00:00:00
We're going to explore the reality of
00:00:01
long cover in relation to protecting a
00:00:03
team or buddy while they're completing a
00:00:04
task or movement. The two long didn't
00:00:06
watch is that you're likely not stopping
00:00:07
someone from getting shot and you
00:00:08
shouldn't go weak side unless you're
00:00:10
only concerned about your own security
00:00:11
and you've also put in considerable
00:00:13
training time to make the hits at speed.
00:00:15
We've already covered the action
00:00:16
reaction death race extensively in the
00:00:18
videos above and know the best outcome
00:00:19
is often a tie game and that distance
00:00:21
and cover are of utmost importance in
00:00:23
evening the odds. And in the same way
00:00:25
for this long cover exercise, we're
00:00:27
ignoring additional assessment time
00:00:29
because we have already predetermined
00:00:30
the course of action and are simply
00:00:32
looking at the requisite skill to truly
00:00:34
provide lethal coverage. In this
00:00:36
context, to set the baseline, we had two
00:00:38
shooters snapshoot strong hand only to
00:00:40
determine how quickly an adversary can
00:00:42
fire one unsighted round pointed in the
00:00:44
direction of a chosen target. The
00:00:46
average between both shooters was 0.75
00:00:48
seconds and a 90% hit rate if we
00:00:51
consider the entire target area. Keep in
00:00:54
mind that true blind fire would likely
00:00:55
be even quicker with obviously less
00:00:57
exposure. And for this context, even a
00:00:59
missed round off the IPS-C target could
00:01:00
be around in the extremities or a
00:01:02
teammate moving shoulderto-shoulder in a
00:01:04
hallway. Next, we placed two hands on
00:01:06
the gun to deliver a sighted snapshot at
00:01:08
the same distance of 5 m. The average
00:01:10
time combined went up by 33% and there
00:01:13
was slightly more exposure from both
00:01:15
shooters. That exposure time, however,
00:01:17
is the crux of this entire issue of long
00:01:19
cover. The 0.75 second average for
00:01:22
unsighted fire to land a round on target
00:01:24
is from the buzzer. And our friend
00:01:26
holding long cover to prevent exposures
00:01:28
like this doesn't get to react to the
00:01:30
buzzer. Their time starts at the
00:01:32
perception of movement and then the
00:01:34
assessment of that movement and
00:01:35
subsequent muzzle in their face. Meaning
00:01:38
that it's practically impossible to stop
00:01:39
this shot from occurring unless the
00:01:41
adversary pauses to take a sighted shot.
00:01:44
Now, we were supposed to be talking
00:01:45
about long cover, so let's get to at
00:01:47
least 50 m and see what happens. Our two
00:01:49
shooters are back to a one-handed
00:01:51
snapshot down this hypothetical hallway,
00:01:53
and the average combined time is 0.77
00:01:56
seconds, but the hit rate has gone down
00:01:58
to 10%. The significant decrease in
00:02:00
accuracy is good, but it doesn't negate
00:02:03
the fact that we won't be able to
00:02:04
prevent the shot from occurring in the
00:02:06
first place. At 15 meters with sighted
00:02:08
fire, the combined times increased by
00:02:10
about 40% and the hit rate was again
00:02:13
100% with accuracy rated by a total
00:02:15
potential points at
00:02:17
72%. Versus the 5 m sighted fire at 96%
00:02:22
potential accuracy. This is just to say
00:02:24
that if a bad guy wants the highest
00:02:25
likelihood to hit you at 15 m or more,
00:02:28
they are going to have to stop to aim,
00:02:30
which could add about 0.2 2 seconds to
00:02:32
their exposure time prior to firing.
00:02:35
Which if we look back to earlier, our
00:02:37
estimate is that gives you at best less
00:02:39
than 0.53 seconds to observe, assess,
00:02:43
and fire to actually prevent this shot
00:02:45
from being sent on one of your buddies.
00:02:47
So, let's look at the time it takes to
00:02:48
place a round accurately from the
00:02:50
perspective of long cover with a rifle
00:02:52
when we're focusing on one point of
00:02:54
interest directly to our front. Again,
00:02:56
keep in mind there is no assessment time
00:02:58
tacked onto this. We know exactly where
00:03:00
the target is. are focused directly on
00:03:02
it with all of our attention and are in
00:03:04
our perfect stance ready and expecting
00:03:06
the buzzer. Our combined average in
00:03:08
these perfect conditions is still not
00:03:10
quick enough at 0.90 seconds for that
00:03:13
100% hit rate, which is the hit rate and
00:03:15
accuracy level we need to guarantee
00:03:17
we're saving our buddy from taking that
00:03:19
first round. Next, we added two targets
00:03:21
to be called out from 1 to three in a
00:03:23
random order. The shooter then had to
00:03:25
transition from holding on the center
00:03:26
target to a maximum of about 30° to the
00:03:29
left or right to engage the respective
00:03:31
target that was called. We did skew the
00:03:33
data a bit on this because we added hard
00:03:35
cover to the left and right targets
00:03:37
between shooters. But you can see that
00:03:39
even by adding three simple choices, our
00:03:41
times on the center target that we were
00:03:43
previously shooting went up by about
00:03:45
10%. It's safe to say that covering an
00:03:47
area with multiple windows, doors, or
00:03:49
hallways may have a similar effect. Our
00:03:52
combined average with the added coverage
00:03:54
of multiple thread areas pushed our time
00:03:56
to 1.08 seconds, which was a 20%
00:03:59
increase from covering one thread area.
00:04:01
Hits were 100% with an accuracy of 92%
00:04:04
of the potential
00:04:06
points. After this, we moved to 5 m to
00:04:09
increase the angle of the transitions
00:04:10
and repeat that same test with the three
00:04:12
unknown targets. We got a combined
00:04:14
average time of 0.91 seconds with 100%
00:04:17
hit rate and 100% accuracy, which sounds
00:04:20
great, but it's still not quick enough
00:04:21
to prevent a round coming down the
00:04:23
hallway, even if the adversary stops to
00:04:25
aim for an additional half second. It's
00:04:27
so delayed, in fact, that if we look at
00:04:29
the bullet math with an average 0.25
00:04:32
splits or four rounds per second, it
00:04:34
indicates the adversary could launch
00:04:36
three rounds before you return fire.
00:04:38
This means that we need to limit our
00:04:40
exposure as much as reasonably possible
00:04:42
and maintain cover and distance to
00:04:43
increase not only our composure to
00:04:45
return an accurate round under fire, but
00:04:47
to prevent that indiscriminate fire from
00:04:49
striking us. And with that, we'll
00:04:51
introduce some weak side shooting for
00:04:52
the priority of decreasing our exposure
00:04:54
on the offside and see how that stacks
00:04:56
up to our strong side shooting times. We
00:04:59
conducted this same test with three
00:05:00
random target calls at the 5 m line,
00:05:03
which in retrospect should have been
00:05:04
completed at 15 m to better assess the
00:05:06
accuracy of our weak side shooting in
00:05:08
conjunction with the speed. There are
00:05:10
some ugly reps in here and we included
00:05:12
them in the average because if you're
00:05:13
going to commit to switching to your
00:05:14
weak side, there comes a higher risk of
00:05:16
these outlier reps happening. In the
00:05:19
end, we had a combined average time of
00:05:21
1.58 seconds, which was a 72% decrease
00:05:24
in speed in comparison to our strong
00:05:27
side shooting times, but we did maintain
00:05:29
the same hit rate and accuracy. Clearly,
00:05:32
both of us aren't training weak side
00:05:33
shooting at a regular training interval.
00:05:35
So, our index is awful. But consider the
00:05:38
fact that most people don't train weak
00:05:40
side, but will still place themselves in
00:05:42
a weak side shooting position to reduce
00:05:44
their exposure and cover without knowing
00:05:46
what they're giving up. In this case,
00:05:48
the decision to go weak side would
00:05:49
contribute to our adversary firing a
00:05:51
potential five rounds before answering
00:05:53
with our own. Not only is the time a
00:05:56
factor, but more so the lack of a
00:05:58
confident guarantee that you'd be able
00:06:00
to land an accurate round on a distant
00:06:01
or limited exposure target from this
00:06:03
position without putting in serious
00:06:06
training time. The biggest
00:06:07
consideration, however, is our teammates
00:06:09
because this is likely why we are in
00:06:11
this position to begin with. If we are
00:06:12
the only ones holding an area while
00:06:14
teammates move or complete a task, then
00:06:16
it shouldn't be our safety that is the
00:06:18
priority, it should be theirs because
00:06:20
they are giving up the angles that we
00:06:21
are covering. Holding long cover is
00:06:24
generally about protecting someone
00:06:25
else's life, not your own. And in that
00:06:28
context, if you're going weak side to
00:06:29
limit your exposure, you're likely also
00:06:32
choosing to decrease the safety of your
00:06:34
buddies due to not only the average time
00:06:36
increase of your weak side shooting, but
00:06:38
the higher chance of anomalies like not
00:06:40
finding your dot and likely a lower
00:06:42
accuracy potential and composed
00:06:44
confidence. Again, what if it isn't just
00:06:46
a body shot? Can you shoot an eyeball
00:06:48
from weak side on a moment's notice? Cuz
00:06:51
that's hard enough from strong side. And
00:06:53
if you know these sides aren't equal,
00:06:55
then it may not be wise to choose to
00:06:57
limit your exposure at the cost of
00:06:59
giving up your highest level of
00:07:00
performance while covering for your
00:07:02
team. But this wasn't supposed to be a
00:07:04
rant about weak side cover. So, we'll
00:07:06
get back to the priority of coverage and
00:07:07
pondering what it actually means. Of
00:07:10
course, cover is vitally important for
00:07:12
many situations to maintain the team's
00:07:14
composure and confidence in completing
00:07:16
their own tasks without looking over
00:07:18
their shoulder. As usual, if the
00:07:20
adversary wants to win, they have all
00:07:23
the odds in their favor. But in a vast
00:07:25
majority of situations, we impose our
00:07:27
will in any manner we choose because the
00:07:29
other side isn't showing up to fight or
00:07:30
they are putting up a passive resistant
00:07:32
attempt that doesn't require our best
00:07:34
effort to survive anyway. But in that
00:07:36
rare opposed environment, do we simply
00:07:39
have to accept the first or first few
00:07:41
rounds for free in that worst case
00:07:43
scenario?
00:07:44
We certainly don't have all the answers,
00:07:46
but at least bringing awareness to the
00:07:48
actual capability we possess and
00:07:49
covering each other is a start to a
00:07:51
conversation. So, what is cover?
