Likes Likes:  4
Page 6 of 12 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 173

Thread: New Army Combatives manual

  1. #76
    Hissho Guest

    Default

    I can't comment on the military application.

    RE: LE however:

    Other than what Jeff has contributed:

    LAPD is the agency that did the study documenting the extent of grappling encounters occurring during police confrontations. After this they instituted a curriculum based heavily in ground grappling tactics (some better than others I might add). Over the next few years they realized a reduction in suspect injuries, officer injuries, lawsuits, and time off for injury claims at at time when attacks against officers grew more violent.

    Then there is LVNR, a Judo based DT method involving takedowns and ground tactics, proven extremely effective in practical application starting in Kansas City and now moving through the country.

    ISR matrix is a clinch and ground grappling based LE method devised by a police officer and a bouncer with extensive background in wrestling, judo and BJJ.

    Hell, even the latest issue of SWAT magazine contains an article about a grappling system for LE which, after railing against the "jujitsu guard" and the "clench" and NHB fighting shows clinch work and ground grappling that is clearly adapted from the clinch and ground stuff common in any judo, BJJ, or sub wrestling club today.


    The point is law enforcement has realized, and rightly so, that real fighting involves a great deal of clinching and groundwork (moreso for cops since apprehension is the goal in the vast majority of situations - but in my experience responding to all manner of assaults and fights and interviewing participants and victims, at least 40-50% of violent situations involve one or both parties on the ground with the fight continuing.) Watch a number of "car cam" videos of officer involved altercations, and especially in the most dangerous/lethal confrontations a large percentage of them spend some time on the ground.


    Of course what we are talking about is not straight mat-style judo, BJJ, sub wrestling or what have you. ANY fighting art has to be adapted to the REAL weapons based close quarters environment and it has to be applied in a manner that will successfully deal with everything from the arrest of a low risk, uncooperative drunk elderly person to a multiple assailant ambush by gangbangers.

    Most people have little or no experience actually doing so with their art, and no frame of reference for what various close confrontations at different levels of force (in civil life at least) are actually like. Even less do they understand the realities of police response to the same kind of thing.

    Suffice it to say, a LOT of grappling happens. Standing in the clinch and on the ground whether on top or on the bottom. A thorough grounding in strategies and tactics based in judo, BJJ, and wrestling, adapted for the realities of "the street," is a very strong component of police control and survival training today.

  2. #77

    Default

    Speaking as an informed civilian and not a member either of law enforcement or the armed services, and setting aside the increasing militarization of law enforcement agencies, the purpose of a police force and the purpose of a military are different. The military fights wars, at least ideally (let's not get into "police actions" and "peacekeeping missions" and such), which means you've got two or more groups of people meeting for the specific purpose of killing one another and wrecking their stuff. A police force, by contrast, does not set out to "kill the enemy" if it can help it.

    Whether BJJ specifically applies is a separate argument, but grappling/locking/control skills most certainly do apply to law enforcement environments, I would think. If this same manual was presented as a training document for, say, Military Police, I might feel differently about it.
    - ©Phil Elmore 浪人
    315.391.1626

    Publisher, The Martialist™
    For Those Who Fight Unfairly

  3. #78
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Sarasota, Florida, USA
    Posts
    733
    Likes (received)
    1

    Default

    Phil, I hear what you are saying, but let me make you into an even more informed civilian.

    The US military, for better or worse, has multiple roles. Killing people and breaking their stuff is one role. We have guns and things that go "boom" for that.

    The other roles are civil affairs, humanitarian, peacekeeping, tactical law enforcement (among others). Breaking people's stuff and killing them may seem a bit inappropriate to the folks we are "helping." Thus skills involving sub-lethal force are QUITE necessary for today's modern US military.

    We may not like it, but we gotta learn to love it!

    Jeff Cook
    Wabujitsu

  4. #79
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    3,324
    Likes (received)
    48

    Default

    You also need to look at the Rules of Engagement. For example, let's say you're a Marine Security Guard assigned to the local embassy. Under the usual Marine Security Guard rules of engagement, then you can usually use chemical weapons (CS, Mace, and pepper spray) or a nightstick with suitable provocation. However, shooting somebody, for any reason (to include being shot at) without first obtaining approval from the ambassador, chief of mission, or regional security officer is a court-martial offense. On the other hand, if you're a Marine off the USS Tarawa assigned to provide external protection to that same embassy, then you need a field grade officer's permission to use pepper spray or CS. At the same time, however, you can probably shoot people under the same conditions under which the Marine Security Guard would have been authorized to use the chemical weapons. Finally, if you're the Marine sniper assigned overwatch on the roof, then, depending on the situation (Mogadishu, say), you may be allowed to reach out and touch someone at 1000 meters simply because they happen to be pointing a gun your way.
    Last edited by Joseph Svinth; 28th July 2004 at 03:44.

  5. #80
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    3,324
    Likes (received)
    48

    Default

    Some links on such topics, if you're interested. http://www.specialoperations.com/mout/usmcmouta.html

  6. #81
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Fort Lewis, WA
    Posts
    233
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default

    Originally posted by Sharp Phil
    Whether BJJ specifically applies is a separate argument, but grappling/locking/control skills most certainly do apply to law enforcement environments, I would think. If this same manual was presented as a training document for, say, Military Police, I might feel differently about it.
    I used to be Infantry (God how I miss those days sometimes... for all of about 3 minutes!), and I used to be a Reserve Cavalry Drill Sergeant (when we learned the previous method of Combatives and were told we didn't need to be SMEs to teach it...), but now I'm a Military Paralegal NCO surrounded by soldiers that are more clerk than soldier. The "Warrior Ethos" being pushed by the Army is more foreign to them than anything you could think of.

    But they picked up the basic drills of the Combatives program that Matt Larsen put together extremely quickly. They are able, each and every one, to clinch with the opponent, take them down, achieve the mount, pass the guard to achieve the mount, roll them into a rear mount, and apply a number of chokes (all of which have the potential for lethality). Compared to some of the more aggressive units that do this training at least weekly if not several times a week (we only do it once a month, and have done so for about 5 months), our soldiers would get eaten alive. Against untrained opponents, however, they would run the show.

    Bear in mind that the Army has specific training requirements - things like "low cost," "safe to train," and "low skill maintenance investment." There are SO many other things we need to train on at any given time, hand to hand combat simply isn't high on the list of things to work on (especially given the oftentimes high amount of maintenance work required for more traditional training).

    I was skeptical at first. Then I started working with it, and am now pursuing certification as an Instructor so I can set up our battalion's program (since there isn't one yet). I will admit some of my own training is leaking through, but the basic fundamentals are strictly Army doctrine.

    Believe it or not, the Army does know what its doing, even when the grunt on the ground or the civilian on the street can't make heads or tails of it.
    Matt Stone
    VIRTUS et HONOS
    "Strength and Honor"

  7. #82
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    3,324
    Likes (received)
    48

    Default

    Some historical background on both MCMAP and Army Combatives appears at http://www.realfighting.com/issue7/josephframe.html .

  8. #83

    Default

    But they picked up the basic drills of the Combatives program that Matt Larsen put together extremely quickly. They are able, each and every one, to clinch with the opponent, take them down, achieve the mount, pass the guard to achieve the mount, roll them into a rear mount, and apply a number of chokes (all of which have the potential for lethality). Compared to some of the more aggressive units that do this training at least weekly if not several times a week (we only do it once a month, and have done so for about 5 months), our soldiers would get eaten alive. Against untrained opponents, however, they would run the show.

    Bear in mind that the Army has specific training requirements - things like "low cost," "safe to train," and "low skill maintenance investment." There are SO many other things we need to train on at any given time, hand to hand combat simply isn't high on the list of things to work on (especially given the oftentimes high amount of maintenance work required for more traditional training).

    I was skeptical at first. Then I started working with it, and am now pursuing certification as an Instructor so I can set up our battalion's program (since there isn't one yet). I will admit some of my own training is leaking through, but the basic fundamentals are strictly Army doctrine.
    I don't doubt that anyone can learn to do these things. I question their applicability in military combat, though, expecially compared to the utility of earlier curricula.
    - ©Phil Elmore 浪人
    315.391.1626

    Publisher, The Martialist™
    For Those Who Fight Unfairly

  9. #84
    Ken Allen Guest

    Default

    Is the previous manual available anywhere, maybe even online?

  10. #85
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    3,324
    Likes (received)
    48

    Default

    Yes, previous editions are available online. Go to Google, and as your keyword search, use FM 21-150.

  11. #86
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Fort Lewis, WA
    Posts
    233
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default

    Originally posted by Sharp Phil
    I don't doubt that anyone can learn to do these things. I question their applicability in military combat, though, expecially compared to the utility of earlier curricula.
    The most recent previous edition of Combatives is/was essentially identical to the current version minus the groundfighting methods. I think the stand up information has been strengthened and streamlined, and the improvised weapons information is better, but beyond that it is pretty much the same.

    The version from the late 60's - early 70's was awful. I was taught to teach that when I attended Drill Sergeant school and was told flatly that I didn't have to be a Subject Matter Expert (SME) in order to teach it... The fact that it was all easily defended against and potentially hazardous to the user seemed lost on everyone concerned. I'm not sure what "utility" you think this variation had, but I can tell you first hand there wasn't any to speak of.

    Officially, the Army has only had a few approved versions of HTH training. Certainly there was the WWII stuff, but that was 60 years ago and hasn't been "official" in a very, very long time.

    What is the utility of groundfighting in combat? Not much if you look at it from a MA standpoint. However, for those of us who are vets here, we can all attest to the very real possibility of simply losing your footing causing you and a potential opponent to hit the ground. Once there, what to do? As has been illustrated so many times, if a person's training fails to at least orient them to a particular hazard, they will lock up and fall victim to that hazard when first confronted with it. One of the purposes of military training isn't so much to make you an expert in the performance of a particular skill, but rather to provide you with sufficient familiarization to allow you to recognize the situation and identify some possible answers to the problem.

    That's what Combatives training provides.

    Anyone who has ever done individual tactical movement with full gear can attest to the difficulty of a simple combat roll to the left or right with canteens on your hips. Now think of the difficulty of doing the same thing with your opponent in the mount or guard... Pretty tough. Not impossible, just tough.

    The mottos of the Combatives school needs to be remembered, too... "The winner of the fight is the one whose friends with guns arrive first." They have no illusions of making Bruce Lees out of every soldier, just to provide them with one more tool...

    Lastly, there have been quite a few reports in the Army Times about the use of Combatives to de-escalate some situations in Iraq. The attorney in charge of my office was in one such situation, and it was well documented. Is GJJ applicable in "combat?" Well, no more than anything else not designed with military gear in mind. But the entire program of stand up transitioning into a takedown to neutralize the enemy is working the way the Combatives team intended it to...
    Matt Stone
    VIRTUS et HONOS
    "Strength and Honor"

  12. #87

    Default

    I am not arguing against the acquisition of groundfighting skills. I am questioning the applicability of emphasizing it above all else in the curriculum.
    - ©Phil Elmore 浪人
    315.391.1626

    Publisher, The Martialist™
    For Those Who Fight Unfairly

  13. #88
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,809
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default

    Jeff pretty much hit the nail on the head. When people think of military H2H, they tend to think of stomping skulls under boot heels on the battlefield. But the military is tasked with a wide variety of roles today, and booting out teeth in every situation a la L.I.N.E. isn't appropriate.

    I haven't read the Army manual, but our MCMAP contains quite a bit of groundfighting and non-lethal techniques as well.
    David F. Craik

  14. #89
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Mountain Home, Idaho
    Posts
    1
    Likes (received)
    0

    Default MCMAC Manual???

    HiYa Group,

    Hey Soulend,

    Do you know if the MCMAC manual is available on the web?

    I appreciate it.
    Respectfully,
    Bruce Tompkins

  15. #90
    Chris Watson Guest

    Default 1987-1989

    As an 11B in OSUT in '87 we were fortunate(?) to have had a 3 or 4 day segment on the combatives. In my case, I'd already spent two years as a student of Jack Hoban and was bored out of my skull.

    My favorite point in time out of those 3 days was when the Drill said "Watson, *let* him throw you!" and then when it was my turn taking my partner about six feet in the air before I helped him land safely. (I did quite a few pushups for that stunt...)

    One of the issues back them with the Army was it's perverse sense of risk-aversion. I never understood how I as an 11B and a block down from the 2nd Batt couldn't do combatives, while the guys there were beating the piss out of each other.

    Has the army finally come to terms with training the Infantry to *fight*? IMHO, If this were the case then SCARS and the other programs in Army SOF wouldn't be necessary.

Page 6 of 12 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Army Rangers dominate Army combatives championship
    By John Lindsey in forum Close Quarter Combatives
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 15th December 2005, 22:20
  2. US Army Unarmed Combat Training Manual
    By cheunglo in forum Shorinji Kempo
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 18th November 2003, 04:50
  3. Army Times Article
    By Matt Larsen in forum Close Quarter Combatives
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 28th October 2003, 14:22
  4. New US Army Combatives Manual
    By Juan Perez in forum Close Quarter Combatives
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 30th January 2002, 18:30
  5. army combatives manual
    By shinja in forum Close Quarter Combatives
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 19th April 2001, 18:10

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •