Posted: 6/30/2007 5:58:42 PM EDT
|
I have noticed there is general interest in the discussion of fighting stances and how they preform in the real world setting. It is Unlikely that any of us will ever need to use a weapon in combat but just like our survival preps we believe in being prepared for the unexpected. So lets discuss the positives and negatives of both the target stance and the modern combat stance or universal fighting position. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Target Stance  -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Modern combat stance or as another poster called it "Universal fighting position"  -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- So the Question , What position do you use and why? What are the benefits of each position? What are the negatives of each position? EDIT TO ADD How many here also use a shot timer when shooting? |
You get more gear with the "Universal Fighting Position". Seriously though, I think that in a fire fight the UFP would give you more options for faster lateral movements. I'm no HSLD guy, but I think they avoid the target stance for a reason. I'm sure there's a time and/or place for both. |
|
Ther'es fellas that do combat around here. I'm sure they will post. I don't understand why you are still standing up after a few rounds myself. Seek cover. Show me a technique that expidites me getting to cover and I'll be shitting in tall cotton. The stance I have in that minute interim is damn near unimportant. |
Agreed, as well when not using any body armor the target stance allows a gun shot wound to hit multiple organs where the UFP general reduces the injury to one organ. The Arms being tucked in front of the body also acts like a shield to possibly take the blunt of the trauma, though all of the above options suck. The UFP offers a much fuller range of movement, it is very difficult to hit a moving target. I was taught that to remain stationary in a defensive combat type shooting is to be out maneuvered by the enemy. In modern combat the practice is to generate a large volume of fire to prevent the enemy from moving and maneuver of him to reach a suitable location to take out the target. Three things that were emphasized to me when training with a group were ....SHOOT.....MANUVER....COMUNICATE..... When using cover or clearing corners or Pieing corners, it is necessary to utilize both the left and right side the shooter must be able to switch to either one in a effort to expose as little of the body as possible when maneuvering. It is much easier to do this when using the UFP and allows one to do this with little change to the body position. The UFP allows ones head to remain square and erect, this allows both eyes to remain open and offers the shooter a much better field of view. The Target Stance forces ones head to tilt to the side reducing the lateral field of view. this also shifts ones body off center. The UFP allows a steadier shooting positions once the shooter has become comfortable with the position. With the body square the recoil of the gun is better handled by the body, as well the gun recoils more reward allowing faster fallow up shots and a better sight picture through the recoil faze. The target stance forces the gun to recoil up and to the side the shooter is shooting from, this brings the sight picture out of the shooters field of view and makes fallow up shots slower due to the recoil. |
This would hold true in a single person type defensive shooting, but in a combat type shooting this is sometimes not the case. In any case you want to be utilize cover and concealment to the best of your ability but not at the cost of being pinned down and maneuvered upon. Once you are pinned down the odds of you surviving the attack are much less then if you were to remain mobile. Once you are pinned the enemy has the ability to take well aimed fire as well as maneuver on you, if you stick your head out or attempt to maneuver they have a great opportunity to take you out, if you don't attempt to fire on them, stick your head out, or maneuver they just have to keep you pinned while they maneuver to a safe position to get the angle on you. Its a tuff decision to make at the time I'm sure but you never want to loose momentum. |
Oh Man, wtf. OK, lewt me explain. The "stand there and choose STANCE" is ONLY gonna take place in civvie world. All gunfighting military folk are gonna take cover if properly trained. I ain't been in a war, but I have a learners permit. Let a btdt tell me I'm wrong. Not you. 
|
please explain where I am incorrect? You give no explanation and present no information that explains where I am flawed? I don't choose stance during the shooting, I choose my stance now and train myself to use only that stance so that it is second nature. Under stress you will take the position you have trained to take, that is if you have practiced enough. The question now is what stance is more effective? Relax man, I don't wanna ARFCOM war, if you don't think what i have said is correct explain why.....Im not above logic. Also please do so in a semi respectable manor as I have done with you. |
BUT If you don't have armor, a Weaver stance gives a smaller cross section to the target. |
What is more difficult to hit, an 18x24 in target stationary or a 24x24in target mobile? The weaver dose not offer the movement of the UFP thus making it harder for the shooter to shoot while maneuvering. WARNING Disclaimer these are only my opinions and thoughts on the subject, if I'm incorrect please explain how and why so that I may rethink my position and become a better gun hand by do so. |
+1 The best position to me is the one that lets me fight back and still be covered best with the cover I'm behind. The only time I'd just stand there to take a shot was if I came across a target while walking that didn't notice me yet and I was taking that shot fast to catch them off guard. I certainly wouldn't stay there after and would seek cover immediately after the shot and only move towards the target in a more open movement when I'm a hundred percent their down for good. Till that point even if they drop and I know their hit, I'm still moving cover to cover till I verify their dead and there's no more threat.  It's my ass and I've only got so much of it. |
|
I don't wory about my position. I move comfortably, keep by legs spread for balance, bring my rifle up and get hits as fast as I can and move on. I have watched many videos of myself moving through courses of fire and some of the contorted f'ed up positions I shoot from amaze me. More often than not they look more like the classic target without the chicken wings. I regularly shoot against a timer but I find it useful only in comparing myself to other shooters (who I regularly shoot against) when doing drills I really work on being relaxed and smooth, not fast. |
Fucking Hooah, Airborne. the standing up stance that is the OP's question is not gonna be an issue when you are shooting from cover. You may not know but "BANG BANG BANG" will make you react. You're first reaction will be moving to cover. You may shoot during that movement but chances are that your grasp of the enemy may be hazy prior to you reaching cover and communicating with your chums. I'm not sure how to tell you you are wrong. I ain't edumacated. I'll tell ya this, your body is a smaler target prone behind a big fucking tree. Show me the best platform for that. |
While being prone behind a tree is ideal when you are an ambushing party that has the drop on your enemy it is not often the case. I will agree with you that whenever possible use cover and concealment but you cant just hide. I was taught that you shoot a few shots from one position and then change position again, even if you can not move to a new piece of cover you come out from a different location on the cover you are using. In order to use the cover to the best of your ability it is often necessary to remain in the UFP, when prone you can not move back behind the cover unless you do a combat role, you cant use the angles that are key to getting reliable hits on target under combat conditions. Don't get me wrong when ever possible use stealth and the ambush, if you can set up a firing position then do so, but when you cant you must have other tools in your box. I think what your are visioning is large scale squad tactics , when you have one large body of men that are trying to hold ground it is common for them to dig in and hunker down, but that is not all that common in modern warfare now. Take for example the LA shoot out, 44 minutes two completely untrained men held the whole LA police force at bay because they did not understand maneuver warfare. The police lost momentum immediately after the robbers began to spray and pray, they became pinned down and unable to move against there targets. They had weapons capable of killing a man, the robbers had exposed heads, and the robbers never really used cover except a few brief times. They were forced to use a Armored car to gain access to there fallen comrades and to break from cover. It was not until the Swat Force who in fact used shoot and maneuver tactics was able to engage the bad guy did the whole thing come to a conclusion. No matter what happens you will still have to expose yourself at times and maneuver on the enemy, The UFP allows you to remain a threat while preforming that maneuver, it also allows you to be a threat while not preforming that maneuver. The Target stance dose not allow you to remain as effective a tool when maneuvering opening you up to incoming fire. Your enemy will use cover as well, if you think you got him you will still need to maneuver on his location to check it out. Any good operator will recognize that you have taken cover and where you have taken cover, he will then be able to maneuver on you in a way that gives him the advantage and take you out. |
Hey man, If it takes that long to explain, you are already dead. Please take it for what it is, a rag on you for your benefit. |
Thats funny, medical information take three times as long as that post, dose that mean I'm dead? Read the link that was posted by ArfArf , that may be able to explain t better then I can. Anyhow no insult intended but I don't believe it is worth my time trying to explain this to you any longer, if you believe My hypothesis is incorrect just explain why and I will gladly reanalyze my position based on the valuable information you posted, but with no expiation , and no information from you to support your position I will just have to hold to the things that I learned from people who have BTDT. |
|
If you're in a real bullets flying shootout I would suggest you move in a low crawl or high crawl. If that's just not possible haul ass in 3-5 second rushes. The cops did so bad in LA because they didn't have a rifle, not because they didn't understand manuver warfare. If one cop had had a rifle in his trunk that would have ended very fast. |
You're fucking right there. I get tired of range shooters telling me "tactical" shit. Let me spell it out, you hear "bang" you hit the dirt and look for a target and nearest cover. You hear another "bang" you bandon all need but cover. |
Hitting the dirt is not always the answer. It depends on what you are doing...CQB for example, you are not going to prone out. We live in a 200M world...really closer to 100M. The rifle may be able to shoot farther but visually and in an urban setting you just plan don't see a lot beyond that. In that setting, you need to be able to move to cover and relocate. Sometimes the best cover is a wall of lead going downrange... Stance is dependant on what you are trying to do. Prone is great if we are out in the open and seperated by distance. It is not so great if we are 25 yards apart or entering a room. |
|
I think this is a solution in search of a problem. I will do whatever works in my situation. Switching between both styles is just natural. It is a good idea to learn to shoot from the squared stance. When I target shoot, I don't tilt my head. It isn't as a un natural position as some make it out to be. |
I beleive what the OP is trying to get at is that since you do not normally walk, run, crawl, stand on your head, use your lips to move your body that it is more natural to just incorporate the rifle into your normal movements rather than adjust your body when you have to shoot. Try this next time you get to a range. Put your rifle to your shoulder and take a step. It will still be comfortable (depending on wich leg you move). Now with the other leg take another step moving it past the first leg (remember to keep your rifle pointed at the target while you do this). What we are trying to get at is to just use your normal walk (wich you can do while squared up on your target). After you get this down you can modifie it to SAS walk, etc, etc to determine what fits your particular body style, preference. Once again YMMV etc, etc. I don't pretend to know what works for everyone but I do know what works for me. |
The above part in red is correct. You never want to lose momentum if you are on the attack. Using cover is good and if possible, the best thing to do. However, in urban environments getting in the prone simply doesn't happen all that much. There is too much else going on. Remember, urban conflict is a 360 degree battle and when you are laying on the ground you do not have an easy way to see 360 degrees. There certainly is a time and place to get on the ground in an urban environment but you spend most of your time on your feet and knees. The fighting stance mentioned is important as a base to fight from especially if you are bringing the fight to the enemy. That is one of the best stances to use for active combat as you are moving. However, you certainly don't want to be standing there trading shots with an enemy. Use your stance as an accurate shooting platform and move, either to cover or to close with your opponent. If you are in a survival situation, you should be working to break contact and get out of town. |
|
Where's the option for the "Run like hell and get behind something big to use as cover and as firing support stance" ? By the time you've gone from a real long range carrying position to one of those,I'll be half way to whatever I'm hiding behind. Within the limits of your question,the only way I ccan see that it will come up for me is if I have to squeeze out a single shot quickly at an escaping target. In this case,the target stance. Otherwise,I'm getting behind something,or going to ground. |
| situation dependent! ive used both. and i can say this if your not moving, shooting, reloading or communicating you better be dead! dont worry about your stance! just do whatever has to be done to kill whoever is trying to kill you. and running away does not make you a coward. it makes you smart! |
If you are atacking I would hope you are attacking with other people. You have not lost the momentum when one shooter moves to the next cover and the rest of the team is behind cover engaing the enamy. I would never slow down in the attack to shoot while moving from cover to cover. The alternate situation is a dynamic entry, CQB situation where you would not ever stop but shoot while moving. I can envision several survival and HD scenarios where the attack is neccesary. But I agree, the retreat is generally the best. |
| After reading this whole thread again I wanted to clarify so that people don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that one must always use the universal fighting position as it is shown, you don't always have to stand, you don't always have to in perfect form, but during training it is a good idea to practice the universal fighting position as your base stance and modify it to fit the situation as needed. That is why I have come to appreciate the universal fighting position, it better lends itself to moving while shooting, it is far more adaptable to the obscure shooting positions that one must use in unpredictable situations. I often use a rice patty prone position when shooting from behind barricades, but it is really nothing more then the universal fighting position while squatting. Anyhow I just felt like some of you are thinking that I am saying that no matter what you need to keep perfect form and use this position, I'm not, I'm saying that as a base stance the stance you use when preforming , mag drills, malfunction drills, sight alignment from the ready positions, shooting while moving, the UFP has the upper hand , when you step up to a firing line and start shooting you should be in the UFP not the target stance, anyhow that is just my opinion on it and I hope that clears some of this up. |
You are exactly right about it being an important part of training. I will be doing alot of my close quarter shooting with this stance, just to get more used to it. I appreciate you posting pictures of it so I could get an idea of how it works. We all know that our best laid plans go out the door when the enemy starts shooting and we run away screaming like a bunch of panseys!
|
When the SHTF I plan to fight in nothing but a Santa hat, boots and my chest rig... they will run screaming. The only reason I don't train like that is I would get thown off the range. |
|
I started using the Universal years ago as the object was to place more of my armor between the threat and me as opposed to the other while exposing less of my unprotected side Its also great for recoil management as the follow ups can be MUCH faster and MUCH more accurate than traditional YMMV, IMO etc etc etc |
Train as you fight, fight as you train, brother. Sounds like you need to find a range where they're not quite so uppity. |
|
OK even though I was in the military in a combat zone and despite this topic often makes me feel a tad Ramboish or Red Dawnish, I will make some comments. First, anytime or any position that makes yourself a bigger target at the wrong time is a bad more. Dependence on one positon or even just a couple is limiting your ability to react or survive. Of the two STANDING positions, the full stock/extended stock position is better for hitting distance targets and the "Retracted Stock" position is better for close in targets. Which one you use should be to fit the scenario (range of target probabilty and what cover you have.) The full stock position presents yourself as less of a target and the retracted stock position is faster for aquiring close in targets. A tree nor a vest is cover. Depending on what is being fired at you, considering both as cover can be bad mistake. Even a 22lr can take your arms, legs, or head out wearing a vest and I'm kind of fond of those. Depending on what caliber is being fired at you and the size and type of tree, a tree can be just concealment. There is nothing modern about the retracted stock standing position unless you consider 40 years ago modern. I'm being a bit conservative by that since it is also a sub-machine gun firing position which goes back even farther in history. With no stock, folded stock, or retractable stock retracted, that is the natural firing position if you are taking aim at all. Not everyone or everytime, was a Thompson in WWII did the user not take aim. The positon is a natural progression of the smaller weapon length. The general rule of thumb in tactics for a counter to an ambush is to attack the ambush. This general rule isn't new either and often a mistake to believe any enemy you confront will not know it nor anticipate it. Point of fact, despite how good you are or those around you or even how experienced you are, in the wrong place at the wrong time a frontal assault can sign your death warrant. There are no absolutes, only good or poor judgement. What really helps on this judgement and I know its difficult for some of you guys is to get away from the range or training enviroment and get some boonie trigger time. Do your own Old Painless Box of Truth and shoot some shit up. Tj PS, I still like a sling. With a carbine there will be times you may be away from your vehicle (have to abandon it) and may need two hands. It also is a very valuable tool for steading your aim at distant targets. |
|
I am asling man as well. {robably the Appleseeder in me, but I still find it useful, even when I naturally take a "universal fihgting position" although I didn't know it was clled by that particular name. There is a lot of thruth on both sides of this argument, being as how I regularly shoot both 3 position and Tactical rifle matches and train for both (disclaimer: I am not currently, nor have I ever been accused of being a high speed low drag kinda guy) being able to shoot well from a fixed position has it's place as well as being able to shoot on the move in a fast paced run n gun type scenario.. A case in point: this weekend, we had a tactical rifle match. One of the stages required shooting 8" steel plates at 175 meters and mini poppers at 75 meters with a bonus target out to 275 meters. Almost no one could hit the long range targets in the alloted par time, even the HSLD guys wwith optics. As soonas I have confirmation, I'll give an exact percentage, but the only guys that could accomplish the stage in a reasonable time were ones that routinely practice and shoot three position shooting... There were a few guys who were good at both and they breezed the match. |
I agree. With .30 cal rounds piercing vehicles and trying to shoot the BG on the head while both PD and BG moving makes it tough to say the least. Yep they were undergunned and not out manuevered. |
|
I say let the situation dictate your reaction and stance. You cannot just practice this stance or that stance, you have to train for the whole enchilada. That's why scenario based training with a good trainer rocks. Never let your doctrine be your downfall. If you are nothing but doctrine, your enemy will learn this and use it against you. |