Coloccw...

"fantasy camp?"

Have you been there? Do you personally know anyone who has? If not, then maybe you should temper your rhetoric a bit.

I have been to Max's place, twice in the last 18 months. Once for the 5 day CTT/Patrol (when it still was 5 days) and retook CTT last fall. Let me tell you, you work your ass off at his place. By the end of the five days, I was spent, and I gained a tremendous amount of knowledge that maybe one or two other places in the whole country are teaching. The level of instruction is top notch, including combat veterans and security contractors who have been there and done that. The facility is fantastic, safety is top priority, and the prices are more than competitive within the industry.

I guess I just don't get why when someone comes along who is doing well, and teaching tactics, that there are always those who will come out of the woodwork to try to tear them down. We are all trying to get better, trying to learn, and a lot of instructors have much to offer. It is no threat to you if Max is doing well.

I am sure many do and there certainly are others that do not to bother. They can negotiate the best price easily by paying cash and have the means to do so. That is not the norm for a majority of the population. This was a discussion not about the means to do something, it was about the opportunity or lack thereof.

I'm not sure what the motivation for all this shit talking is.  I mean there are many folks, on many forums talking about their experiences with many different training companies.  Why someone else would spend so much time and trouble trying to refute what is being said is beyond me.   The guys I have met, that are as high-speed, as some claim to be, don't waste their time on forums talking shit about other instructors.  So again I'm not sure what the deal is here.  Other than some guys just love to argue and talk shit on internet forums?    

But anyways, back to the OP, this issue of buddy position awareness.  I did a lot of training blank fire, which sometimes can lead to bad habits.  One of which is to not pay enough attention to your angle or sector of fire, in relation to your buddies.  By getting back to some solid live fire training, this point was brought to bear.

Since you're a shill who just joined here in the last 3 days, perhaps you should read the other threads in this section. This has been discussed already there.

It seems he's calling in his favors to help him try to sell classes on arfcom. Business must be really hurting...

Miss my comment at the bottom of page 2 Scott?

Well, looks like the hurricane missed us.....time to go do something more useful.

FYI...

I had an account here years ago, but couldn't recover the password because I don't know what email I used to sign up back then. I guess if you can't refute the message, you can always do your best to destroy the messenger huh? Weak.....

I don't think that anyone has disagreed with this idea. What I see being disagreed with is the idea that the instruction provided in those classes should not be made available to individuals not included in those two "classes" of student. For-profit, commercial enterprises that are happily providing services being paid for with tax dollars are selling a product. It is certainly their right to sell or not sell those services to potential customers but if the basis of the choice is business ( we prefer to specialize in government clients only) that is different than the philosophical objection made when the narrative is that " Why do you need that? We don't think you do so we refuse to allow you to have it"
Edit: I was not saying the above sentence about any specific individual, I was referring to opinions presented in this thread by participants.

Our local range used to be managed by a former .mil guy. They have a shoot house, and teach room clearing, etc. He is no longer managing the place, but when he was, they wouldn't teach civilians (non leo, non mil) people in the shoot house. I asked him why, he said, "why would you need it?" Well, duh. He said that the LEO's there didn't feel comfortable with civilians learning such things. since then, he has been fired, and the new manager welcomes anyone who wants to run through those classes.

I can't speak about any 'sales pitch' other than to say that this is a firearms training forum and several members posting in this  thread and the others have the little "Training Provider" pistol widget in their account info, and the discussion amongst members has led to the topic of who "should" be able to obtain what types of training. At least two members have expressed this thought so I believe that is sufficient reason to continue the discussion. This thread will die and fade away (barring any inappropriate resurrection in the future)when the topic is no longer of interest to the participants.
TBC...

Yes, My account is new.  I have lurked around the Internet for a couple decades now and don't always sign up so to speak because forums like this are 100% about making $ these days and I don't always have an interest in upping the cost for advertisers by padding 'membership numbers'.
A colleague told me that there was a thread going on on this site I might like to read (I was told there was some dick wagging going on...)because this colleague knew that I liked to shoot and have been interested in professional training. I decided to join in this discussion because although I never served in the military, I have had the desire to learn some of the skills. I'm not one to sit around with the only plan being "hope" and as is being discussed there are some barriers in progression that guys like me may face.

Thank you for these links, that is useful.

I wasn't really questioning your ability to teach, as that is a talent separate from mastery of skills. I was more interested in how you were able to move from point A to B when obtaining that required skill and experience is not really offered at the community college. I would disagree about whether someone would care about a resume because it shows depth and breadth. Agreed it does not convey competence. I have intentionally not hired people that had a ton of certs but not a lot of experience in favor of a candidate with no certs and tons of practical experience. The point here being paper tigers are everywhere and there is no guarantee that being 'certified' in some arena means anything besides the individual figured out how to pass the test.

I wish the thread could get back on track.
Lots of thread hijacking going on here....

Back on Track:
I think its crucial to practice live fire in combination with movement in realistic tactical formations not just engage in transition dancing on the square range around the blue barrels.
It appears that the OP is proposing and practicing just that + the fact that he does it open enrollment for citizens makes it especially valuable

Kudos to him!

PS:I knew the "evil new account" thing would come up sooner or later if you post in anything a high postcount member doesn't like.
Any Admin can see my registration email from a .mil address and can see my old account with an AKO email same name that has been on here as a lurker for years.
But I ETS'ed and + I can't get on my old AKO anymore.Should be able to, but am not. (grrr)

Perhaps I've missed something in the multiple threads that are currently going, but it seems the general consensus has been that there shouldn't be any issue with people learning SUT or other topics.  The people that tend to keep bringing the issue up are the MVT crew/supporters.  I don't know if this is a holdover from discussions on other forums or what but it doesn't seem to reflect what is being said here.


I'll cover the other stuff later tonight

What's being said doesn't have much to do with the original topic of the post...how about sticking to that....?

Plan on doing the same?

Thanks TonyF.

Just been watching the movie  Dodgeball with the kids in the basement hurricane bunker, for the hurricane that missed us! I was laughing out loud, and couldn't help giggling at the parallels between MVT / average Joe''s gym vs. GLOBOGYM / trolls!

Now: anyone want to discuss the OP, which was buddy team awareness? Any constructive comments on what was originally posted?

Have a great weekend, and if you are in a flooding area, stay dry!

I'm not sure what a "transition dance" is but the square range, while it appears to be deeply poo-poo'ed by a select few; is the place where we establsh our fundamentals. It can start with something as simple as everyone genrally staying online together during shooting on the move blocks of instruction and progress to movement around barrels, cars, and whatnot. In fact; I will not take pairs (or more) into a shoothouse without having seen them demonstrate fundamentals on the sqaure range.

While getting into a close approximation of your actual operation is desired it shouldnt be something that is rushed into.



It has little to do with not agreeing with what is being said but more of an issue of the astro-turfing that occurs in these types of discussions where a flood of new posters suddenly appear for the given topic never to be heard from after said topic dies off.

Yes the square range is a neccessary part of the progression.
What I have seen in the past though is that  a lot of folks seem to get stuck at that stage and never progress past it. :)

Indded that can be as big of a problem as the guys that always want go to do the sexy stuff without spending their time developing the needed skills.

OK, back to the OP, I think the point is a real gunfight is not restricted to one direction/angle of fire, as on the square range.  When you are working in conjunction with 1 or more buddies, this becomes critical.   It's easy to become sucked in to servicing your target and forgetting about everything else.  So I practice a scan, which goes from targets, sights, buddies.  In a woodland environment, it is more pronounced, as the distances are generally longer,  there is more cover, and usually a bit more time.  In urban environments, it's more compressed, because the distances are usually much closer, you may have no cover, and time is of the essence!  So the scan becomes more blended, as I'm behind the sight more, usually standing, and my buddies are close enough to usually see in my peripheral vision.

One thing that does help, is the RDS.  With both eyes open (as in bug-eyed in a real gunfight) and your face not pressed so far down into the stock (like trad sights), you have a slightly better field of view and much better situational awareness.  This is even better with NV gear.  When using an IR laser in conjunction with a NV optic, you're using a "chin weld" on the stock, which allows you to sight over the day optic, and pick up the laser on target.  This gives you fantastic situational awareness.  With either optic, getting your head up higher off the stock helps you stay in touch with what's going on around you, and where your buddies are.

No one is saying you don't need square range training.  It is a training progression.  You need to start with safety, BRM, weapons manipulation, and then work on other skills sets as the facilities allow.  But what I have found is that by getting off the square range into ranges where I have anywhere from 120 to 170 deg range of fire and movement, I can explore how other things come into play, such as movement, and working with other folks.  

And I agree, a lot of folks don't want to put the time and effort into the "basics" before going into some so-called "tactical" class.  I just attended a Civilian Close Combat course at MVT.  There were doing a Combat Team Tactics class concurrently the same weekend.  The first day of CTT is safety, BRM, and weapons manipulation on the square range.  I showed up a day early and went through this portion again because I'm a big believer in sustainment training.  I think everyone needs to continually go back and review the "basics" before moving onto other stuff.  

By being up to speed with your weapon, I've found that you can shoot more efficiently, spending less time fiddling with your weapon, and more time on other things, like buddy position awareness.

To the OP-

Saw this happen not to long ago with some friends. All had done this sort of thing before and ran smooth.

One had put an ACOG on his rifle. He was "sucked into" the tube (optic) more than he should have been and lost that awareness. We clarified the problem.

"Their is no microphone in the rifle stock!" LOL

I am glad this came back on topic (I apologize for being one of the causes of drift...)
A long time ago I got invited to play paintball. This was in the woods with low capacity(I think 9?) shots onboard, not like this arena stuff with hoppers and big tanks of  air. The individuals  in the group were teamed up and there was a team of guys that all were together. I didn't know that they were a regular 'team' and had skill. When the game started it became very apparent that our team was doomed. These guys hunted any position that fired on them and used what I now know to be buddy pairs and fire/maneuver. Shit works. I wound up hauling ass away from that to hopefully sprint "around" them to snatch the flag. Another guy had about the same plan and we ended up as a buddy team by accident when the other team's flank protection ( I know what that is now!) busted us. As you can expect, we valiantly attempted to just not get hit , ending the game. We quickly got flanked and were done. I bummed me out when he got hit because I saw it coming and couldn't really do anything about it.
It was just a game but I learned a real world lesson on effective teamwork. My ad hoc buddy and I didn't know what the hell we were doing  and that is what planted the seed for me to want to learn those techniques. For me, I appreciate the option to learn not in a game where all sorts of random shit will be going on, but rather from experienced instructors and solid methodologies.

Good posts.  You know we talked about this before in other threads, about how you can use other methods to learn this stuff, such as dry fire, blank fire, hell even paint ball can be useful.  What I found is live fire is just different (duh).   Kinda like the boxing analogy.  You can do the drills all you like, heavy bag, speed bag, shadow boxing, etc.  But until you get into the ring, you ain't really learning it!

Team work is powerful stuff.  Hard to explain sometimes to those that have not experienced it.  SUT really brings that home.  If nothing more than to illustrate a point.  If you are in some sort of WROL situation, and your house comes under fire from a far tree line.  You immediately return fire, with everyone who can shoot.  You are so intent on suppressing that fire, that you don't notice the group that has been quietly approaching to a flank, until you hear the crashing in of a door and several armed intruders rush in.   You have just been schooled on SUT.  It would be nice to know that you are being suppressed by a base of fire, and prep for a possible assault, rather than being distracted by fire from simply one direction.   Even if you think you'll never do it, it's nice to know what someone else may do coming up against you.

The "downside" of teamwork, if we want to call it that, is now you have to be aware of others out there.  You can't just go weapons free and blast everything in sight.  The upside should be obvious as well.  You learn to shoot around non-combatants as well.  What, there's another cross-over to "normal" self-defense.

Buddy position awareness, team work, small unit tactics, square range, 360 degree world, etc...  

I don't know why I didn't consciously tie all this together before.  I went through Paul Howe's "Citizen Response to Active Shooter" course a while back, and the first dry run through the shoot house was a HUGE lightbulb moment for me.  My experience behind a gun had always been hunting, competition, or square range, where there are either virtually no other people around, or the "downrange" area is sharply defined and rigorously maintained.  

Anyway, in Howe's class, students were operating as individuals, but it was really my first live-fire experience with a 360 degree world.  He also had a BUNCH of no-shoot targets sprinkled among the very few bad guy targets.  My first thought was "Boy, in real life this would suck bad without a partner to cover my 6."  My second thought was that I had to REALLY scan, and REALLY see what I was looking at - not just wag my head around after the drill, or look for the black spray-painted "hands" or "gun" on the IDPA target.  The next thing that dawned on me was that I had to be very conscious of angles between me, the bad guy(s), and the no-shoots.  At the beginning of that class, Paul Howe told us, "The shooting part is the easy part."  3 days later, I totally agreed with that!

That kind of situational awareness and really looking at who is where, and what's going on around you, really does carry back and forth between the "advanced CCW" type course, a SUT course, and everyday life.

Yeah I'm beginning to see it more, the cross-overs are definitely there.

Well, you've finally learned to read instead of run your mouth.  You info is partially correct.  Yes, I was in 75th for only a few years.  I moved on to other things.  While I was out I noticed you've celebrated your "victory on arfcom" on your little forum by me hitting the mountains for a few days...thanks for the laugh.  Since you brought my experience up twice and want to dick measure then I will humor you this once:

False Claim #1:
You state that the Para are similar to the 75th. No, they are not.  According to their website, (they are "the airborne infantry element of 16 Air Assault Brigade."  You are nothing more than basic infantry with a static line canopy, similar to our 82nd.  I was in the actual 75th Ranger Regiment, not some cheap imitation of them.  Then you state that you are were a "Para Military Contractor."  No one in that industry refers to anyone as a Para Mil, especially working for the USG as you claim.  Being basic light infantry, you were probably static security at a gate somewhere, checking ID cards and doing vehicle checks.  All of this assumes that your info on your website is actually you, which you refuse to verify.  There is a word for that...POSER.

False Claim #2:
"I'm here as part of the AR15.com professional exchange and I'm here to discuss and be part of the forum." (posted here: http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_9_1/234404_Max_Velocity_Tactical.html&page=3)  Then in you're little fantasy forum you post "Yes, I think this is a perfect time to just talk over him, don’t even respond."  You are not here to discuss anything.  Every time some critiques your methods, you immediately attack them.  You can't even do that by yourself, you have to "mobilize" all your sheep from your personal forum to defend you.  Where is your attempt at discussion?  You haven't even checked into you hometown forum and introduced yourself to people in YOUR STATE!  

False Claim #3"
"It's legitimate British Army /US Army live fire and SUT tactical training. I simply refined my training site and curriculum, because i am a skilled trainer.' (Posted here:http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_9_1/234404_Max_Velocity_Tactical.html&page=3), and then "No, the point of MVT is not to teach out of an FM." later in the same thread.  So which is it?  Is it UK/US techniques or is it something YOU modified?  You've stated that its the same tactics used by Rangers and CAG yet a Ranger and someone from CAG has told you that it isn't. (here http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_9_1/234501_A_Day_at_the_Range.html)

False Claim #4:
If someone disagrees, it is because they "haven't been to your course/don't know the COI/don't think civilians should know this stuff"   I would post a link to any statement supporting that but there isn't one.  Just one of your immediate defensive reactions to someone questioning you.  I've stated several times that my opinions were based upon the info provided in the threads, including the videos.  If the video doesn't clearly demonstrate what you are teaching, then why post it?  

I can continue, however you have wasted enough of my time today.  I'm done dick measuring with someone who hides behind a pen name.  Again, the word for that is POSER.  That's OK.  Most cowards do hide when confronted.  Yes I'm an asshole at times.  I'm an asshole to those who teach unsafe tactics that will get people killed.  Most instructors take a personal issue with BS being taught.  Others, like you apparently, prefer to make money selling it to the sheep.

1 question: WHY ARE YOU HERE?  You've established that you're not here to discuss anything.  You not here to help others on the forum.  So why are you on here?  I'm leaving a challenge for you: go post your verbal diarrhea on other forums with other vetted professionals (lightfighter.net, M4Carbine.net. etc...)  If you don't believe my credentials, then post your shit there for others to critique.  I don't think you can handle the rejection...

Sadly this thread can do with some cleaning up.
We have gotten way off track  

I guess your birth certificate says "coloccw", huh?




yeah, I know, somehow I can't fuckin' read.

Your's says "AShooter" ?!?!     You didn't think much before posting did you?

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahsh

Bwahahahahahahahahabahhh

*chuckle*

@*Colotroll*

I also heard the Brit Paras were shit. It was scary being a gate guard, with all the TCNs.

Moving on......

Nope.  

But I'm not shooting off my mouth about being an "expert", either.

I really wish there was a way to force everyone to check their testosterone at the forum door.