- This topic has 26 replies, 11 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 2 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Question for all military and police members:
What are the differences between KM training and the training you receive in the military or the police? Are there differences in weapons defenses? What are they and, having trained in both, which methods do you prefer?
_________________
GiantkillerRe: Differences between KM and military/police training
Well first let me clarify that I had very little training in the military. The training I did have lasted 2 weeks and was mainly dealing with pressure points, a few basic punches, and empty hand control techniques. Importantly they stressed open hand heel strikes as opposed to fists so that you were less likely to damage your hands and you could still use a gun if necessary.
The basic idea of everything was for subduing and controlling a suspect.
I could use some of what I learned there especially with the pressure points along with my Krav training.
Re: Differences between KM and military/police training
I think that the Army combatives program needs some serious restructuring. Apparently they are throwing a lot more into it now, but I haven’t seen any of that come down.
The only stuff we worked on in the Army (outside of basic, where we did bayonet fighting for one day and pugil sticks a few times) was straight up grappling. No strikes, no kicks, no weapons defenses…. Nothing. Our main focus was basicly to smash the opponents face open with the butt of our rifle and then choke that bastard out.
I definately prefer Krav. A lot more realistic if you get caught off guard.
J-
Re: Differences between KM and military/police training
quote downforlife76:The only stuff we worked on in the Army (outside of basic, where we did bayonet fighting for one day and pugil sticks a few times) was straight up grappling. No strikes, no kicks, no weapons defenses…. Nothing. Our main focus was basicly to smash the opponents face open with the butt of our rifle and then choke that bastard out.That was my experience as well in the infantry. Basically rifle drills with bayonet in basic (parry, thrust, butt-stroke, slash). More specialized training could be had if you went thru special schools such as Ranger school, but even that is fairly limited in amount of time dedicated to learning h2h from what I heard. My 1sg was a h2h instructor at the ranger school during the late 80s, but we didn’t incorporate any of his knowledge into regular training. Everything hinged on teamwork. Squads, platoons, companies, battalions etc. Training usually placed you in known hostile areas with the proper equipment and support for defense.
I left the Army in ’92. My biggest complaint about our training was we rarely did anything outside of jungle warfare. Hawaii is similar in terrain to vietnam (they shoot a lot of vietnam tv shows/ movies there), but I always felt we should do more (or some) urban warfare scenarios. I hope our involvement in the middle east has been a wakeup call for seeing the need to include more h2h on a regular basis. If I were active duty now and wasn’t receiving h2h training on the job, I’d definitely be seeking it on my own and krav would be the way to go.
I can’t speak for what training police receive, but our training relied heavily on target identification and elimination. Very little instruction in the ways of subduing someone with grappling moves or the preservation of life excluding POW search and processing. In law enforcement people are innocent until proven guilty… in the military the pentagon tells me who’s guilty and what my rules of engagement are. The closest thing we did to peaceful resolution of a situation was riot control training with batons.
Re: Differences between KM and military/police training
VWR… Things have definately changed since then. I got in soon after Sept 11th 01 so I got to see all the “Oh s***!” changes first-hand. A lot of the live-fires now are not geared towards jungle fighting, it’s mostly react to IEDs and mounted operations. There is much heavier usage of the MOUT sites and there are improvised MOUT sites popping up all over the training areas. A lot of the physical stuff (as far as standards) seems to have been watered down.
The only really good “combatives” training I ever got in the Army is when I had LTC Steele (Yes, that Steele) as a battalion commander. He would take us on 5 mile battalion runs that would end in a field. Every time we did that, he had a different way for everyone in the unit to get hurt. Company on company no-holds-barred fights, 30 second “you’d better not stop hitting your opponent” boxing matches in a 6ft x 6ft ring (guys were getting knocked out in 10 seconds and having their faces pummled for 20 on the ground… it was nasty), and 2 on 1 pugil stick fights. Now THAT man knows how to run an Infantry unit.
J
Re: Differences between KM and military/police training
Sounds like a blast. I think we saw the urban terrain site once after arriving to our duty station (cohort unit). The reason they gave us for always doing jungle training was that our tactics going into vietnam reflected WWII thinking. After vietnam they saw the need to change, so that’s how we trained. I guess it takes something like vietnam or 9/11 to get them to rewrite the FMs.
Re: Differences between KM and military/police training
quote downforlife76:There is much heavier usage of the MOUT sites and there are improvised MOUT sites popping up all over the training areas.Side note, after talking about it I did some searching around. Just thought the MOUT facility they have at Camp Lejeune is… wow. With all the military bases that have shut down, or are no longer being used, I’m surprised they aren’t converted to MOUT battlefields instead of the cheap plywood buildings we rarely got to use.
Re: Differences between KM and military/police training
So the grappling that you learn is basically like BJJ? Or more of a stand up version, hit the guy, then choke him? If you are on the ground during training, they don’t allow you to simulate strikes? Or maybe grab a knife during the fight or even a gun (in case you are pushed to the ground before you have a chance to draw your weapon)?
I suppose you would try to avoid getting so close to an enemy that you would have to engage him in h2h combat, but I guess under certain circumstances it could happen.
Strange that there are no weapons defenses. I thought there would be at least some of them in the army.
_________________
GiantkillerRe: Differences between KM and military/police training
quote Giant Killer:So the grappling that you learn is basically like BJJ? Or more of a stand up version, hit the guy, then choke him? If you are on the ground during training, they don’t allow you to simulate strikes? Or maybe grab a knife during the fight or even a gun (in case you are pushed to the ground before you have a chance to draw your weapon)?I suppose you would try to avoid getting so close to an enemy that you would have to engage him in h2h combat, but I guess under certain circumstances it could happen.
Strange that there are no weapons defenses. I thought there would be at least some of them in the army.
_________________
GiantkillerNot basicly like BJJ… It was BJJ. No strikes (simulated or otherwise), no weapons defenses (except shooting the dumb bastard), nada.
I posted something early on when I came onto this board about an incident where a guy, who’s car we were searching, grabbed for a soldier’s weapon and got beaten stupid(er). The only reason we came up on top is because all the training we did focused on being extremely aggressive and not stopping until the threat is eliminated.
Re: Differences between KM and military/police training
Being aggressive and not stoping until the threat is eliminated sounds similar to Krav.
The BJJ thing seems odd, since as a soldier you would probably have to try and kill an opponent fast, not play guard and try to catch him in an armbar while his buddies are jumping out of hidden corners or shooting at you.
_________________
GiantkillerRe: Differences between KM and military/police training
quote Giant Killer:Being aggressive and not stoping until the threat is eliminated sounds similar to Krav.The BJJ thing seems odd, since as a soldier you would probably have to try and kill an opponent fast, not play guard and try to catch him in an armbar while his buddies are jumping out of hidden corners or shooting at you.
_________________
GiantkillerIt helps with a variety of use-of-force issues… especialy now. I can’t really get into rules of engangement, but let’s just say it’s pretty restrictive so you find yourself having to subdue a lot of people.
J-
Re: Differences between KM and military/police training
Hey GK,
You are right that in most circumstances military members will try to avoid getting so close that they are forced to use unarmed combatives. There are also lots of reasons and times when this is not possible as well as you allude to, and DFL noted the escalation of force side of things. For example, think of UN or other peace keeping-type of operations or patrolling in crowded market places to name a few. Another example mentioned above is prisoner handling and detention. In these cases, using lethal techniques would often not be the best option.
During higher intensity conflicts, examples of where H2H becomes more imperative could be when fighting in trenches, bunkers, buildings, stairwells or other close confines etc, where sometimes using a weapon can be restricted by space etc. Here, using fast and effective lethal techniques comes into play.
In any case, there is a real need for military personnel to know and practise both lethal and non-lethal, and have a good balance of striking, grappling, weapon retention, weapon defences etc.
I will defer to the US military guys on the thread to comment on how things are done here. I can make a few (unofficial) comments on the way it is done in the Australian Army. We have military combatives now divided into two separate components – Military Self Defence (MSD) and Close Quarters Fighting (CQF). The former is designed for pretty much everyone and emphasises non-lethal self-defence sorts of things – there are a variety of strikes and grappling taught here, as well as weapon defences etc. There is not an emphasis on any one form of art such as BJJ. As an aside, I understand that all officer cadets now qualify as MSD instructors when they go through our Academy.
The the CQF package on the other hand is designed for personnel with a much higher need for lethal force e.g. infantry, combat arms, SF etc., and builds upon the training of the MSD package. In both packages there are also segments that deal with psychological preparation for conflict as in an attempt to be as holistic as we can.
Lots of the techniques have a similarity to KM, but there are lots that do not. I have done heaps more KM in recent years so I expect I would instinctively revert to that if required.
Hope this is useful for you.
Cheers,
Andy
Re: Differences between KM and military/police training
Giant Killer,
I’m NOT a Krav Maga student, so I can’t speak as to how it differs from military/police training. That said, I am a Army Combatives instructor, non-lethal weapon instructor, and an MP who teaches self-defense and custody/control techniques.
Keep in mind that most military personnel would prefer to engage the enemy from as far away as possible and with as much firepower as possible … as such the Army emphasis on weapon skills and collective (team oriented) training.
The Combatives training at the initial levels is heavily based on BJJ, but most instructors have enough of a martial background that they will add other techniques into unit level training (training done outside of Basic or other Army schools). The concept is close with the enemy as quickly as possible, maintain a dominant body positon, and fight until your battle buddy shows up with a gun (i.e. if the enemy starts to kick your butt, your friend fires center of mass until the enemy is no longer a threat). Any decent unit training program will include strikes and weapon skills, but not all units can focus a lot of time on Combatives due to all the other training that has priority. I have found MP and infantry units put it higher on the priority list than most, but the best instructor I ever worked with was a field artillery guy who could choke me out before I knew what was going on.
MPs place a much larger emphaisis on unarmed fighting skills due to our increasing involvment in situations where the need is to close with the enemy and detain, rather than kill. Because of this, the Army MP training I have encountered and what I teach at the most basic level is focused on maximum control with minimum force. It makes heavy use wrist locks and arm bars, as well as ‘distracting’ techniques such as knee and elbow strike to pressure points. It also has a heavy emphasis on cuffing techniques and weapon retention. As training progresses, there are more strikes, weapons (baton, PR-24, ‘less-than-lethal’ shotgun and M203 rounds, OC spray, etc), riot control, and various other skill sets. Defense against weapons is included, but not heavily focused on as the MP has a weapon themselves.
In general, milatary or police (at least MP) training is geared for a type of mission, rather than general fighting ability … they are in no way a stand alone fighting system. However, when combined with shooting skills, battle drills, use of force concepts, and the other skills Soldiers work on during the duty day, on training exercises, and on the battle field … the training they recieve does a pretty decent job of enhancing their combat capability and battlefield flexibilty.
Hope that helped …
Re: Differences between KM and military/police training
Yes, thanks a lot. Are you thinking of starting KM? It’s actually taught to some military units, I’d be interested to know how you like it in comparison to what you are teaching now.
_________________
Giantkiller
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
