Buddy Pair Drills

Moderator: jimothy_183

Post Reply
User avatar
Ryan
Posts: 2799
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 3:10 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Buddy Pair Drills

Post by Ryan » Thu May 24, 2012 10:55 pm

What kind of battle buddy drills can you conduct?

I.e. cover drill (jam, reload), break contact (peel, etc), man down.

Do buddy pairs ever, or are there ever drills where you do things back-to-back or side-to-side? Can you list a few?


I love the way on badger's video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... u3MWNVLipY) whenever one turns, the other instantly backs him up then makes an action: Engage, ignore. Engage the threat then move on or ignore the threat and snap back to your arc of responsibility.

They also go along different paths of movement to get the best advantageous angle upon the threat. On some drills one checks the area between them, on others both do - especially if a contact is spotted.

I also noted on entries the first pair went in, the second man on such an angle to support the first in those dire first contact moments, he acknowledged no contact OR the contact was managed and instantly changed his direction path to the next threat area. He would even engage moving into his area of domination, even before entering the doorway or whilst moving through it, to give the first man a better chance at survivable - shooting past him but being aware of line of fire and having strict and situational control over paths of movement.

Contact management is very important in those multi-person engagements and between buddy pairs differentiating their own lanes of fire and targets. If the third man noticed only one threat and two muzzles from the entry team already on it, he would switch up and check other areas (including a 180 to check behind the door and the hard corner).

The way they can switch positions and do each others role fully - the hidden communication of knowing how your partner works and instictively knowing what they need is just unbeatable.
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: Buddy Pair Drills

Post by jimothy_183 » Fri May 25, 2012 12:42 pm

@ 1:30 Sort of back to back drill?

semper acer , semper velox , semper trux , semper promptus

User avatar
Ryan
Posts: 2799
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 3:10 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Buddy Pair Drills

Post by Ryan » Sat May 26, 2012 5:45 am

Yes, exactly. Good video. There are a mixture of back-to-back drills.

I notice in some training and combat videos troops whom are acting as buddy teams sometimes shoot over each other on contact front:-
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
tacticalguy
Posts: 703
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 4:48 pm
Location: Florida

Re: Buddy Pair Drills

Post by tacticalguy » Sun May 27, 2012 4:16 am

Ryan wrote:Yes, exactly. Good video. There are a mixture of back-to-back drills.

I notice in some training and combat videos troops whom are acting as buddy teams sometimes shoot over each other on contact front:-
Image
That's a LOT of drill practice which creates a HUGE amount of trust that allows a technique like that. The knowledge that you and your buddy KNOW what's in the other one's head, a level of intimacy, a bond that goes FAR beyond shared range time every week. That is a demonstration of two guys who who practice all of their tactical skills together; weapon retention, combatatives, CQB, buddy rappel (or abbing, for my mates), fast-roping, precision shooting, etc...
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: 2799
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 3:10 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Buddy Pair Drills

Post by Ryan » Mon May 28, 2012 1:53 am

That's true.

Take a look at this specific video: http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=162 ... 904&type=2.

SSG Operations Part 2 - Shoot House Training (and theory by my standards).
It focuses on many buddy entries and drills.

I get some parts of it. For instance, the initial breach to the first room you enter. You're in stealth mode so there is a huge chance the bad guy will be towards the middle or far end of the room, not the corners or near-door unless intentionally moving there. The process of elimination tells me worry about the centre, ignore the corners or soft check if you can - in the secondary scan of the area after engagement would be a good time to do so.

First man pushes door, second moves and first man steps back. Good for if rounds come your way you can break contact, making more space. If you wanted to you could pause for a microsecond then move. Co-ordinate and choreograph it with your partners specific movements so when he gets to this location, this position of movement then you instictively move because you've left enough space and you can get in there without tripping up your partner, lessening that stack or entry spacing between yourselves. This equates to being quicker in the door to back up your partner, a better close quarter gunfighter!

Now the second mans secondary sweep looks awkward due to footing. If he did have a bad guy in that hard corner it would be awkward for him to turn - you can already see the strain on his anatomy with him partially turning his upper body and head. The secondary sweep should advisably be done with the weapon in a ready-to-react position but this is not always possible due to these kinds of anatomy mistakes, so the soft check was the only option left. If he did have contact he would of had to turn his whole body and change footing to engage; I only hope his partner would instantly back him up seeing those problems or having previous knowledge of them. Example of a better way with the secondary: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uhc-QBXZLn8.

If there was shooting in the hallway I would call to my friendlies and wait for the all clear. If I had to peek, I would peek quickly checking right (towards the threat area) and come back in. To check left if there was no threat identified I would change height and peek that way, with the weapon towards eye-level ready to engage. You must know full-well though that the bad guy can peek it too, he might have engaged then went to ground or cover, visually obscuring your point of view and perception of the event.

The good points are that I love the way they split the doorway and use multiple actions with both members during the same time-space. Great communications and teamwork. By using the over-the-top drill they can also back-out or break contact from the room with two muzzles, side-by-side slightly off-set from each other to back-track out of the door and peel left or right whilst maintaining arcs of fire. If the front man is then hit the second man can drag him out of there. The good thing about having the muzzle by the side of your face also is that you know where your partner is aiming and you know the arc limits between each member so when doing an action such as a jam, you stick to your own 'personal combat space'.

Some parts I don't get - for instance multiple threats and the fact that they swap over each others arc of fire whilst in contact, during delivery. The front man should take the hardest to reach threat, not the rear. The front man should try crouch when possible in those positions, it makes it so awkward being stood up infront the rear man inhibiting view and combat effectiveness. This also means he transitioned without going crouched meaning yet again more implausible in combat - it gives enough space for a bad guy to take both of them out.

Then comes the engagements: No layering of fire, no interlocking arcs of fire for many parts and sections of the scene(s). As an example, the initial engagement has the first man engaging then going to low-ready while the second man is still engaging; this simply should not happen, you keep the muzzle-up until all threats are down and identified as being combat ineffective. The great things about it is adaptable target transitions dependent on what your buddy is doing and/or whom he is engaging; the escalating and de-escalating rates of covering fire, the transitions between threats after each short-burst or engagement, the secondary scan with muzzle at eye level, the re-evaluating of downed threats in any lull time, the well-done buddy drills.

Another fairly bad point to put my finger on though is the train formation, during which they left-flank exposed themself as one team clears that room. If a bad guy shoots through the doorway they shall not only potentially hit the entry buddy team but the train members including the shield man! This may lose valuable protection to the front of their formation. I may work on thinking of solutions around this... this and the other problem I noticed: "Sandwiching", where they move too far forward of the clearing team. That entry team clearing the room may be taken out, then you could have bad guys to your front and rear, hallway ambushing you in a sandwich fashion; "Squashing" is also a common term.

I'm sure they have their reasons but this is objective theoretical critique. In no way do I mean it to be subjective. They have probably discussed the same problems and micro-problems and if so then very good. Every team needs its feedback and must be open to combat potential, concepts and probability.

A reply from Spec services:
"Not sure if there is a question here and unfortunately I do not discuss hard tactics on open forums, just something that I believe in. The only reason that those clips from the video actually appear online is because they are set warm ups, or drills designed to test specific pieces of the larger puzzle. We do this in a crawl, walk run progression on training evolutions and not all drills are the same on any given day. Not wishing to be the one to expose tactics open source is another reason that the youtube channel that I do, ONLY shows basic firearms related information.

As for any tactics we employ, we adhere to the NTOA's best SWAT practices and are a full time 24/7 dedicated, FEMA type 1 unit within the US and there are only a handful of teams that meet these standards within the US. Our training group has received instruction, were former members, or trained with many of the top units in the US and abroad, to include LE and Military. I will note that tactics within the US can vary slightly from region to region, especially West Coast v. East Coast. Keeping this in mind it only stands to reason that tactics vary from those performed outside of the US and I know this is true because we have been heavily exposed to a multitude of variations from units world wide. Also keep in mind that we are US LE and work under differing scenarios and rules of engagement from Military in combat zones, so there is definitely a difference in SOP. Our training group also interacts heavily with, and trains select US Military unit personnel.

I appreciate the interest."
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: 2799
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 3:10 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Buddy Pair Drills

Post by Ryan » Sun Dec 02, 2012 2:45 pm



2:20. Buddy support (The flesh bipod!). Another example pictured below.

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."

Post Reply

Return to “CQB Two Man Team TTP/S”