I like Augees's idea of running the NOD over the dominant eye, though it does have a couple of drawbacks. First, I love an absolute cowitness setup because my Eotech can be used as a large "rear aperture" for close shooting even if the optic goes down. It is also great to be able to quickly verify zero against the irons in the field. An  ARMS 36 SuperEx rail could be used to elevate the irons and Eotech 1/2" to mitigate this issue. The second drawback to running the NOD over the dominant eye would be transitions to white light will require flipping the NOD up and switching the Eotech out of night vision compatible mode. Of course the advantages are lower cost, weight and no active laser emission.

Cheap, and available in different heights...

Wheeler riser

Hey Augee, I read your post regarding high rise optics and NVGs over the dominant eye and found it intriguing. I am likely to pursue this setup as a proof of concept as your describe in an effort to avoid lasers if I can help it.

One question though - in your opinion, what are the advantages of the method you describe versus simply dropping a monocular on a weapons mount behind a micro dot?

- Being able to use binoculars
- No transitioning from a weapons mount to a head mount if you need to observe
- No or less risk of killing the tube via recoil

Anything obvious I'm missing?

So if I don't have iron sights in the way, what height would I want a Primary Arms MD-ADS mounted at?  It's on an American Defense Mfg AD-T1-11 right now.  I see mentions of 2.4" and 2.3" but unsure if those are people trying to get past their irons.

My experience is based on a 1.2" spacer that we used for clearing respirators. That having been said, I don't think the height has anything to do with the iron sights. You would want the rear sight flipped down so you do not have physical conflict. I have not run this system as indicated but I intend to do so in the near future. When I do I will be using a set of Troy offset sights. Vertical iron sights would be obscured by the riser. You may be able to get some kind of a view of them through the riser but, in my experience, sighting through the channel is a losing proposition.

I just want to slap my RDS on an upper and go hunt with it when my MNVD gets here.  I want to keep the $1300 for the ATPIAL-C in my pocket.  Seems dumb to spend that much more to hunt hogs.  JMO.

Words and pictures can't describe how clear and detailed gen three night vision is. I personally have not used modern gen two, but hear it is pretty good. Gen one is pretty much worthless. I'd be looking for a used pvs14 if I were you.

@SOT_Solutions--a 1/2" rise should at least be enough to give you a sense for whether or not you want to continue to explore this method, if you think it's starting to work for you, but still feel that 1/2" is a little too low, the LaRue 5/8" riser you mentioned is an option.  If you're into 3x magnifiers, Wilcox has a great "kit" that can be had with a 5/8" riser as well, and an engineering marvel of a FTS/QD magnifier base, but it's quite expensive.  KAC also makes 3/4" risers in various lengths as well.  

With an absolute cowitness sight, which puts your sight line about 1.4-1.5" above the top of the rail, a 1/2" riser will put your optic at between 1.9-2" over the rail on a conventional AR pattern, which is almost exactly in-line with the "NV height" optics mounts that many companies sell, which put the sight line 1.93" over the rail, though that's primarily to clear LAMs out of your FOV when mounted at the 12 o'clock.  

For those that are interested in keeping their BUIS zeroed, a long enough 1/2" riser would allow you, if you so pleased, to put a BUIS on the riser behind the optic, and you could also get a small riser that you could mount your front BUIS to, most likely behind the LAM, if you have one, as you could potentially get splashback from the LAM if mounted ahead of it.  This would allow you to continue to have absolute-cowitness with BUIS, while still employing the riser system.  

With the Wilcox kit, a front sight riser is actually included in both the .410" and 5/8" heights with the kit, however the magnifier base can only be used with KAC Micro rear sights, as no other rear sight that I'm aware of has a small enough profile to fit in the BUIS slot on the riser behind the magnifier base.  



@1ipschoser--I don't worry too much about BUIS personally, though, as I mentioned above, there are options if you still want to cowitness with irons.  The BUIS on my HK are not even zeroed, and because I've removed the front sight riser--not even usable in their current configuration, I mostly keep it set up like that to keep track of the front sight, and to throw people who have fits over BUIS into a rage.  

That being said, I do like having the rear BUIS on the riser behind the absolute cowitness sight because I have non-corrected astigmatism.  It's a non-issue for most situations, but it does make zeroing RDS more of a chore than it could be--the dot in an Aimpoint T1 literally looks like the Playboy bunny to me, which is one of the reasons I like the 1 MOA center dot of the EOTech ICW the large ring--if I'm going to have a comet as my aiming point, it may as well be as small as possible.  Under most "heads up" shooting circumstances, I can manage just fine with the comet-dot, but to get a good precise zero, I'll pop up the rear aperture which makes it a little easier for me to get a good zero.  

Regarding your other point about white light transitions--it is a good one, and it is worth noting that for a fighting gun, though I use the optic as the "primary" system of aiming, it does not mean that I advocate everyone dumping their LAMs, and I keep and use my ATPIAL on my rifle.  

It should be worth noting that when I talk about "fighting guns" and NODs in general, I am almost always referring to military/LE use in team-based scenarios, something that should come as a surprise to none.  One of the things I enjoy the most about low light/night operations is that they require a little more thought, finesse, and skill/expertise than "straightforward" daytime operations to get around and/or adapt to the obvious limitations of operating in the dark while taking full advantage of the resources and assets at your disposal to gain the tactical advantage, which is why organizations that specialize in night operations are more highly trained and skilled than the baseline rank-and-file servicemember or officer, and while I make no claims of being at the "top level" of night operations, I try to learn, practice, and train as much as I can to be as competent and proficient as possible with the resources at my disposal.  

With that, while I am necessarily vague in public settings about specific TTPs, a couple notes: while it is often the door-kickers and face-shooters who get the glory and attention, ideally, in almost any planned scenario, you would try to have at least three distinct elements--some variation of "maneuver, support, and reserve."  While these elements sometimes go by different names, or have different sub-groups or compositions, and more than three elements might be employed, in a very general sense, they tend to fall along those lines.  Understanding that your role could easily change, and very quickly from one to another as the situation develops or from operation to operation--different roles and tasks often come with different techniques and methods based on a probability of your most likely and most dangerous engagement scenarios.  E.g., in a support role, it may be most beneficial to stay under NODs for the entirety of the operation, and   continue using passive aiming solutions, even when the shooting starts, to avoid exposing yourself and giving away your exact location as you work from initial, subsequent, and contingency positions.  

A maneuver element may be less concerned about active emissions, as their task is focused on momentum and movement, and when you're moving rapidly, it becomes a calculated risk that it is less of a liability to present active emissions, as you're unlikely to stay in that place long.  When I talk about transitions to white light, I am usually (though not always) talking about a relatively deliberate action, which, at very least allows you the extra moment to flip up your NODs, and prepare for active, white light engagement.  Once again, while EOTechs take a lot of heat, this is one of the places where the EOTech format--to me--has some value.  With the EOTech I can pre-set my daytime/white light brightness before hitting the NV button, rather than twisting a knob/dial and hoping I've landed on the right brightness setting when the time comes.  This is also, IMHO, where ANVIS systems like the F4949 and F5050 shine--everything can function with relative efficiency and economy of movement, when you prepare for the assault, all you need to do is flip up your NODs, confident a) that they'll shut off, and b) that they'll be exactly in the right place if you need to flip them down, without adjustment, and hit the "NV" button on your optic, and get ready to kick some teeth in.  

For less deliberate white light transition scenarios, there are a variety of options available as well.  Depending on your TTPs and equipment setup (and settings), if you need to hastily transition to white light, and run your NOD high and forward as I also advocate for (instead of sucked into your face), when the lights go on, you actually have a fairly good view, even with dual googles--you eyes/brain do a good job of "filling in" all the input from your peripheral vision around the NOD, and the green (or these days, though sadly not for me , blue/white) image through your tubes.  Again, depending on your preference and situation--you can actually use any combination of an IR laser, a daylight bright optic, or a visible laser (the ambient light will eat up much of the "bloom" that you would get in darkness).  Is it super good for your tubes?  No, we're talking about a lot of light--but we're also talking about being caught off guard in a hostile situation that requires you to quickly adjust for the circumstances.  Without getting into the many myriad permutations where this might occur/be necessary--you can keep your LAM set to the VIS laser while you use your NV optic, and with devices like the TAPs that allows slaved function of a white light and LAM, or the visible override on the DBAL-A3, or multifunction devices like the RAPTARs, PEQ-16, and upcoming DBAL-A4, you can very easily go "straight" to visible engagement methods without having to do a dick dance putting all your switches and controls where you can instantaneously active them at once.  It's worth noting at this point that one thing the SOF-issued LA-5/PEQ has that is not present on other ATPIAL variants, is a "VIS HI" function.  At the same time--even with the white light on, at close ranges, even the IR laser will still work if you're looking through your NODs even in broad daylight, as will a white light bright optic, though it may appear as something of a "ring of fire" (or even brighter comet?), but it will only be in one eye, whether you're using dual tubes, or a mono, and your brain can figure out which inputs are most important.  

Anyways, all of that was a very long and complicated way of saying--it all depends on the situation, often flippantly tossed off as (and I will invoke with some levity) "METT-C Dependent," saying that using the optic is "primary," doesn't mean that it's "always" for every situation or task.  


@westernhaikus1-- basically this technique comes with all the advantages of using a head-mounted NOD and laser without the active IR emissions and offsets of an IR laser.  Those advantages have been discussed at length in the past, but among them are increased situational awareness and safety, as you do not have to point your weapon at everything you want to look at.  Another advantage distinct to this technique, however, is that by not hard-mounting your NVG to the weapon, you also far reduce the likelihood of burning your aiming reticule into your tube, something that has on occasion been reported even with NV-capable optics left too long behind an optic that's too bright (even NV settings have brightness levels), and thereby continually bombarding the exact same part of your tube with photons--no matter how steady your head and consistent your sight picture, you will still be "spreading the wealth" across your tube.  

One other advantage is that day optics in front of an NVG will cut down on some of your light collection--with some optics being worse than others, of the ones I've tried, EOTech does best because of the thin, "bright" hood, while Micro-format dots like the T1 are the worst, because they are "perfectly sized" to fill up your NV FOV and eat a lot of light--though I would at least note that this is relatively minor, and even a T1 is usable like this for target engagement.  With the NVD hard-mounted, however, you're basically giving up a lot of light collection 100% of the time.  


@35Remington-- Looking at the ADM mount in question, it appears to be a "Lower 1/3" cowitness mount, which places the sight line at about 1 3/4" (~.28" above absolute cowitness) above the rail.  A 1/2" riser will easily get you to the "desired" 2"-2.5" height (~2.28").  

The new Falla/KAC T1 mount has a *lot* of rise, I forget the exact number off top of my head, but IIRC, it's somewhere around 3.8" or 3.92" or something, which I don't think I'd mind, but I don't necessarily think is necessary to use this technique.  


A couple of general notes:

As I've already pointed out, most of my input has to deal with team-based military scenarios, but that does not preclude adaptation of these techniques for other applications--again, it just requires some thought on the individual's behalf WRT what applies and what does not, and what is a useful technique and what is not.  Obviously, for the critter hunter--the big advantages that I can see at least, are much lower cost than needing to purchase an IR laser, and not having to compensate as much for offset, or at least having a more consistent offset, since raising the optics does introduce a new offset--but it at least translates from day to night.  

Finally--for PVS-7 users, I've not "proofed" this technique with bioculars, so I can't speak to how well it would work for that.  My inclination is that probably if you canted the rifle slightly, you could put the day optic in front of the tube, and still shoot this way, but I have no idea how it would end up working "overall."  Maybe someone can try it and let us know.  Other than that, sorry for being not very helpful if you're a PVS-7 user.  

~Augee

@Augee

I reviewed the KAC lineup on your recommendation. I found the 98053. I looked all over the web for it and all I found was "Discontinued" or "No Longer Available"... but sure as hell there was one in the EE!

Done. Thanks bro. I may not like what I find when I try this but, if I do, then I don't want to start over trying to find a permanent mount. This should either work for me or nothing will.

Just for others who may also be looking for the .75" riser--the older 98053 was "designed" as a scope riser, I'm not sure if KAC will ever make more, but they did "update" the design for more "purpose built" red dot applications, though I think it was kind of a step backwards, as you can no longer mount a magnifier behind it, the new .75" riser is much shorter (4 Picatinny rail slots), and has just enough space to mount an RDS:



http://shop.knightarmco.com/ProductDetails.aspx?ProductID=KM30779


I'm unsure if they're planning to eventually come out with an improved long riser as well, or if they're dropping the scope mount/receiver length risers entirely, but these are ~$50 compared to the ~$100 you would have paid for the older risers, and should do the trick just fine if you're not worried about mounting a magnifier to match.  KAC also has a 1.25" riser now for red dots as well.  

~Augee

I got the KAC 98053. It's acceptable but I don't care for the tiny rail claws - they'll get lost for sure if they ever get separated from the mount. I'll VibraTite them. The rail allows for mounting the PVS-14 behind the EOTech ICW my favorite 2X telephoto lens so I can shoot fixed mount, if desired.

The standard irons had to go on account of not being able to see through the riser. I substituted a set of Troy folders. Side benefit: Prone shooting is massively stabilized in prone because the pistol grip can rest on the ground if you are using 20 round mags. 30 rounders still hit the dirt. the rear sight needs to stay in the "Up" position because it will interfere with the charging handle when in the "Down" position.

I put a LaserMax Uni IR laser on the E-Port rail so I still have laser capability if desired.

I put a SF M952V on the slab side rail for some supplemental IR and white light.

I need to wring it out a bit - then I will post some upside/downside comments.

Thanks for the start, Augee. We'll see how it goes.

Remember, even if you are primarily engaging via optic, you always want laser capability on your rifle. You don't have the luxury of acquiring the red dot everytime you need to squeeze the trigger. Being able to center punch your target with a laser is invaluable under stress.

@Augee

I have typically been running a 50m/200m point blank zero with a 1.5" sight offset. Do you have a ballistic table handy for me to use for my new top end with an XPS3-2 on a 3/4" riser for a similar zero? I used a free calculator on the web and it was a disaster.

I'm picturing that if I use a 50m FPC (first point of coincidence) zero that my SPC (second point of coincidence) will be even further than 200m but that my point blank zone will be larger (maybe too large). Maybe a further FPC like 75m or 100m is in order.

I agree, that's why I put the LaserMax Uni IR on it for experimentation purposes - but I won't be smoke-checking an imminent threat with it because it's way too slow to activate. If this rig pans out then I'll probably toss an OTAL on it.

I run conservative. I'm not going to cripple my primary carbine by removing my OTAL to experiment on this rig. Even if this pans out I'll probably retire the old top end intact.

I 100% agree. In my limited experience so far, there is definitely a speed threshold to the passive technique. If you fail to index the position of the RDS and/or angle you don't get a reticle at all. This is way worse at speed. In all fairness, I am programmed for absolute cowitness and the problem can be overcome with training. I am currently dry training all available targeting techniques and will put them on the clock in live fire. The other side of the coin is whether or not a specific situation requires an aiming reference outside of body index / NPA. You don't really know how fast you can do something until you crash and burn - then look and see how fast you went before the wheels came off.

I am also curious to see what impact utilizing a BNVD has on index shooting versus using an MNVD. This may be one aspect where the PVS-7B shines.

@SOT_Solutions

I do not have a ballistic chart, sorry.  

I usually try to zero SBRs at 100m and long guns for a 50/200m, and besides that I do not do a whole lot of KD/grouping at range, mostly just steel when I have a chance to stretch the legs, and qual ranges are all just hit/miss automated target affairs.    

As I've already noted, using the optic as primary doesn't mean that I get rid of the LAM, but at the same time, speed comes with practice, similar to the way that guys using red dots with pistols will initially shoot much slower (especially first round breaks), but once you've had enough practice and go over the "hump," your speed and accuracy potential goes way up.  While it "seems" like a minor change in the height of your sight line, that small adjustment can be a big difference if you've spent years training your muscles and reflexes to index to one sight plane, and now are trying to adjust to another--it takes a lot of dry firing and "up/downs" and presentations before you truly get comfortable with it.  Once you've adjusted your NPOA to the raised sight height, however, I've found it to be no different than using an RDS in any other situation, though I had to break another habit--shooting NTCH (difficult when your nose is an inch above the charging handle anyways )--to get there as well.  As of right now, I simply don't have the money or number of risers to raise my magnified optics, yet, but I have also been using piggybacked RDS on magnified optics for almost a decade now, since I first realized that the TA31F was an utterly shitty low light sight.   In other news, I've been re-experimenting with offset RDS... and I still don't really like it.  

FWIW, I don't know if the technique works "better" with binos, or if I'm just more used to binos in general, I'm a little slower with the mono though when I've used it with a mono-only.    

And yes, VIS lasers do make a great EOF/deterrent when the situation calls for it.  

Again, there are two different applications we are perhaps addressing here:

1) a low cost aiming method that does not require an immediate investment in an expensive LAM after the initial outlay for an NVD

and

2) "another tool" that can be used/considered when running a fully equipped fighting rifle based on and relative to the situation

~Augee

Augee did all the heavy lifting for us. Can someone else crunch what a 50m zero trajectory looks like? I would like to see 75m and 100m zeroed trajectories as well.

If you spent the time to find the white paper we'd certainly appreciate it. I gave this a try several years ago and relegated it to the toolbox. I have an A.R.M.S. #54 set aside for respirator use but we were never really happy with it. I can accept that it can be done well - we just didn't get it at the time and we did a piss poor job of it.

The new top end I built has a lower rise and I can see that, with enough training, the lower rise will allow us to do what we need to do without murdering our daytime abilities as much as the higher rise did.

I was lucky enough to attend two of Dave's training courses last year, he's a good dude and a great firearms instructor.

Circa 2007-8:




The piggybacked MRDS was a direct result of realizing first hand how the ACOG sucked in low light/night, and deciding I needed something better to address the situation.  Had to field a lot of "hey, you know your sight's on," "yes, it's always on."  Finally ended up having to send it back to Trijicon (Trijicon Red Dot, for anyone that remembers, before they started using Docters and long before the RMR--it was a license built JPoint/Optima 2000) in late-2009 after utterly destroying it, they sent me back a brand new one after determining that it could not be repaired, free of charge.  

~Augee

I was reading through Augee's excellent post and thought i'd throw in my $0.02 also.

Red dots on handguns are becoming more popular and also work great for NOD's.  If I was going to run a PVS-14 again and shoot handgun (with a RDS) I'd try mounting the PVS-14 over my dominate, right eye.  

With the mono over the non-dominate eye my brain will see the target with the NOD's but then super-impose the red dot onto the picture.  Took me a bit to figure out I couldn't hit anything because the mono and my right eye were not really lined up.  To be able to get good hits with the RDS pistol I'd have to close my dominate eye to pick up the dot through the PVS-14.  I don't recall if turning down the dot brightness far enough to NV only settings forced my eye to pick up the dot through the PVS-14 only because once I figured out my issues I went with the blinking technique to get hits.

If your running a RDS on a handgun and a mono this might be another +1 to use your monocular over your dominate eye.

Guys:  Any updates on this thread?  I am very interested in the higher riser concept for both day and night shooting.  Have you guys been able to acquire any new mounts and experiment with them?  

I have a couple of ADM mounts for my MRDS's.  The 1/3 height co-witness is actually high enough to get the MNVD behind them.  A little awkward but it works.  My first set of "ready-ups" was a challenge but I'm going to keep working it.  A Magpul M-BUS rear will just let a -14 in on top of it.

I'm on a short leash until I get some construction done on my house. In my dry fire training recently, the biggest thing I am seeing is that I need a little room for overshoot when the cabine is raised from Rhodesian. Without the ability to overshoot and make the minor corrections to get a solid sight picture, I am slower. The EOTech works best for me. The Aimpoint Comp M2 works pretty well.

The geometry is radically changed so it's like learning Rhodesian all over again. The Height over Bore is altered so Maximum Point Blank Zero changes as well. I really miss Absolute Co-witness for daytime use due to the three way zero validation that it provides - Laser / RDS / Irons. (I don't put Irons last because they are the least important. They are last because they have the final word.)

I am experimenting with this on a spare top end. If I knew every engagement would be in the dark with the aid of an MNVD then this is the way that I would want to go. I am not 100% sold on it for 24 hour all-conditions use but it's a damned good compromise.

I used the KAC riser I mentioned above. I am considering tossing a spacer in the bag for temporarily wedging the RDS on my primary carbine higher without adjusting for zero to see how much error is induced. There is a good chance it is good enough for the likely distances needed. For daytime use I could just remove the spacer. I'm just spitballing here.

I need to put all of this on the clock to get a glimpse of truth.

Hey thanks for the update, look forward to your conclusions.

I was practicing my daily ready-ups today and was concentrating on looking directly through the optic, keeping the reticle centered, and just seeing where the cheek/chin weld ended up.  The MRDS on an ADM riser sits up high enough that my cheek bone is no longer in contact with the stock.  The classic "chipmunk" cheek that Augee was referring to.  It sits approx. 1/2" below where it would if I was sighted in on the irons.  Well in my case, MBUS.  Tonight, when sighting in with the IR laser, the weld is approx. 1" below the "iron sight" position.  Maybe a little more.  Just enough to clear the optic and see the laser.  (I say below because the weld is moving down, away from where it would be with irons.  Obviously, my face is actually moving up and higher).  Then I adjusted to pick up the RDS reticle.  It's actually very close.  And BTW a very nice way to confirm your IR zero to RDS.

I think to really do this right, I need a bit more height.  Which will throw the MBUS sights out, so I'll have to see what I can whip up.

Fun, fun, fun.

The irony is if they had just reversed the positions on the J-arm, it would sit on top, out of the way on the right eye and allow much better interface with the RDS.  But I guess they weren't thinking in that direction back then.

Another update on this.  As I did some ready-ups under NV, using a helmet mounted -14 and a weapons mounted MRDS, I am finding out one fundamental which my buddy keeps pounding in me becomes very important.  You are basically looking through a toilet paper tube and trying to find your reticle.   It becomes critical to look directly through the optic, looking directly through your eyeball, by which I mean, looking out the center of your eye, not having your head cocked and looking through the bottom or top.  But rather looking directly out the center of your eye socket, though the tube, through the RDS.  Wearing this big tube on your head really accentuates this.  If you're not looking out directly through your eye, thru tube, thru RDS, you're gonna pick up some distortion and me thinks probably some parallax as well.  But I ain't an engineer so don't quote me here, just spit-balling.

So issue becomes one of getting the optic(s) at the right height so you can achieve this alignment.  It CAN be done, with lower 1/3 co-witnessing, but in all probability, you are going to be cocking yer head in one way or another.  I find my self having to "goose neck" or tilt my noodle down, in order to get the reticle image.  So I know this can't be optimal.  I plan on getting a riser and experimenting a bit.

I know this is not an end-all/be-all technique; it is merely another tool in your tool box.  I am not advocating everyone run out and do this; but I do think this is a very viable technique in some circumstances.  Definitely worth exploring.

I wish that I could say that the Aimpoints stomp the EOTechs in all ways but I can't. This is the one area where the EOTech really shines. Thy are much more forgiving regarding alignment and the goofy reticle presents itself very well under NVD.

Yeah very true.  I shit-canned my eotechs when I got battery bounce, way back about '07, and went with Aimpoints.  I did miss that reticle though; it's just so- pointy!  Up close it is lightning fast.  I bought a Halosun 515 just for the express purpose of getting the eotech-style reticle back.  The only downside with the MRDS, as Augee mentioned, is it tends to fill up the MNVD field of view, so you have a very narrow window to find the reticle.  Otherwise I'm loving the lighter weight and all.

OK got my riser in the mail, installed it and did about 100 ready-ups so far.  I gotta say, I REALLY like this new position.  It's more heads up or head neutral, versus trying to get your eyeball down behind the tube, which entails some slight turkey-necking, unless you displace the heel of the stock beyond your shoulder, which I don't.  So the stock hits at a cheek weld, about a good 1"+ below the std iron sight position.  As I said before, you really have to concentrate on your other fundamentals, especially putting good pressure into your shoulder pocket with your other strong hand.  And look STRAIGHT through the tube(s).  If you're doing that, the cheek weld will just fall in place, wherever it needs to be.  And I don't really miss being down in the traditional cheek weld; in fact I really like the new position, which is far more natural/neutral; the head stays straight and locked on target, and the sight comes up to the eye.    

I got the Hahn Precision 1/2" riser, which covers the entire upper receiver rail , so you can also mount a rear BUIS on it and use "irons", although I now will need to get a short 3 slot riser for the front sight.  You could also mount the -14 behind and check zero.  I liked this unit because at 55 bucks, it's a nice compromise between the lower and higher priced stuff.  It also uses a complete rail, on both sides, which slides on your existing rail (much like a MBUS) and is held in place by set screws drilled n tapped down through the rail slots.  So it's very clean with no protruding hardware.  As an added bonus, your LAM is now completely out of the picture, so to speak.  

I have only dicked around in the closet with it under NV but will fully test it out after dark.  But my initial impression is that you can actually do decent ready ups with it, and find the reticle.  Will get some real low light reps in tonight and confirm that.

Ok I repped it out tonight, both active and passive.  Passive, it works.  At this point, I still like active, using a pointer and illum if necessary.  It's still very fast and my go-to technique.  However, when you need to go passive, it is now possible to do so.  It's just gonna take some work to get used to it.  With the 1/2" riser you now have some room to find the reticle with almost the same head position as daytime.  The only drawback is the MRDS does occlude the field of view a bit.  I could use this technique out to about 25m or so, but past that, you lose too much target resolution.  You have to turn up the gain somewhat to aid in seeing the target.  If you use the illum, such as a hunter might, this technique really works well, much further out.  But I think a larger optic is going to work better, allowing you to aim much farther out.  

Comparing the two.  Active is still the shit.  If you are dealing with low-tech threats, then the laser pointer is the way to go.  When combined with a little illum, it's truly still a game-changer.  With a can, you will be hitting them and they won't know what's happening.  I use a low cheek weld, really just under the hold for the MRDS, which is very fast with a fantastic field of view.  Great situational awareness.  

Passive is very viable with this technique.  Especially close in, you can be hitting them without any light emission giving any warning.  The head position is very similar to daytime, although it feels like I'm angling down more to pick up the reticle.  Have to have someone watch and give me feedback.  Compared to active, it's a little harder to set up.  Trying to align two tubes, instead of just pointing a beam, well yeah.  But the upside, is as Augee stated, you are using the same targeting technique, both day and night, which all things considered, is a better way of fighting, if it's possible to pull off.

In mixed light, when viewing houses or street lights, it still works when viewing through a .225" diopter, although the gain will probably need to be turned up some.  

But you know, the surprising thing is I really like the extra height for daytime shooting.  It's like coming full circle and shooting off the carrying handle, like the early model RDS's.  So even if I would rarely use it for passive NV shooting, I like the new height of things.

Finally got off my butt and got the riser on order for my Eotech 552. Augee has me excited to try this out.

Any word back on how it works with EOTech?  I will probably end up with one myself.  Gotta love that reticle.  A good friend of mine said a lot of guys are going back to (new) EOTechs for the reticle, in spite of what Crane says.  I can understand why as my ready-up drills are so much faster with the 65 MOA reticle, than just the 2 MOA dot.

Got my riser installed tonight. Just shouldering the rifle around the house / yard, it feels much better for normal, daytime shooting. Under NODS it is a major improvement over a direct flattop installation and is very usable. As augee mentioned, there is some slight light loss, but the Eotech pretty much rocks in this role.


BTW, if anyone is interested in a very high quality riser at a decent price, check out the US made Weaver Rail The "permanent" attachment is the unit to get. Looks great on the gun. Be advised, there are two versions and one has 20 MOA of cant. Obviously the standard version is the one for this application.

Hey cool, that Weaver is very similar to the Hahn I got.  No protruding hardware.  

I tried my buddy's set up with an EOTech and the FOV is the shit.  

Disclaimer:  I guess you have to say it these days.  I have no agenda concerning EOTech.  I have no monetary or other interest in pimping them out.  I am simply stating what my buddy has told me.  Within the context of what we're talking about here, the EOTech is the optimum set up for passive NV.  Use it or not, up to you.

One thing I need to get squared away is an IR weapon light. Put my SuperTac IR on the rifle last night and it is way to much for close range use. Need a dual IR/White unit. Thinking about the new WML.

Been following this thread for a bit since @Augee mentioned me here and wanted to add a few thoughts and observations to this:

First on the Optic selection:

    There are significant advantages and disadvantages to tubed vs windowed red dots in many applications. Depending on how they are used and what the purpose is, the strongest one often varies. When we get into NV integration, there are two main significant factors (assuming NV brightness settings):
         1- Field of View
         2- Light Transmission

    Light transmission is defined here as how much light permeated the optic to reach your eyes. In the case of NV use, you have an intermediary device in the form of the Night Vision Device that converts the IR spectrum to a viewable image. As most of us know, the amount of light that the NV device can collect greatly affects our ability to see with them. This is evident when comparing your ability to see at night with your NV device on a low lum night compared to a high lum night. There are some optics that have a heavy tint on the lens, this greatly reduces the amount of light that passes through and can affect your ability to see the target. I often see this during one of the courses I teach for NV operation where we conduct walk backs to determine visual failure points. Often shooters get to a distance to where they can just see the target, without using their optic- and then as soon as they raise the optic, they lose the target due to the now decreased brightness of the target area. This was a key change, in my opinion, from the Aimpoint T-1 to the T-2 which has much less tint on the lens. So, a great example of strengths becoming weaknesses is some applications- tint can help you sharpen the sight picture in bright sunny conditions, yet drastically decreases the ability to see with NVG's.

    Next is the Field of view, or more specifically in this case we are talking about the field of view as it affects what angle behind the optic we can acquire the aiming reference. This aspect of application really starts to slay some sacred cows of marksmanship. We have all heard the mantra of “bring your sights to your eyes, not your head to the sights” or some variation thereof. However, if you view most shooters that are not running a riser- the head is always at a slight angle and the shooter is generally looking through the top 25% of their eye protection. In effect- glancing up and slightly towards the non-firing side. This picture is a good example:



This quickly becomes a problem when we strap on Night Vision devices to our head. Our eyes are capable of aligning off axis from the direction our head is facing, our NVG’s are not (at least not in the variable manner our eyes can). With NVG’s you can only view what the tube is facing, glancing around with your eyes, does not change the field of view. This creates issues with aligning essentially three lines of sight: our eyes, our tubes FOV, and our optic’s FOV. So, a windowed optic (like the EoTech or LCO) generally has more FOV and has more leeway to seeing the dot at imperfect angles (see the parallax test result on this forum for additional considerations) than a tubed optic does. What complicates this is that we don’t set up our rifles to conform to our body ergonomics and the NVG integration exposes that.

So, as @augee unpacked a bit for you, getting the optic up higher allows for your head to be upright and your NVG’s to be more naturally in line with the optic, I’m reposting the setup I run because the pic @augee linked is broken:




I’ve been running this setup for quite some time and learned it from dudes who have been running it longer than me. Here is a pic from 2005 which demonstrates why I prefer to run a quick release riser, instead of a fixed riser (the specific riser I use is the LaRue LT101):




Although the optic in the pic was still functioning after taking a glancing round- this height over bore does not allow for a co-witness, so I wanted to retain the capability to get a non-functioning optic and magnifier off my rifle in the remote case that it became necessary.

Now a key factor of this type of usage is the compatibility of your daytime training to your night application. So, what I teach here is to get your body naturally aligned with the target and to get your buttstock mounted high and as close to underneath your eye as possible. In effect, you should be able to simply lift the rifle in a close-range engagement and see the optic, without dropping your head or angling your body. Keeping your shoulder angle neutral and square to the target also increases your ability to deflect your aiming towards your firing side in a CQB environment, which is a critical (and difficult) task when room clearing on the move. Keeping your weapons manipulation during daytime common with how you use it at night time maximizes your training efficiency and also prevents you from the sensory overload that occurs when you attempt to perform a less familiar action in a more complex environment.  

Now on the topic of EoTechs- I would stay away from the 3.x models and go with the 3.0. The additional dots in the other models cause a bit more light bloom under NVG’s. The single dot induces less light interference, keep in mind that the dot is brighter than your target area, so the less light between you and the target- the better.

There is also the topic of laser devices. Those also have strengths and weaknesses of their own when compare to optics. However, if your daytime training is compatible- using the optics under NVG’s should be seamless.

As a final note- any time you alter your height over bore, you should recalculate your optimal zero using a good software solution (like Applied Ballistics). Your zero distance will not be the same and keep the same trajectory.

Thanks for weighing in here.  Your observations are exactly what I experienced in R&Ding this stuff for myself.  My buddy is from the same school as you, and he taught me the same thing, namely through the center of the eye, through the center of the scope, and in this case, the center of the MNVD.  

Running a 1/2" riser has really made a huge difference for me, even without night optics.  He showed me his risers some time ago but it really didn't click with me until I considered it's use for passive NV use.  Then once I tried it, I like it across the board.  Or spectrum of light I guess.

I have to admit this is a "duh" type thing. When it was first mentioned I thought it was a good idea. During some practice last night I got so fed up with how much I had to tilt my head, especially with my brain bucket on with the integrated hearing protection, I ordered a riser first thing this morning.

If it works out as well as I think it will I'll outfit the rest of my AR's with them.

Good point on the epro.  When I would shoot with the 552 mounted directly on the flattop, Comtacs were really in the way even if the rifle was canted. I began using Peltor TEP-100 electronic plugs and that helped. Will have to try the Comtacs with the riser. Would be nice at times to use them with NODS.

Yeah that's a really good point, sometimes either ignored as not being relevant to the hobby crowd, or as being taken for granted with reality-based crowd.

Doing ready-ups (or live fire) in your t-shirt is a different thing from a complete load out.  Sounds basic but yeah.

Same goes for your body armor.  If the carrier isn't right you can't get the stock in place.  Or the plates hang down too low.

The good news is with (active) NV, the cheek weld is not as important, or lining up behind a sight, so that gives you a little room for all that stuff on your head.

Some guys mount the rifle center-chest on their plate when employing a laser to avoid having to target a cluttered shoulder pocket. I don't necessarily advocate it - but it's a solution.

Ever seen damage from recoil with ceramics from this?  I know they are tougher than people think but repeated recoil strikes in the same spot could be problematic, no?

Well it showed up. No live fire yet but wow is it a big different. Even without nods is just way more comfortable. Got everything on and Loctited up. Hopefully I can get out soon

I am not an expert and I do not have access to an X-Ray machine anymore but I doubt it. 5.56mm in a 9 pound rifle is not much in the way of a recoil generator. The microsecond spikes that damage intensifier tubes doubtfully damage ceramic plates. Once again, this is not my field of expertise - but if I need to take a shot and the plate conflicts with me taking the shot then I would not hesitate to go center chest to get purchase.

It may be an option for some folks, depending on how your build, kit, and rifle all fit together.  The 5.56 recoil shouldn't effect plate integrity.  If you crack a plate with your training, then your mastery of the subject should more than make up for your need to buy another plate.  

It can be a problem getting plates and buttstocks to get along.  The more "squared up" your stance is, the more you might need to move inboard.  The guys I've trained with around these parts are now using a more "hybrid" approach of going back to "blading" as much as necessary to get everything working right.  They do not advocate squaring up, or blading, rather finding a position in between that works for you.   They extend the stock out fully and blade a bit to make it work.  Using this approach, you should be able to get a good stock position with plates.  If not, then you may have to collapse the stock and move inboard.  I think this is critical, for when you de-emphasize cheek weld, eye relief, etc, you have to make sure your other strong arm is holding a good stock weld into your shoulder pocket, which compensates for some loss of support from your cheek.    

Back to sight height, yeah this is pretty amazing.  Most guys are used to positional shooting, where the sight height, cheek weld, eye relief, etc. are pretty set for a static position.  When you switch up to CQB style shooting, you move more towards rapid, stand-up, mobile shooting.  So you optimize your weapons and equipment for how you plan to fight.  In this case we are discussing fighting with NV gear, but an unexpected outcome from this was finding out one technique was also very helpful for shooting across the light spectrum.  Keeping your head up (not turkey-necking), not only allows you to sight through the center of the tube(s), but vastly improves your situational awareness.  And allows more room for helmets, comms, (and MNVD's in passive mode).

Kudos to all the warfighters who R&D'd all this stuff over the past 10+ years.  We appreciate them sharing all this stuff with us.

I agree with all of this except I do not think there is any single best position in the type of shooting you are discussing. Depending on your armor, weapon, and whatever other gizmos you are hauling with you - you do the best you can at any given time. When you shoot prone, the plates get in the way. If you have cover, you can blade and expose very little flesh to take a shot. If you need to make a long shot then you can blade and get in your fancy High Power Standing position with your elbow up at shoulder level (Chicken Wing) if that's what it takes to get the stability you need in the time you have.

Yes, the guys make fun of me a lot at the 3 Gun matches for my positional idiosyncrasies while working around my armor (which they are not wearing). My response is universal: "Did I make the shot?"

Yeah, use what works for you.