Basic Questions: CQB

Moderator: jimothy_183

User avatar
Ryan
Posts: 2789
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 3:10 am
Contact:

Basic Questions: CQB

Post by Ryan » Fri May 25, 2012 9:24 am

Another one of those...

What is Close Quarter Battle (CQB)? What is it's definition?

Battle within a close area or proximity?
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: 1024
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2008 7:55 am
Location: Australia

Re: Basic Questions: CQB

Post by jimothy_183 » Fri May 25, 2012 9:51 am

From here:
jimothy_183 wrote:CQB is a terrain and is a sub category of urban combat that is defined as gun fighting indoors.
semper acer , semper velox , semper trux , semper promptus

User avatar
Ryan
Posts: 2789
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 3:10 am
Contact:

Re: Basic Questions: CQB

Post by Ryan » Sat May 26, 2012 5:34 am

And outdoors of course, Marine's in Afghanistan fight close quarters in outdoor, external building environments. What do you think the distance is for it to be defined as Close Quaters? Yes, it depends on terrain and micro-terrain such as open ground.

0 - 50 meters?
50 - 100 meters?
100 - 200 meters?

And Urban Combat or Warfare is defined as Combat within a conventional urban area such as a city block with numerous buildings.
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: 1024
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2008 7:55 am
Location: Australia

Re: Basic Questions: CQB

Post by jimothy_183 » Sat May 26, 2012 9:45 am

Well to elaborate on my definition, I like to think of CQB as a terrain that is located inside a building because to me it has a much more clear cut definition. Are you indoors? Yes, then it's CQB. No? then it's not CQB.

I've mentioned it before in other threads that I do not like to restrict myself to arbirary numbers. Why? Because in the real world things can vary so much that arbirary restrictions are detrimental to problem solving.

What's defined as close quarters? Depends on a weapon being used. 100m could be considered close quarters for a rifle but certainly not for a handgun.
semper acer , semper velox , semper trux , semper promptus

User avatar
Ryan
Posts: 2789
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 3:10 am
Contact:

Re: Basic Questions: CQB

Post by Ryan » Tue Jul 17, 2012 8:25 pm

An article via email. Highlighted relevant part.

Suarez International Group Of Companies
15 JULY 2012

CQB TIPS



First a definition. "CQB" is an acronym for Close Quarters Battle. It was coined by the British SAS as far as I know and formed a catch-all category to throw anything to do with fighting in or around buildings. Since "fighting in and around buildings" is a mouthful by anyone's standards, I will use the British term.



Some things to consider. The CQB area is sadly lacking in many a man's training. Sure, he has been through a shoothouse...maybe even done a paintball game at some point...but there is a great deal more to consider. Here are some of those things.



He who lays in wait has an immense advantage over he who goes to get him. That cannot be ignored. As well, the tenents of the application: For the defender...patience and stealth. The role of the defender is much like hunting from a blind. But for the assaulter...surprise, speed, overwhelming violence, will mitigate the danger to them...but not eliminate it. If any of these is lost, the danger goes up dramatically.

I will also say that a single operator clearing his home...a father moving to rescue a child from a home invader, or a protective agent moving his principal through and clear of a danger area are all doing different things than what a military assault, or a SWAT entry entails. There are similarities in concept...but vast differences in application.

Paramount to success is having a clear understanding of mission. Why are you doing what you are doing. An understanding of that will dictate how you do it, as well as how much you risk in the application. In short, the missions are as follows.



1). Lay in wait - waith for the adversary come to you and then ambush him.

2). Search and clear - Role reversal from the above. The traditional clear the house scenario.

3). Hunt and Kill - Think of a private citizen hostage rescue in the home directed at the home invaders actively hurting family members.

4). Escape and Evade - In short, how to get out of a danger area under arms.



All three are viable missions to consider and each has its own tactics.
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
Ryan
Posts: 2789
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 3:10 am
Contact:

Re: Basic Questions: CQB

Post by Ryan » Wed Aug 15, 2012 10:22 am

"Fighting in an enclosed area" was a good suggestion for a definition in direct proportion to "fighting INSIDE a building".

"CQB is an acronym for Close Quarters Battles and refers to fighting methods within buildings, streets, narrow alleys and other places. " -- http://www.wordiq.com/definition/CQB.
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
Ryan
Posts: 2789
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 3:10 am
Contact:

Re: Basic Questions: CQB

Post by Ryan » Fri Aug 17, 2012 12:00 am

http://www.cqcsa.co.za/history.htm

Anyone agree with this article?
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: 1024
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2008 7:55 am
Location: Australia

Re: Basic Questions: CQB

Post by jimothy_183 » Fri Aug 17, 2012 9:23 am

I do not agree with it. It's all about K.I.S.S and from what I have read in there that definition is not K.I.S.S. The first sentence also has a criteria that is far too broad (jungle warfare was once called CQB). The one you posted "fighting in an enclosed area" has a much more specific criteria but I don't agree with that either. My definition has a very clear cut, strict and simple yes/no criteria.
semper acer , semper velox , semper trux , semper promptus

User avatar
Ryan
Posts: 2789
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 3:10 am
Contact:

Re: Basic Questions: CQB

Post by Ryan » Fri Aug 17, 2012 2:22 pm

Probably so. I like references to outside, in the streets, because you can use "indoors" tactics just as effectively with some added compromises.

The article is interesting in the points of reference to the 'originators' of modern CQB. Where do you think, in CQB history, the changes occurred? Do we take lessons from every theatre, even say a jungle theatre like Vietnam or winter operations in the Arctic Circle for CQB lessons? Do other people's wars, wars which we are not involved in help to evolve our understanding of CQB?

I want to finger-print where those changes occurred, such as in Medicine and the "theory of germs" and how they spread disease. Yes it was looked at as far back as I believe 61 BC, but it only came to 'true light' around the late 1800's where it evolved into a scientific world of exploration. Where for instance did people come up with or develop the idea of a Fatal Funnel, and how was the evidence, experience, common tactical examination or study related to it for it to be so dangerous in the eyes of CQB-ers?
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: 692
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 4:48 pm
Location: Florida

Re: Basic Questions: CQB

Post by tacticalguy » Tue Aug 21, 2012 6:50 pm

Ryan wrote:Probably so. I like references to outside, in the streets, because you can use "indoors" tactics just as effectively with some added compromises.

The article is interesting in the points of reference to the 'originators' of modern CQB. Where do you think, in CQB history, the changes occurred? Do we take lessons from every theatre, even say a jungle theatre like Vietnam or winter operations in the Arctic Circle for CQB lessons? Do other people's wars, wars which we are not involved in help to evolve our understanding of CQB?

I want to finger-print where those changes occurred, such as in Medicine and the "theory of germs" and how they spread disease. Yes it was looked at as far back as I believe 61 BC, but it only came to 'true light' around the late 1800's where it evolved into a scientific world of exploration. Where for instance did people come up with or develop the idea of a Fatal Funnel, and how was the evidence, experience, common tactical examination or study related to it for it to be so dangerous in the eyes of CQB-ers?
Excellent thought. I would think that the "Art of CQB" developed quite a bit during WWII when the house to house fighting and clearing of machine gun nests in France and western Germany were occurring in '44-'45. I'm inclined to think that I may even be "parroting" someone else's comments in another thread. Certainly, tactical theory was advanced in the aftermath of Tet in '68 and Munich in '72.
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: 2789
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 3:10 am
Contact:

Re: Basic Questions: CQB

Post by Ryan » Fri Aug 24, 2012 2:30 pm

I'd just personally like to know where the terms came from though and how they were formed, through what experience or study? Interesting none the less.

Image
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: 1024
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2008 7:55 am
Location: Australia

Re: Basic Questions: CQB

Post by jimothy_183 » Fri Aug 24, 2012 5:21 pm

You mean terms like fatal funnel and the like? Well I would think that they came into existance when people started to discuss tactics and what not and so in order to keep everyone on the same page a term that was quickly thought up was assigned to the things that we have learnt today.
semper acer , semper velox , semper trux , semper promptus

User avatar
Ryan
Posts: 2789
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 3:10 am
Contact:

Re: Basic Questions: CQB

Post by Ryan » Wed Nov 14, 2012 4:57 am

jimothy_183 wrote:You mean terms like fatal funnel and the like? Well I would think that they came into existance when people started to discuss tactics and what not and so in order to keep everyone on the same page a term that was quickly thought up was assigned to the things that we have learnt today.
By whom and why I would definitely want to know. Otherwise you feel like you're going with the flow, with something that may be well and truly cemented but it doesn't feel right not knowing the history behind such a subject. A definition, term, phrase comes from somewhere - guessing as it's a military topic, someone must of claimed it and for such reasons which would be interesting to know about.

"Trust me dude, just trust me, OK?" :lol: Is how sometimes it feels...



A definition here - thoughts?
"Clearing a wall and everything behind it" fits better. :lol:
"Meaning up close physical confrontation."
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: 1024
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2008 7:55 am
Location: Australia

Re: Basic Questions: CQB

Post by jimothy_183 » Wed Nov 14, 2012 7:56 am

Well unfortunately it's another one of those things that will be lost in history because no on stepped up to claim responsiblity for coining a certain term and no one as far as I know bothered to record the information that you are looking for. So now the only thing we can come up with are theories made from making educated gueses on the information that we do indeed hold.

For example there are a few theories on where the salute came from. One says that it came from the medievil times where knights passing each other would raise their helmet visor to allow each other to be identified, another states that it came from ancient Rome where a person approaching would raise their hand up to show that they have no weapon and mean no harm. The fact is that no one knows for sure what is and isn't true and we probably never will.
semper acer , semper velox , semper trux , semper promptus

User avatar
Ryan
Posts: 2789
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 3:10 am
Contact:

Re: Basic Questions: CQB

Post by Ryan » Sun Feb 24, 2013 2:04 am

I'd like to point out this post (you can view it without facebook I believe) for the misconceptions and lack of self-funded knowledge of our current society:
http://www.facebook.com/CQBteam/posts/10151455797641797

I would like to note people referencing Wikipedia and VIP protection as a counter-argument to that presented, that CQB is a military subject matter now converted to the use by LE tactical teams who need it for their given situation (which gradually is becoming a more militaristic situation say with terrorism (and therefore counter-terrorism) and an internal differentiation to those who act violently say with a mass shooting). It is not H2H self-defense classes, nor is it a bar fight, nor is it a gunfight at 31 meters (inside joke, you'll get it if you read the comments). :lol:

What this industry needs is solid definitions. Oh but then half the companies would poof, vanish in smoke. I should also note the... flawed arguments offered went to PM to which someone said my post was more about "strategy" and that CQB in a military subject sense is "strategy", which I argued was wrong - yet again - because CQB is a tactical foundation for soldiers operating in the urban environment but is of course used by higher ups as a strategy in itself to have individual soldiers and/or teams operating at a higher standard within that environment. It was a good conversation, although as stated I was vague and did not fully argue it. To be honest it is hard trying to educate some people, those who have NO IDEA or are totally opposed to the viewpoint for whatever reason... or whatever Wikipedia article. :twisted:

"It's trying to break people away from perceptual ideas of the subject. That there is more to it than what people tell you and you can learn that! You can educate yourself, do not become another 'CQB is solely H2H or VIP protection' person, do not be a 'CQB is a firefight at specifically this meters' realize that you have to encompass clearing rooms and subtopics you have mentioned such as weapon selection, gear selection and rarely but possibly hand to hand. It is the umbrella term for the subject matter, so do not use a subtopic "H2H" to vaguely attempt to redefine it."
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: 692
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 4:48 pm
Location: Florida

Re: Basic Questions: CQB

Post by tacticalguy » Sun Feb 24, 2013 7:51 am

Ryan wrote:I'd like to point out this post (you can view it without facebook I believe) for the misconceptions and lack of self-funded knowledge of our current society:
http://www.facebook.com/CQBteam/posts/10151455797641797

I would like to note people referencing Wikipedia and VIP protection as a counter-argument to that presented, that CQB is a military subject matter now converted to the use by LE tactical teams who need it for their given situation (which gradually is becoming a more militaristic situation say with terrorism (and therefore counter-terrorism) and an internal differentiation to those who act violently say with a mass shooting). It is not H2H self-defense classes, nor is it a bar fight, nor is it a gunfight at 31 meters (inside joke, you'll get it if you read the comments). :lol:

What this industry needs is solid definitions. Oh but then half the companies would poof, vanish in smoke. I should also note the... flawed arguments offered went to PM to which someone said my post was more about "strategy" and that CQB in a military subject sense is "strategy", which I argued was wrong - yet again - because CQB is a tactical foundation for soldiers operating in the urban environment but is of course used by higher ups as a strategy in itself to have individual soldiers and/or teams operating at a higher standard within that environment. It was a good conversation, although as stated I was vague and did not fully argue it. To be honest it is hard trying to educate some people, those who have NO IDEA or are totally opposed to the viewpoint for whatever reason... or whatever Wikipedia article. :twisted:

"It's trying to break people away from perceptual ideas of the subject. That there is more to it than what people tell you and you can learn that! You can educate yourself, do not become another 'CQB is solely H2H or VIP protection' person, do not be a 'CQB is a firefight at specifically this meters' realize that you have to encompass clearing rooms and subtopics you have mentioned such as weapon selection, gear selection and rarely but possibly hand to hand. It is the umbrella term for the subject matter, so do not use a subtopic "H2H" to vaguely attempt to redefine it."
LMAO!!! That FB conversation is HYSTERICAL! Thanks for sharing.
If you have to quote Wikipedia in your argument about what CQB is or isn't and you consider yourself to be an instructor in tactical matters, you need to check yourself. I'm sorry, just my opinion. I thought that guy looked familiar, too. LOLOLOLOL. He was the same guy that almost fell on his fellow demonstrator during a technique demo that you posted in the H2HC section, too!! Not trying to flame someone here but, seriously??
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: 2789
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 3:10 am
Contact:

Re: Basic Questions: CQB

Post by Ryan » Sun Feb 24, 2013 8:02 am

I feel embarrassed and unfortunate to say... That's the man. :mrgreen:
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: 692
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 4:48 pm
Location: Florida

Re: Basic Questions: CQB

Post by tacticalguy » Sun Feb 24, 2013 8:07 am

Ryan wrote:I feel embarrassed and unfortunate to say... That's the man. :mrgreen:
Why should you feel embarrassed, brother?? He's the one that shamed himself. You simply re-posted his site that he had publicly posted. I would say the same stuff to his face.
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: 2789
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 3:10 am
Contact:

Re: Basic Questions: CQB

Post by Ryan » Sun Feb 24, 2013 10:47 am

You're right to some degree you shouldn't because these people diminish other truthful and productive perspectives by stating wrongs. But at the same time I feel sorry for the level of... :D What's a tactful way of putting it? I guess there isn't one, he's a plonker. :lol:
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: 692
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 4:48 pm
Location: Florida

Re: Basic Questions: CQB

Post by tacticalguy » Sun Feb 24, 2013 11:51 pm

Ryan wrote:You're right to some degree you shouldn't because these people diminish other truthful and productive perspectives by stating wrongs. But at the same time I feel sorry for the level of... :D What's a tactful way of putting it? I guess there isn't one, he's a plonker. :lol:
I kind of look at it like the Kung Fu wooden arm post. If you hit it hard without understanding that it's going to spin, it's gonna swing around and clock ya. Call it weeding out the idiots? I think that people who've spent any serious amount of time researching CQB are going to spot this pogue for what he is. If you're not serious and looking to waste your time, the folks that are actively teaching real techniques don't want you anyway, IMHO.
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)

Post Reply

Return to “CQB General Discussions ”