I will say what I’ve found in practice (on my own and with mates) is at a certain point, a situation gets complicated enough, i favor a more dynamic/read/react style of entry. But to be fair, I received sizeloves condensed version and haven’t had a chance to take the full course.
One shape one of my instructors referred to as a s##t sandwich. A four way with multiple open doors to rooms immediately round each corner. If you have indicators of where the shooter is a police technique reffered to as checking where you are not clearing each room but quickly take a 1 or 2 second look into each room with an open door along your direction of travel without breaking the threshold of the room which scans about 80% of the room. While quickly moving towards the threat. Over 95% of threats are a single shooter but you still need to keep an eye out for multiple threats. Also the sound of gunfire can be a poor indicator of where the shooter is. Due to echoing it can cause a false direction of where the shots are coming from.
How we handle that is through our 4 Principles of CQB and how we engage things be priority. So its not a playbook, but principles we run our decisions through. If you know the principles and know the procedures, then you know how to handle the exposures as they come and know your direction of travel for the highest threat.
But regards to the shapes, you still have to take one shape at a time. Wether that is taking a room or moving on because you know where the threat could be. That where we also talk about priority of life and decision making off of that. Its different for everyone, again, context. LEO priority of life is different than civilian. Details matter. Get what I'm putting down? Thanks for the comment.
@@PracticallyTactical Thanks for the reply. The context we were being trained for was mainly for a church security team where it was interesting to learn a LEO type approach. Even among the law enforcement community there are different views on procedures for handling a situation although it has become more standardized in recent years. The S##t sandwich is where you believe you know where the shooter is and are moving towards that area and approach two corridors to your left and right which are directly opposite each other or two open doors. With two responders you can each check a room but with just one responder if there are no indicators to help you then you have to choose a direction to glance first. There are techniques to reduce the risk but it does add seconds. Not sure if you have tried it when doing training classes but if someone shoots a blank off inside a building with multiple rooms it is very hard to tell where it is coming from. I think all of us managed to blow ourselves up because we failed to look up before or after entering a room that had an IED above our heads. All of us also shot an innocent who jumped out of a room 12" in front of us screaming for help after we had already been hyped up on multiple previous scenarios. When a person does actually train beyond the static firing line they will start to understand how little they know and unprepared they are. You have to work hard to train tunnel vision out of yourself and to assess before acting.
it sounds like you guys need a real CQB class. check out alliance police training for classes. I help teach there and lots of great instructors there too. you are looking too global as a shape. one shape isn’t a 4 way and a bunch doors. it’s a 4way then doors as shapes on their own. one procedure at a time dictated by priority of life and principles of CQB. To take it up a notch, doors came be isolated doors or threat doors. and then both of those can be open or closed. different ways of handling each one. That’s why we have simple procedures for everything. When you have a procedure for everything AND your manipulations are down pat, you free your brain bandwidth for processing information. Knowing how to do something is very different than knowing how to do something while making decisions. - Joe Weyer
21:12. This is really nice. Some parts of it, I don't fully agree with. It makes sense for beginners say dealing with a centre-fed, closed-ended hallway like an L for entering the room but it's not sensible if you know your options. Question, do you teach room layouts rather than just hallway like box, linear/elongated, etc?
I didn't cover any procedures on how shapes are handled in rooms. Every shape has a procedure. Doors have a procedure, and those are broken down into Open or Close Thread Doors and Open or Close Isolated Doors. This video is all about seeing the shapes and understanding them. Not how we handle them 1, 2, or Team procedures. Just like how i didn't talk about the type of breach to use. The CQB package we run isn't a playbook, as in IF the room is this way, do it this way. We have CQB Principals we follow. The CQB I run isn't about remember the playbook or just doing tactics. Identify shapes, know the procedure, and apply the CQB Principals. This makes it easier to get everyone on the same page, you have simple procedures for everyone to free up the processor, and keep pressure on a structure.
Assuming you are CQBteam on reddit that pop'd up into my google alerts? You ready way too much into the placement of points of domination and such. Way too much into the video. This is just understanding and seeing the shapes. Didn't go over any procedures that we run or have. If you'd like to know more about that, drop me an email and i'm happy to discuss it with you.
@@PracticallyTactical For sure, man. I get the shapes part now. It came across as treating it like a hallway which confused me at first. Same for you, hit me up any time.
