualties risk regarding the dynamic entry in the parallel doors hallway being hold down scenario. However, one would assume that, in real life, a 12 gauge bullpup be used to enforce the door and fortunately suppress the threat. while suppressive fire switch side with the man opposite whoever is forcing entry at the beginning of the hallway. Perhaps if possible, flash grenades could be used as well as door charges to avoid having to switch arm and to avoid momentarily posing the suppressive fire on your side (leaving only the man at the opposite side to provide it for the first room). Would I be correct to assume that?
Learned some stuff this time! Keep it up man!
Thank you sir
Thanks
Thank you for this
There is a key difference between airsoft/MILES and real bullets. Bullets can go through walls and wall corners. In that context (real bullets), walls are an illusion.
Are you saying real bullets can go through walls?! No way. I guess the answer to that problem is to stack up and blindly run into rooms using "Speed, surprise and violence of action" right? They tried that in 2003 in Iraq. Turns out it doesn't work so well against prepared defenders.
These methods have been used by American SWAT teams for over a decade. Thousands and thousands of high risk entries. I still haven't see the pile of bodies from officers getting "shot through the walls".
@@GunfatherMilsim I'm not criticizing you.
In both Parkland and Uvalde the shooters shot through walls. Walls are generally plasterboard over studs.
It does give you the opportunity to engage the shooter in some situations.
It also might suggest different ideas for future school construction standards.
And, maybe, evaluate various technologies to 'see' where the shooter is in a room. What if competent police knew all the students/teachers in 111 were on the floor?
There are a variety of tests on various walls. ruclips.net/video/7VeqqNuQU_4/видео.html
Cheers.
@@cwolf8841 Sorry, hard to read "tone" via text and most RUclips commenters are trolls.
In Uvalde the walls were concrete and the doors were steel. Apparently the shooter shot through the steel doors as they were not thick enough to stop the bullets. However, the concrete on either side of the doors AND the windows was cover. I am not going to get into the multitude of issues with Uvalde but it was a failure of will not a lack of means to end the threat. When the right cops showed up they ended the stand off.
I am not overly familiar with Parkland. I will have to get back to you.
I think I see where you are going with your "if all the innocents were down on the floor scenario". Hard to say. Some law enforcement agencies do have weaponry capable of punching through significant barriers (ex. 50 cal sniper rifles with AP rounds) but they are not common. Lining up that kind of shot without any line of sight would be challenging and it would have to be a static event, not a dynamic one. I am not saying it couldn't happen just very unlikely. Having said that the BLM shooter in Dallas was killed by a disposal robot robot carrying a device so you never know.
@@GunfatherMilsim Dialogue is good. All the Uvalde doors had glass windows. The photos show bullet holes in doors. Steel doors are generally thin sheet steel over foam.
ruclips.net/video/c28ttM1TaOo/видео.html Texas Chief, DPS, says the walls were drywall. The wounded teacher who survived stated the first gunfire was thru the classroom wall.
The devil is in the details. Concrete block is very brittle and easily penetrated. Solid block is tougher, but still somewhat brittle. The 556 penetration tests show a single shot only penetrating one side of block. But they don't test multiple shots.
All of which is why I emphasize live fire testing. Wall penetration works both ways. Should responders use Mk262, frangible, or Glaser ammo? Needs to be tested.
I agree. The first 3 man breaching team got to the classroom door in minutes. But ran when they received fire.
There are a very large array of issues which should become Lessons Learned to prevent/respond to future events. Apparently the Secret Service is the federal school shooting lead (see their reports).
nice stuff indeed thanx
Nice fire and maneuver drill.
BTW, about two man shooting from the cover, which stance do you prefer? High Low or Low High?
It depends. On a breach and hold, a planned event, I prefer low high. It gives both people a better view and better use of the threshold for cover as the two man is over the top of the one man versus going around. However on an unplanned event I have found the first guy to the threshold will always go high and stay high. So the second is gonna be low by default.
At 5:56, there is only 1 man assaulting the room in the diagram. Would it not be beneficial to try to maintain fire from the other side of the hall, and then use some of the additional men you have to assault the room dynamically with a team of 2 or 3?
Lol. Technically, in a perfect world, yes. Especially on a room with a known threat. To be honest though fragging a known threat room prior to entry would be ideal. Unfortunately "ideal" rarely happens. Every time I have used this technique at an event I didn't have the man power to throw down the hall and most the rooms were empty. But you are correct. Ideally, 2 or 3 for a dynamic entry.
Pfft. In situation like in airsoft event, there's barely 1-2 guys who would even move into this corridor. You're speaking about 2-3 guys moving down the corridor and cleaning one room on one side, which kinda assumes there's even more people moving down the lane - and on my experience, this is NEVER a thing.
If you excuse me sharing my video and my shallow editing, here's example of what I and my team usually deal with - ruclips.net/video/mHreevKKd9k/видео.html
Scenes are mixed up, but story is - my team of four stack on entry to the corridor, clear the first side rooms with nades and blind aggressive entry, we got casualties, but keep coming back. Later on we got reinforcements of like 20 men, but still they achieve less then what we did in 4 - they just stack up at each possible point, at entry, in the rooms we cleared, but barely anyone even holding the lane and angles. It's again the same story - myself and my best partner I are trying to push forward and clear the exit, with mixed results.
Remember to share with your team mates. Doesn't help if you're the only one who watched this.
Thank you sir