Im the only one that i cand finy anymore XrayAlpha?

We should be using bayonets. I get the intricacies of additional barrel length protruding from a threshold, but if I could put a bayonet lug on my suppressor, I would. It shouldn't be the focal point of tactics or doctrine, but it is a redundancy which is still relevant today. Why should I be forced into a clench when my rifle malfunctions? The current doctrine is to thrust the rifle forward into one's shoulder from the high port anyways -- https://youtu.be/6wd2fJw0dRs?si=NN-DXg-FxTGpm6vX&t=714 -- so this would just be a seamless movement into nuking some dude with a fixed bayonet.

I agree that we don't need to do frontal assaults with the bayonet as the focal point of CQB doctrine, but if I had to jump into a trench with a weapon that has dirt, mud, and slush all over it from getting artilleried in open terrain, I want to leap on top of some poor guy and be able to destroy him in close combat, putting myself in the least amount of danger possible. I'm not arguing that the bayonet gives soldiers some magical mindset to close with and destroy, I've been in the mindset many times and have never used a bayonet in combat, but when you get into the mindset to close with and destroy, we should have every available means -- bayonet included. Not to mention, I would imagine it would take a lot less training hours to become proficient in bayonet usage than getting out of a clench and pulling a knife. SOF trains hand to hand somewhat consistently, but mostly still not near enough to be good at it. I don't see how the regular infantryman wouldn't benefit from the use of a bayonet in a CQB scenario, and it takes less training.

We have a million redundancies in CQB. In fact, CQB itself is a nuanced redundancy. If I can't light a building on fire and set up blocking positions, level it with air/artillery, shoot a tank into it, or level it with demo, then I have to conduct CQB. Additionally, we have redundancies for what to do in case the rifle malfunctions -- draw a pistol (if you just so happen to be using a sidearm which many choose not to), then hand to hand or a teammate. This is just a simple way to extend the range of a hand to hand engagement in case of a rifle malfunction, and prevent getting into a clench.

Lastly, being in the US military was great but Ukraine opened my eyes to the fact that it is possible to run out of ammo. To say that there will never be a situation where an element of US soldiers get outmaneuvered and experience local enemy superiority is pompous and wrong. We can't spend all kinds of time training for this extremely specific scenario, but bayonet training would equip soldiers for the ability to fulfill their code of conduct and continue to resist until there are no more available means.

What do you guys think? What is wrong with my assertion? I posed this question to my buddy who is actively Navy SEAL and he hated the idea but couldn't articulate why it shouldn't be used as an additional tool in the toolbox. I feel autistic just posing this question but I did some research on why the US Army got rid of the bayonet and it really seems like there was not a great reason.

TLDR:
I'm not saying the bayonet should be the focus of doctrine, the inspiration for tactics, or the psychological backbone of our country's military. But for a tool and a redundancy, I think it is a damn good one for CQB.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nrrfHLYs_WA

It might seem pretty straight forward however I could use some clarification. We’ll assume that in this case someone takes a shot through a threshold. Is he meant to rush in directly after his shot and take his point of domination or would it be acceptable to still pie the room and then follow his shot? Any other clarification would be appreciated.

I recent read and watched some of Ken J Good's work. He is a former Seal who primarily focused on night shooting and lights. His stuff sucks. Really outdated and ridiculous stuff that even by the time was bad. But I have always noticed that WML SOP's tend to vary a lot from person to person and unit to unit. So I figured I'd share what has worked for me, and ask others how they use lights. What SOP/TTP's do you prefer? What are some mistakes you often see when it comes to guys running white lights? How do you deal with certain issues like light flooding underneath doors? Etc.

I use two main methods of lighting an area with WML's. The first being the "snapshot", where the light comes on for a split second, information is gathered and processed, then light goes off. Second is the "drag", which is like a snapshot, but you drag the light from one point to the other. I recently did some FoF training, and a dude with a strobe light really demonstrated how effective the drag could be. I also noticed a lot of guys still run pads instead of a tail cap. I don't understand why. I have seen so many ND's from pads.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O-Wlf5jh34U
I saw this video and i notice the 3rd guy pointed muzzle at 1st man's back at the beginning.
is it his mistake or did i miss something?

Most of the prices seem so steep, I was contemplating going to Thailand to get tactical training but they seem to be ridiculously priced (separately pay for rifle fees, bullet fees, vat tax)

So, Pranka says a guy with a gun in a room is not a barricaded shooter. To call something a barricaded shooter, one must physically set up defenses to hinder an assault.

"Barricaded Shooter" as I know it is a phrase used to describe a decision point and guide decision making in certain situations. I think it is widely used this way. Not all of these situations require the literal definition of the phrase.

I think this is interesting because it makes me wonder about the decision work flow for him in the absence of something like this.

Say, as you begin down a hallway, a guy with a gun takes a shot in your direction and runs into a room at the end of the hall. Absent an HR type thing, what is the wisdom of going straight at that?

I would open my barricaded shooter folder in my brain and look for alternatives.

Is Pranka just being pedantic here? Does he not get that people don't mean it literally? Does he not make decisions which would change his approach based on changing circumstances? Would the scenario i described above be a decision point for him? I can't imagine he'd think it was a good idea just to go for it.

Dynamic and watered down deliberate CQB often get posted online, but does anyone know if Line of Communication style CQB has ever been properly demonstrated in any videos?

https://youtu.be/YmFJKq0kNtg?si=x2q1zRnZTP5gpXtT

Also the comment section in this video is a little funny, tell me what you find there

Can you name all the training facilities that you know of that have a cqb facility in USA that are great? Looking for new locations to rent.

Holster When Safe

Check the shirt drop for you CQB lovers. 🤙🏼

I have never used a flash bang, or have ever experienced one in real life.

My question to those experienced in their application is, is their effectiveness diminished against an adversary who has experienced them enough? or who is expecting them to be deployed?

From my understanding a flash bang is a devise that makes a large amount of noise and changes the air pressure in the room. So I'm curious if someone is ready for this interaction can they "ignore" the effects.

Hey! New guy here!

Maybe someone can point me in the right direction?!

Heres the question, I was unable to find an advanced cqb training system that tracks the entry and reacts to it.

In most cases operators are flying into rooms and just shooting at moving targets at best.

Hence my curiosity - is there a “smarter” system that can generate and provide feedback?

Thank you in advance.

I recently went through some FOG videos. I noticed that they constantly bypass known threats to clear unknown space. Two examples being at 0:50 in https://youtu.be/1rgO9_jJax4?si=YhsiVMMMOS42ULOG And at 0:10 in https://youtu.be/njxZxSVZOlw?si=MeOWpRJf9tGvCF5B

Kinda odd given them being known as the "PRIORITIES OF WORK!" guys, but when I asked, they stood by this and that it didn't make sense to not clear a corner before the threat. Do people still do this because of big army indoctrination, or do you think it's something else? These guys have done FOF, so I can't understand why they haven't changed to known threat>unknown space.

I came across a article at Borderland Strategic:

https://borderlandstrategic.com/2017/06/13/cqb-and-the-floating-angle/

In that "article" it states:

"Still others use more of a corkscrew clear that tightens to the door rather than consistently moving away from the corner, so that sections of the room that have already been cleared always stay within visual sight of the person clearing. This technique is difficult to describe but helps solve many of the above issues."

I have not seen or heard of this technique. Is there anyone on this sub that can explain a corkscrew clear and how it is performed? Also, is it effective.

I’ve always addressed the floating angle by use of step center for DE and by having 2 msn move up to cover the potential moving angle as point man rainbows the entry point before crossing the line of departure. Any suggestions to the contrary are appreciated. Thanks.

Due to the increasing actions and hostility around the world, the threat of near-peer conflicts grows higher and higher by the day. As the title states, I’m wondering if any laser sight is on the market, civilian or military, that wouldn’t alert a similarly armed opposition force also equipped with NODS?

Edit: the way the title was worded it seems like I’m asking about all laser sights. I realize that would be specialty equipment and not available on a standard, run of the mill sight

So I had a thought occur to me and this is mainly academic as I live in Canada but figured this would be the best place to ask. Is there somewhere on Youtube or something that would demonstrate the best way to counter a breach? You see all these guides and courses on how to clear a room including things like flashbangs and whatnot. What I'm looking for is what if your the guy inside that room that's about to get banged before they make entry?

https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/s/79ytxdo9qt

Could be wrong… But looks like the dude in the structure utilized an elevation change, looked pretty low… 😏 Combined with the casualty’s poor angle of attack to angle of exposure ratio, and he sealed the deal.

Mods, take down this post if elevation changes are too taboo 😉

Hi everyone,

Here's a link to the video with the specific timestamp I'm referring to: https://youtu.be/HCQ-4jsvnNk?si=tFdAYsxzUQs7cfPZ&t=1005. But most of you have probably already seen the new UF Pro series videos. In my particular example you can see Dr. Special Forces essentially teaching a plating maneuver when encountering dead spaces located inside the wall you're moving along.

My biggest concern with this technique is probably that the outside man, the one that is replacing the scan of the first man at the dead space, is potentially moving into the sorrounding fields of fire. The most common way addressing such dead spaces I've seen so far is to either ignore and walk past them until all scanning inside your room is finished or to just stop in front of them, that potentially leading to space issues on the other hand.

However, while I can understand the way they handled the lateral dead space, the technique he taught for handling opposing dead space right in front of them is totally illogical and pretty dangerous in my opinion (https://youtu.be/HCQ-4jsvnNk?si=ab7IHfdj9FF\_pMOA&t=1118). If dead space is located on the opposing wall you can just scan and see inside it by continuing to move along the strong wall no need to stop and to perform plating.

Anyway, what are your thoughts about this, how would you have handled this situation ? Same way as in the video or somewhat different ?

And as always, dOn'T FOrgET yoOUR FuCkING PRIoRiTiEs OF WoRK !

I live in a bungalow. Small house, lots of doors. I’ll describe my best and try and find my floor plan later.

Front door, straight into a sitting room. That flows into a kitchen, which leads to an upstairs, and a garage. Kind of straight forward. Except, in the upstairs , there are two angles impossible to clear no matter the personal. You’re simply bested in a narrow stairwell and spots someone can lean down and into a kill zone. That’s problem one.

Problem two is way worse. The home has about a 10’ long, L-shaped hallway. It leads to the bathroom, both bedrooms, and a closet. So, when you enter that hallway, there are already 6 blind corners. Bathroom has 2, both bedrooms have 2, hallway has another dead zone at the corner need one bedroom.

Both bedrooms have your typical closets. All these rooms have awkward, easy to hide behind doors.

So a solo sweep of the house and you’re done if someone has already mapped the house. No matter how slick or careful, you give yourself away when choosing an angle, because it opens you up to several more when you reveal.

With even 4 guys, all will have to walk into a blind corner when clearing , no matter the strategy the house doesn’t give any chance of taking any pie slices without being blind to another room that could have a better shot at you

Has anyone seen this scenario? Again a drawing would be better but suffice so say, even a team will have their point man exposed to multiple angles without room for a spotter or anyone to cover them.

So it’s just hope for the best? Throw a flash in the room and hope for the best? What is done in these scenarios?