weapons. Shooting from a vertical obstacle with an exit under a “weak” shoulder without a change of hands at a distance of “room” or “home ownership” is absolutely predictable, aimed and, as a result, ricocheting is safe. Difficult shooting, but excellent ergonomics - the advantage of AK
I am glad that I can again appeal to readers from the pages of the magazine "Weapon". Those who are constantly reading my articles and waiting for them, I ask you to excuse me for the long silence. After my incorrect statement about the apologists of sports areas of combat training (think about this phrase), a lot of time passed, they calmed down, went into hysterics - tears dried out. Now, we can and should sum up the interim results and calmly talk about our problems.
It is gratifying to see that the information field is growing around the shooting, in general, and around its combat aspects in particular. Video portals on the Internet today are just overwhelmed with tutorials. The choice is huge. From oligophrenia in the degree of dibilizma to genius. It is possible for a minute, for example, to purchase a "basic rack in the work with the machine." They will show you how to do it at home, and then add: “next Saturday, we will show you how to turn around,” and say goodbye. This is very similar to the situation around any science science, such as dietology or conflict management, thrown into the mass consumption market. In view of the simplicity and accessibility of common, mostly external bases, everyone who has at least the slightest opportunity is engaged in the combat aspects of the shooting - in general, this is a huge plus for the population.
The downside is that this wave has also spilled a mass of strange people to the surface. Basically, they are gurus of different levels of enlightenment and just instructors of various, all kinds of special forces. The minimum set of tools for such specialists consists of clothes, slang, light charisma and inability to fire at the destruction of living targets. By the way, this problem is international.
So, for example, when watching videos of training groups of antiterrorism of neighboring countries, our, to their misfortune, potential opponents, a certain similarity of their instructors with our “killers” immediately strikes. The shooter handled the corner in the "cross", then
to the “center”, from the “center” I shot at the target, with a voice I reported - well, everything is as it should be in such situations and during this work. And when assessing the result of the shooting, the instructor said to him: “This is what you hit, but overlooked here (he points his finger at a hole two centimeters further south).
Do you know why? Because you broke the entry scheme. ” The question involuntarily arises: “Why put it on the Internet?”.
It is good that such instructors, including those in Russia, occupy the lowest stages of rifle development: small station, grip, sticker, photo. Where speed and range matter, and in general questions of external ballistics - these individuals are not observed. They will not be there. I think this fact explains a lot.
This can be said to be the first intermediate conclusion.
With the beginning of the development of the combat aspects of the shooting, this “cart” both stood and stands - in the same place, however, there were many times more passengers, slogans and slogans on it. Previously, there could at least sit down, now everything - there are no places. And the disputes in this dump are still the same: “And which caliber is better? And which AK is more beautiful, with or without trims? A stylish shoot bursts or not? And where to buy, ... and how much? To be honest, as a person who is unable to overcome his disgust with respect to this category of people, I am rather pleased with this state of affairs. As a person who is passionate about shooting and who is jealous of her, is deeply disappointed. Have the last years and almost two hundred dead employees not taught them anything?
It is bad or good, if you earn money from it, then you, in fact, are absolutely indifferent. But if you are serving and ex officio not “sitting at headquarters”, but “running around with a machine gun”, then, of course, there is a certain degree of dissatisfaction. And it lies in the fact that in any course of shooting, no matter what departmental affiliation it is, sports, or rather, commercial start, for the present - the main thing. And you do not like it. The topics offered to you at commercial fees for which you paid a lot of your money on your vacation are all “dead”, the methods are far from perfect, and you don’t like it either.
Those who lead these charges, those who teach you to fight - you don't like them either. Seminars, fees, competitions, courses, advanced courses, etc. etc., all this does not carry in itself even a hundredth part of a rational grain, applicable in real combat training. Today it is so - and everyone sees it.
There is a lot of noise - there is little use.
It was a mistake to introduce sport into combat training. It should remain a sport: a spectacle, recreation, communication, money.
The outflow of Special Forces troops from Practical Shooting and other similar disciplines imposed on them in the form of the basics of rifle training is completely predictable, and this is sad.
Many of their best-minded officers spent money, were eager for something and ... "I will not teach this fighter ..."
Someone did not consider, someone did not appreciate, someone did not "flooded" - it does not matter. The result is important: people tried it - people did not like it. Something very stupid is hidden in all these screaming, pompous pictures about sporto-special forces. As a big man from the Ministry of Defense once said: "Between any rational initiative at the top and its execution on the ground is the abyss of morons." But this is not a topic for discussion - we work with it.
In order to understand the essence of any question, it is necessary to get rid of subjective perception, that is, to bring your main weapon - the head, to a normal battle. The head brought to a normal battle is the strongest protection against all that delusion that is growing exponentially today. Let's start in order.
Suppose that there is a certain division, let's call it conditionally “division”, in the abbreviation of which there is necessarily the word “special”. He has a full-time or freelance fire training instructor: wearing 5.11 pants and a Blackhawk cap. What is he doing? Few people know. But I will enlighten you!
Firstly, it absorbs terabytes of any rifle infection from the Internet and from the introduced flash drives and becomes strange: it is not clear, it complains about the lack of ammunition.
Secondly, about once every six months, when asked by the commander: “What are you doing?”, A miracle consisting of AK-104, always with a “snail”, a collimator, an IR LCC, a conventional LAC, tactical source of tactical light (lantern), IK lantern, on a tactical bipod, with strips along the entire length, with a front handle, “single-chechnik”, with a telescopic butt and necessarily, where without it, - a flow-slotted muzzle brake-compensator: everyone stops - for such a miracle all sins are forgiven him. Once a year, closer to Christmas, he can also show AK converted into a bullpup, well, it's like a revelation from John - for the elect.
Thirdly, when visiting colleagues, such an instructor necessarily asks: “Is there anything in electronic form?”. And if there is, he immediately copies all this mercilessly, and on this, his life cycle closes.
Such today is the very shooting culture in which everyone pulls in his direction.
It is in such conditions that a certain shooting product appears, which must be tested and accepted, either not accepted for service, or that person in his pants and cap punches the next “fees” or “workshop” on the subject.
But what categories does the average instructor think? This question is relevant precisely because it seems outwardly that the movement itself has a movement: videos on video portals, outdoor photo shoots, magazine articles are all signs of life. But at the same time there is not a single (!) Official methodology. No manuals. Not a single textbook. And as a result - no result.
Let's look at the problem that most often knocks out an officer’s normal rifle life: AK and its modifications; methods and methodologists; criteria for evaluation.
Suppose that in the place of permanent deployment of our "division" a certain woman lives, conditionally we will call her "our common woman." In all military camps there are such persons. But now she realized that a little more of such a life and everything - they will never be married again. She went to the hairdresser - cut her hair and dyed her hair. Then to a plastic surgeon - somewhere I increased the size, somewhere, on the contrary, I pulled it up. And then, as it happens, jumped out to marry a young lieutenant. And everything would be fine, life goes on, but the officer cannot understand: why does he always have problems with “our woman”? But the fact is that the instructor in a cap and pants, who wore “this woman” to him, did not say that her “rifling step” remained the same; In other words, no matter how you change the AK, it is still AK, with all its flaws and virtues. And the difference between the AK-5.45 and any other modification of it - no, except in the caliber. A divorce will follow, and our young lady, will go to another military unit, after the next young lieutenant. She goes hand in hand and in time she will understand that she is the same as everyone, albeit with buffers.
In navara in all this stories left a hairdresser and a plastic surgeon. The instructor in the cap and pants chose the role of a pimp.
But the visibility of the case has the scale, in truth, a grandiose one.
AK really amazing machine. He is already so many years old that few people believe in his modernity (they believe in modern wound ballistics). As a result, people begin to take some action, consisting in changing the cosmetic appearance of the weapon. We have already dealt with the topic of "tuning", but then nobody heard anyone behind the general noise around the Chpox - everyone was making noise like at the fair. But time has passed. All zatarilis all. Everyone has everything.
But as a practicing instructor I will say: The results have not changed at all. Not one hundredth. Neither combat nor competitive. Moreover, in some divisions, where the “tuning” was raised to the degree of obyazalovki and it was confused with the preparedness - the result fell.
Individual tactics, sharpened by tuning, completely oskokinili consciousness of a whole generation of shooters. They have to retrain to at least somehow flew. It was a massive attempt to shift its rifle incompetence to iron, which fortunately did not take place. And they were carried away by it because looking “real”, even for money, is easier than being one. This is the second intermediate conclusion.
And in this dance the instructors stopped understanding the difference between the rifle training and the fire training, and their general difference from the tactical fire.
Generally interesting things happened.
Where the actions of the fighter are closest to the actions of the so-called "operators", the gunners, it is precisely the rifle efforts of the staff that break through in an amazing way. For example, machine gunners who are defined as "gunners of the machine gun" by the NSD, shoot from their hands - in an automatic manner, at sighting devices, in the vast majority without additional sighting devices. And very weakly shoot. Even competitions are held. Shooting large-caliber, without restoring the “sighting line”, with the accumulating recoil momentum is carried out with the hands. This could be considered wrong only because it could not be. Previously, it was so. Today, this skill is already in service. It's nice.
And, on the contrary, where exactly the rifle skill should dominate in sniping, there today the shooter is not able to make a quick and accurate (sniper) shot without prior preparation, which completely excludes his participation in short-term fire contact. The work of the sniper in the overwhelming majority is the work of the gunner-operator of the rifle and its carrier to the place of the shot. In training, as a rule, snipers work separately - not in composition. They demonstrate effective fire at different ranges from previously prepared positions.
Returning to the AK, the trends of recent years are more likely chaos: stupid debates about caliber and ricochets. Tuning, the purpose of which is the preparation of weapons for a specific task, on the contrary, in the hands of many, makes the weapon ineffective. For example, the very "snail", because because of it, many even go to the caliber 7.62, to attach it to the machine, because it's cool. But ... If this is a "snail", it means that the shooter decided to give the machine gun the function of a machine gun. It is all clear and understandable. Then where does the collimator come from? And there must be a bipod, not an assault grip. And the shooter himself should, at least from afar, remind himself of an arrow, and not a mockery, in which the second, third and all subsequent ones to the 75 cartridge, fly past the target - into the sky, when firing in a queue.
Farther. When firing single, out of the fully-equipped “snail”, the recoil impulse of the weapon increases significantly — it stretches and hits the arrow in stages. This is very inconvenient when shooting fluent single, which means - “snail” is, first of all, a lineup. For this
and came up with it. And the turn is the destruction of the enemy, at distances to the 1 / 10 real fire. Then why with a “snail” collimator? With the "destruction" at melee distances, the time interval for the effectiveness of hitting the target will not allow you to aim "at a point" using sights - only the "target location". If the shooter does not have fluent, sighting, single fire, or he is not allowed to do this by the rifle complex, why does he take away the chance to hit the target? All those killed in the last five years at distances to 1 / 10 real fire - all died from the queues (I do not take into account the "ambush" shooting, when the enemy did not find the shooter).
A collimator and a bipod, such as a paradoxical EO-tech, are also mutually exclusive elements - they look ridiculous. Plus the butt, not performing the function of the butt, but rather an emphasis. And the belt, which is used where it is not needed and completely useless and interferes more, where the belt function is needed, is a different kind of "... dots", designed for submachine guns.
The shooting skill, which is often cultivated today in fire training, does not at all correspond to the speed and conditions of fire contacts that exist in life. After all, it is necessary to distinguish the training of a civilian, an American reservist, with a weapon and an employee of the Russian unit acting under a tactical plan. Yes, I agree, beautifully shot, I also want to wear glasses and a hat, start gesticulating accordingly. But you can not transfer viruses from the Internet to the combat practice.
Each subunit has “its own” distances, “its own” speeds at these distances, dimensions of targets, fire modes, its intensity and tactical tasks solved by fire.
For example, again to the question of methods. If today in training we work with “our” size and the purpose of the training is not going beyond the limits in all fire modes, this skill can be shot through without tactical equipment. And if we work with an error when aiming, which will be a component of the first response shot at the target at distances to 1 / 10, where we also use the target size, which is affected by the return fire density, then the clearance for the clearance is already laid down in the conditions as initial - this , and tactical equipment is also required. But this is no longer a shooting skill, as you guessed it, this is an individual tactic that is “shot through” to get a real picture of speeds, distances, density, and modes.
These "golden" rules, giving us the opportunity to simulate the combat use of small arms, are being trampled upon today in subdivisions absolutely godlessly.
In any occupation, it doesn't matter if the rifle is training a fighter, fire or tactics, “tuning”, the concept of destroying living targets, suppressing firing points, shackles, the concepts of distances and dimensions - these are all key points. And the orientation on the video during the lessons in the unit is an imperceptible death. For some, unfortunately, it can become a reality.
External entourage will never be superfluous, and we each have that cap and those pants as evidence of belonging to a sect whose members consider a shot at the medulla oblongata an art. But we must be able to distinguish between: what can be sold and what cannot be survived in a fire contact.
The special forces say that in the mountains and the forest it is necessary to take only that without which it is impossible to do, and not what you want or like. In the fire training as well, only to many it is not clear what this is - something without which it is impossible to do. This is roughly what makes the line between the living and the dead, in the first half of a second of visual contact in a duel confrontation.
And all those skills that are needed in the "shooter", when working on the goal or the area on which the goal, and not on the volume.
The essence of the destructive impact to which the special forces community and our rifle elements on the part of sports and commerce were subject to the fact that there are two types of attitude on the part of employees to these "external manifestations", "new directions", "tuning", etc.
The first believe in it as a deity. The latter use it. The second is smarter. And if something happens, the second ones will say, the whole, the trouble is that the “tuning” was incomplete.
Errors in shooting, teaching methods will always and in all - not without it. But to get to the bottom of the causes of these errors, and not to the “body kit” on AK, is much more effective. The only question is, will we be able to admit that for this, if not sadly, we will have to take a step back? Two forward we made and very wide.