Comment on Entry technique: ISRAELI LIMITED & HTLE

Forum to discuss CQB entry tactics / room clearing, with other registered users.

Moderators: jimothy_183, Admin

User avatar
Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 335
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 6:07 pm
Contact:

Comment on Entry technique: ISRAELI LIMITED & HTLE

Post by Admin » Sat Sep 25, 2010 5:54 am

Please place your comment and questions about the specific entry techniques here.
http://CQB-Team.com
http://www.youtube.com/user/CQBteam
Tactical education and motivation.training info for the soldier that wish to learn the art of CQB.

Itsahak
Posts: 11
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: Lynchburg, VA

Re: Comment on Entry technique: ISRAELI LIMITET

Post by Itsahak » Thu Dec 23, 2010 12:54 pm

I'm looking for opinions on this technique. Last year a Capt at a neighboring Sheriff's Office (and their tac team leader) attended a week long training class on the carbine done by Aaron Cohen. This is the technique they were shown, and he liked it so much he's switching their tactical operations and active shooter training over to it. I've been playing with it for a while now and am liking it more and more.

We've been working with it on our courtroom suppression drills in case we were to have a situation, and with our Judges threat assessment team. I was wondering if anyone else has any experience with it?
Wil
See how easy life can be?

Dramatikk

Re: Comment on Entry technique: ISRAELI LIMITET

Post by Dramatikk » Mon Sep 12, 2011 9:03 pm

Example video.



Kind regards, Dramatikk. :)

Jack
Law Enforcment
Posts: 402
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 7:27 pm

Re: Comment on Entry technique: ISRAELI LIMITET

Post by Jack » Tue Sep 13, 2011 1:14 am

The obvious problems with this are that you are flagging your position with the muzzle of your weapon. If I'm in a hard corner and I see your muzzle shove into the room, you can not yet see me but I can see exactly where you are. I could shoot through the wall and you would never have a shot at me. I could also move up and grab the muzzle of your weapon and/or reach around and stab your face.

I want to like this technique but it's hard to get over the disadvantages.

User avatar
Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 335
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 6:07 pm
Contact:

Re: Comment on Entry technique: ISRAELI LIMITET

Post by Admin » Tue Sep 13, 2011 6:15 am

I found this text from someone teaching the system.

IACT Tactical John: if the door is split by the two operators, the operator on the opposite side can see anybody hiding near the door close his partner. If somehow the operator grabs the barrel anyways and isn't shot, all you have to do is step back and smash his arms against the door frame and then either operator can shoot him when he lets go.

A common argument against dominating from the door is that the suspect can shoot through the walls of many residential structures. The question to then ask is, “If the suspect is prepared to fire immediately, is it better to run towards him into the room?” If the operators receive fire, they can disengage or return fire as needed. If they are wounded and fall, it will be much easier to perform a rescue. Charging into a room against an armed and prepared defender is at best a one on one quick shoot contest with the potential for frequent ties or worse.
http://CQB-Team.com
http://www.youtube.com/user/CQBteam
Tactical education and motivation.training info for the soldier that wish to learn the art of CQB.

Jack
Law Enforcment
Posts: 402
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 7:27 pm

Re: Comment on Entry technique: ISRAELI LIMITET

Post by Jack » Wed Sep 14, 2011 1:12 am

I ALMOST really like the limited pin. I don't like the idea of running into gun fire, but at least if I get in the room I can see him and engage him. If he is facing me and looking down the barrel of my gun he is more likely to surrender. If he has a shot at me while I'm not even looking his way, he is more likely to go for it and engage me.

I would agree that using the door frame to scrape off a gun grab would probably be manageable. Having two operators in the door frame would reduce somebodies ability to engage you.

I don't know tough call. Yes you have two guns covering part of the room, but if four operators entered they could have four guns dominating the whole room.

I think the technique would work perfect for airsoft, where the bullets don't fly through wall.

The jury is still out on this one for me.

Dramatikk

Re: Comment on Entry technique: ISRAELI LIMITET

Post by Dramatikk » Sun Sep 18, 2011 3:30 pm

Wasn't this technique invented by the israelies because of the strong building materials used in israeli cities?

When they perform tactical raids, most of the buildings they encounter contains strong walls that small arms fire will not penetrate. Therefor it is safer for them to clear most of the rooms from the outside. And this because they are standing behind some good cover ... Just my guess ... :?

Kind regards, Dramatikk. :)

User avatar
jimothy_183
Military
Posts: 1030
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2008 7:55 am
Location: Australia

Re: Comment on Entry technique: ISRAELI LIMITET

Post by jimothy_183 » Sun Sep 18, 2011 3:59 pm

Dramatikk wrote:Wasn't this technique invented by the israelies because of the strong building materials used in israeli cities?
Pretty sure I read that somewhere on this forum or the CQB team website. If it's not here then it must be somewhere else, but I do remember reading that it was because of that very reason it was invented.
semper acer , semper velox , semper trux , semper promptus

4Bravo1
Posts: 5
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2011 2:48 pm

Re: Comment on Entry technique: ISRAELI LIMITET

Post by 4Bravo1 » Sat Sep 24, 2011 5:46 am

Jack and others:

I currently train several U.S. Domestic Units and other units in a modified limited penetration technique. I will try to answer a few of your questions.

MULTIPLE GUNS ON A THREAT:
Here is one I would like to address- "Yes you have two guns covering part of the room, but if four operators entered they could have four guns dominating the whole room."

I believe this is mostly incorrect in reality although in theory it seems valid. For one, those four operators aren't in the room until they have all moved single file through a doorway and established their points of domination. This takes significant time, forces them through a killzone (the doorway), breaks down in complex situations, and often takes operators out of the flight as their fields of fire become hazardous in most of the room. This is especially true with opposing corners which means that operators are facing each other. Additionally, you can get four operators on a door in a high low configuration with limited pen immediately and not have to wait for any of them to walk two corners- something a bad guy is not going to let you do if he choses to resist. Its the process of getting those 4 guys in the room and into nice, neat sectors of fire that causes the problem.

FLAGGING:
Some flagging occurs at "rescue" speed, but keep in mind you are watching targets being engaged from that position. At slower speeds, no flagging occurs. If no target is present in the sector of fire, then the operators are into their next sector well within a second. If a threat is so prepared in the corner of the room, that he is able to engage you within a second, then the last thing you want to do is run into that room. If you run in the room with the immediate entry technique with a center and corner target, then you have to turn your back to one of them- how effective is that. Look at all of the recent catastrophic entries of American SWAT teams, all caused during immediate entries- Oakland as one example, but there are many. I will take two guns on a single threat immediately (by far, the most often scenario) and then focus my efforts on the corner where someone may or may not be. If they are waiting to ambush and I run in, then its a one on one gunfight with me as an easier and easier target. Yes, the #2 can see anyone around the corner due to cross cover, and the defense is fairly easy and would require almost super human reaction time from the suspect to pull off. I asked several Israeli spec ops operators and they had never even heard of any bad guy being able to even attempt it during a raid.

WALLS AS COVER:
I think the issues of walls and cover have been addressed, but I will rehash a little. Cover is psychological as well as physical. Yes, people shoot through walls, but isn't that better than having them shoot directly at you while you get closer and closer to them? With current military ROE it is stupid to force operators into a six foot gunfight, when you can threat test a room and have the ability to back off and hit it with heavy ordinance. Domestically, look at my above "If he is so prepared to fire comment..." If he is that prepared to shoot through walls, and he instead sees you come in the door, he will simply fire at the doorway and wound, kill, or near-miss every single operator who "stacks" and comes through the door one at a time. Your fields of fire in the room will definitely break down at that point. I have plenty of videos that document this in real life. Also keep in mind that I teach a narrow approach and view into the room. Operators can immediately see deep into the corners on approach or as soon as the door opens and can engage threats as soon as they see them, often before they are seen by the threats who expect them to come into the door.

IMMEDIATELY ENGAGE IMMEDIATE THREATS PRINCIPLE:
Here is my immediately engage immediate threats principle: "There is rarely a greater threat than the man standing right in front of you at close range with a gun. Shoot threats as you see them. Don't pass them up for an unknown or could be threat that might not even exist. You must survive the next second of your life before worrying about the rest." I would rather not expose myself immediately to multiple threats hoping my #2 man is there and hoping that I win an equal gunfight at ranges where skill is minimized. It most often takes more than one round to stop a threat, even if you get the first shot, you are rolling the dice.

Your questions are all reasonable, but it does take some explanation and looking at alternatives to see how deep the advantages of limited pen go. If I run into a room- still an easy option with my limited pen method- then I am doing it because it offers a tactical benefit, not because it is my default method. Keep in mind that surprise and lack of will and preparation to resist are really the only things that allow immediate entry to work. If you have surprise and do everything right, immediate entry will work. But if you run up against a prepared, dedicated defender, it will most often fail. With limited pen, you have a tactical advantage either way, one that is closer to what humans want to do under stress. I have only seen one man run through a doorway into fire intentionally and he was frikkin crazy and lucky. I have two friends who did immediate entry and were shot and will never do it again. Luckily one in the plate and one in the helmet. In both cases they could have done it just as effectively and more safely from the doorway. Test it against people who don't know what to expect and see the results for yourself. Of course you can game any entry method to make it "fail." Just come up with common scenarios you might face. Get defenders who don't know what tactic you are going to use , and simm it out.

Its tough. There is a lot of dogma out there. I can tell you that every team I have trained says that the technique "just makes sense." Is it perfect for every imaginable situation, no, but it works effectively and consistently in a wide variety of situations.

Hope that helps. Let me know what other questions you have.

User avatar
Alan
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Apr 23, 2008 10:23 am
Location: Wales

Re: Comment on Entry technique: ISRAELI LIMITET

Post by Alan » Mon Sep 26, 2011 11:57 am

Just reading the information on this thread, i think what has been overlooked is the difference between military and police views on cqb.

Firstly I think aggression, speed and surprise are fundamentals of contact drills be it cqb or otherwise. I think that Limited P loses a little in terms of surprise, aggression and arguably speed. Certainly this statement will be a point of debate no doubt. That is however my view.

Now for my main point. I think that a soldier/policeman is basically being paid to put his life in harms way, it is his work. Now in a cqb situation involving non-combatants, whos life holds priority? The crux of my argument is priority of life, A soldier must accept that his life is less valuable than a non comabatant in this situation and i dont LP is an acceptable method of dealing with a Hostage Situation because reducing the risk to the operator may increase the risk to the Hostage.

As an example, How would the iranian embassy seige in 1980 have played out with Limited Penetration. Now in a situation with barricaded suspects or a drugs raid then i think LP has its place.

Dramatikk

Re: Comment on Entry technique: ISRAELI LIMITET

Post by Dramatikk » Mon Sep 26, 2011 4:46 pm

Alan wrote:Just reading the information on this thread, i think what has been overlooked is the difference between military and police views on cqb.

Firstly I think aggression, speed and surprise are fundamentals of contact drills be it cqb or otherwise. I think that Limited P loses a little in terms of surprise, aggression and arguably speed. Certainly this statement will be a point of debate no doubt. That is however my view.

Now for my main point. I think that a soldier/policeman is basically being paid to put his life in harms way, it is his work. Now in a cqb situation involving non-combatants, whos life holds priority? The crux of my argument is priority of life, A soldier must accept that his life is less valuable than a non comabatant in this situation and i dont LP is an acceptable method of dealing with a Hostage Situation because reducing the risk to the operator may increase the risk to the Hostage.

As an example, How would the iranian embassy seige in 1980 have played out with Limited Penetration. Now in a situation with barricaded suspects or a drugs raid then i think LP has its place.
Read the article Push or Hold: A few thoughts on dynamic entries by Paul R. Howe. It is a well written article that discusses the "What, Where & When" on dynamic entries, and this from a law enforcements perspective. A good read indeed.

Kind regards, Dramatikk. :)

Dramatikk

Re: Comment on Entry technique: ISRAELI LIMITET

Post by Dramatikk » Tue Oct 11, 2011 12:50 pm

Israeli limited used in multi-room clearing:



Kind regards, Dramatikk. :)

User avatar
jimothy_183
Military
Posts: 1030
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2008 7:55 am
Location: Australia

Re: Comment on Entry technique: ISRAELI LIMITET

Post by jimothy_183 » Fri Dec 02, 2011 4:22 pm

semper acer , semper velox , semper trux , semper promptus

User avatar
Ryan
Posts: 2810
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 3:10 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Comment on Entry technique: ISRAELI LIMITET

Post by Ryan » Wed Feb 01, 2012 12:12 am

Dramatikk wrote:Example video.



Kind regards, Dramatikk. :)
I talked to the guy who made that video. P.S. 4Bravo1, i.e. Trevor, up there is the guy who made it!!!

"I am trying to change the way we do things. I do offer a solution that is more effective and more survivable. Look at my other videos. With a room, I say clear quickly from the breach, then attack the corners as a team. That solution will give operators an offensive and defensive advantage and allow them to mass forces on threats with the ability to disengage if they face superior forces. It is also a universal method can be used at various speeds for different missions. If you want to run into the room, you can even do that using the same technique, just give the command "enter,enter, enter" and everyone flows in. It is not the default, but an on call option.

My solution for the corner is to just have one guy snap the corner with a brief pause, then send the guys around, or if you are moving slower, do an israeli style high-low, then the same. Move down the hall quickly to the next angle. Automatically running around a corner into the open at the end of a hallway will get you killed against a prepared defender almost every time.

My method is behaviorally based and completely aligned with what people do under duress and when facing real people- that is stay close to cover and fight from the doorway.

Our techniques are flawed [in relation to conventional, standard Army techniques] and I am doing what I can to correct them. I have numerous teams and entire agencies using my method including a police department of 800 officers, the U.S. Marshalls Metro Task Force, Various SF Teams, Foreign Teams, and Numerous SWAT Teams.

It is guys like you and me who will make the difference because we are not stuck on dogma and just want to find the most effective way."

It's a mix between the Israeli-limited and an adaption to the/your current environment with a few behavioural and technique micro-touches and tweaks. It's a great system that has only a 16% hit rate to #2 man in force-on-force, that's pretty insane for a prepared threat shooting at the doorway!

HTLE (High Threat Limited Entry) is to both avoid the dilemma of "rushing" AND to prevent a fatal funnel circumstance. It does this by simple principles which should work against threats - clear from the door before moving in, leaving only 'hot spots' to clear... split your operators so even if one does decide to engage you, they're not going to take out the whole team... triangulated fire onto threat.
4Bravo1 wrote:WALLS AS COVER
It's obviously been stated that rounds can penetrate walls, it's common sense but do you philosophy using the doorjamb/corner as cover? To me it's only concealment. You use more of a pop out technique rather than rolling out or pieing it off - due to the fact #1 is basically being rabbit and you have to be fast.

RB1 (RedBack One) do a similar technique, "I have worked with the Israeli Tier-1 MCT Unit (Flotilla 13) in the house before. Interesting?! We have revised our doctrine on CQB at RB1 to include a new method that I have developed called 'Offensive Stronghold Clearance'. This technique has been in R&D mode for the last few years and was taught for the first time as a primary method of room combat during our Advanced Hostage Rescue Course for Jacksonville Sheriff's Office in Florida. Our OSC method relies heavily on clearing the majority of the room from the outside with very strict SOP's and Actions On Contact. I would be very interested to read how the Israeli method compares to what we are teaching. Looking forward to the read. - JF"
CQB-TEAM Education and Motivation.

"Pragmatism over theory."
"Anyone with a weapon is just as deadly as the next person."
"Unopposed CQB is always a success, if you wanted you could moonwalk into the room holding a Pepsi."

User avatar
jimothy_183
Military
Posts: 1030
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2008 7:55 am
Location: Australia

Re: Comment on Entry technique: ISRAELI LIMITET

Post by jimothy_183 » Wed Feb 01, 2012 7:14 am

I don't know. I'm still of the opinion that this guys version of limited penetration is still only good for any mission other than hostage rescue, officer recovery and active shooters.
semper acer , semper velox , semper trux , semper promptus

User avatar
Ryan
Posts: 2810
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 3:10 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Comment on Entry technique: ISRAELI LIMITET

Post by Ryan » Tue Nov 27, 2012 1:26 am

http://www.swatdigest.com/mag_nov_2012.html
http://www.swatdigest.com/mag_sept_2012.html

Two articles on HTLE (High Threat Limited Entry - High Threat System LLCs version of the Israeli Limited Entry).
CQB-TEAM Education and Motivation.

"Pragmatism over theory."
"Anyone with a weapon is just as deadly as the next person."
"Unopposed CQB is always a success, if you wanted you could moonwalk into the room holding a Pepsi."

User avatar
tacticalguy
Posts: 712
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 4:48 pm
Location: Florida

Re: Comment on Entry technique: ISRAELI LIMITET

Post by tacticalguy » Tue Nov 27, 2012 6:26 am

Limited penetration has it's uses. It's not the "use in every situation" tactic. There is no magic technique that is applicable in every situation. All of these techniques are built on basic building blocks. Those building blocks are universal to CQB; surprise, speed, and violence of action. Everything else is mutable. "Speed is paramount", "slow is fast", "surprise is EVERYTHING" "without a quick, hard entry, surprise is useless". It all depends on the situation.
If you have `cleared' all the rooms and met no resistance, you and your entry team have probably kicked in the door of the wrong house.
(Murphy's Cop Laws)

The greatest enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan. (Von Clausewitz)

User avatar
Ryan
Posts: 2810
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 3:10 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Comment on Entry technique: ISRAELI LIMITET

Post by Ryan » Wed Dec 05, 2012 7:40 am

One thing I'd like to ask is how HTLE works on a center-fed? Trev still using these forums? :P



Because here it's just shuffle stepping while remaining in contact (shoulder contact) until you pop out. Also note ability to shoot bilateral.
CQB-TEAM Education and Motivation.

"Pragmatism over theory."
"Anyone with a weapon is just as deadly as the next person."
"Unopposed CQB is always a success, if you wanted you could moonwalk into the room holding a Pepsi."

User avatar
Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 335
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 6:07 pm
Contact:

Re: Comment on Entry technique: ISRAELI LIMITET

Post by Admin » Wed Dec 05, 2012 10:41 am

This way?
6.Team enters just far enough to clear the corner using the cover of the doorway, lateral movement, or bounding to get two guns into any fight ASAP. This provides a localized offensive and defensive advantage.
7.Team stays shallow upon entry and enters only as far as needed to avoid over-exposure to new angles and friendly fire from opposing corners.
http://highthreatsystems.com/media/arti ... t-cqb.html
http://CQB-Team.com
http://www.youtube.com/user/CQBteam
Tactical education and motivation.training info for the soldier that wish to learn the art of CQB.

User avatar
Ryan
Posts: 2810
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 3:10 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Comment on Entry technique: ISRAELI LIMITET

Post by Ryan » Fri Dec 07, 2012 12:04 pm

I don't get how they clear the corner without moving in and/or stopping or clearing from the fatal funnel. I get the lateral movement, that would clear a corner. Spinning around would clear the next. Bounding would still clear one corner unless the covering man was clearing the other corner as the other laterally moved into the room.

Lateral movement as in the center of the room? If so it sounds like running the rabbit if you break it down. And bounding movement I don't always get. It's only bounding really if the coverman is set, i.e. holding from the doorjamb which obviously can't always happen until #1 moves; unless he's really quick to basically catch-up to do it just as you move through the fatal funnel or make enough space. I suppose that's where the "true high low" comes from, because #1 can go low afterwards and use the doorjamb straight away or #2 can move up as one is moving so #2 can hug the doorjamb.

I sure agree that it provides a defensive and at the same time offensive position for number 2 man. That's why studies show that during a similar drill to this he was only hit 16% of the time against a prepared human enemy. But if they are shallow penetrating then number one wouldn't be moving too far into the room or all the way to the opposite wall. Plus he'll always been in some muzzle arc or firing arc, that doesn't demote the drill for me personally. It's just I can't picture it. I can picture the corner-fed.

See: http://www.cops.usdoj.gov/pdf/OSWG/Unkn ... ntries.pdf ...
CQB-TEAM Education and Motivation.

"Pragmatism over theory."
"Anyone with a weapon is just as deadly as the next person."
"Unopposed CQB is always a success, if you wanted you could moonwalk into the room holding a Pepsi."

Post Reply

Return to “CQB entry tactics / room clearing”