Modern Army Combatives Program

[jks9199]

the information that i've seen said that that 90% statistic comes from the cops.
When a study was done on street self defense, they went to the group of people who had seen the most fights: cops.

But realize that as a cop, 90% of your fights would go to the ground because 1) you are trying to get the bad guy to get down on the ground
and 2) if he resists you can't (officially) punch or kick him, so it becomes a grappling match

Wrong. Most of a cop's fights do go to the ground, because if we pin the bad guy to the ground, we take away a significant amount of their mobility and ability to resist and fight.

And we can definitely punch, kick, and otherwise strike, when the situation merits it. You won't find many cops kicking very high, for lots of reasons, not least of which is the gun belt... but kicks and punches are certainly in the range of defensive tactics options.

 

[LoneRider]

The one aspect that has been neglected of the WHY so much emphasis placed on ground combatives for newer soldiers is one thing. MINDSET....

Wouldn't a program emphasizing practical defensive tactics progression with as much realism as safely possible, e.g. from standing to ground work just as well? If I'm not mistaken MCMAP does something along those lines for training.

 

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

The differnece is that MACP is very BJJ and MMA influenced and seeks to puttl from those worlds, a mistake overall.

MCMAP as it was founded , was influenced heavily by Koryo (Japanese Battlefeild arts), Judo, JUJUTSU, Karate and other Military Combatives and founded by a Marine Officer who looks at martial arts as something for combat first and not for sport.

MACP is good insofar as it gets soldiers doing something but it really should be a system that looks at the conditions a soldier faces and stars there.

Even the Military becomes star struck by MMA and BJJ's success in sports and beach brawls.

Heck, look how many units used to do TKD? Lots of soldiers got into Ninjutsu in the 80s and 90s.

Fads effect them too, sadly.

 

[LoneRider]

I think the Army Combatives program is a vast improvement over what recruits had been taught years prior, however I think it could do with a little tweaking. Starting with standup, with all the sundries the average infantryman carries into the field and then progressing to the ground fighting aspect would be the best bet in my humble opinion.

 

[BLACK LION]

Using grappling to teach or instill mindset is training them to grapple... they will do what they train.

I say dress em up in normal field gear and run em through an H2H kill house...


excuse the outburst

 

[LoneRider]

That's more or less what I think would be a far better course of instruction for young soldiers. But at any rate both MACP and MCMAP are far superior to the old LINE system with MCMAP having the clearest advantage for realistic training (I'll risk being crucified by my Army breathern for sacrilige by that one).

Perhaps MACP can be vastly improved by emulating the USMC methodology of training. The Army officer corps has already done something similar in another venue with it's BOLC II (a six week equivalent to the Marine Corps TBS) and pushing an 'every soldier a rifleman' attitude into its ranks.

 

[BLACK LION]

Whats disturbing is that the Navy doesnt even have h2h training let alone rifleman "training"... unless you are part of NSW.

I am not sure the airforce does either.

 

[MBuzzy]

No, we don't, although the Air Force Combatives program is under development.

I don't really find that disturbing though. We are transitioning to a more "warrior-centric" force, due Army ops tempo and contracts, but our mission simply doesn't involve hand to hand combat. Same with the Navy, we operate in different conditions. Our basic trainings are different.

The bottom line is this, when the Air Force or Navy has a mission need for h2h combat, we go to the Army and get the training that we need, which is why their program is of interest to us.

 

[LoneRider]

BLACK LION/MBuzzy Lord knows I agree with you gents. I got some Defensive Tactics training when I went through Security Reaction Force training (one of the MA1s teaching us had a blackbelt in jiu jitsu and judo. It was hilarious to watch him through a mouthy TM1 eight feet across the mats with a picture perfect sacrifice throw). But the Navy/Air Force with the latest shift in mentality, could use a service wide H2H program. It'd benefit people and not to mention be a great way to relieve stress on ships.

 

[BLACK LION]

BLACK LION/MBuzzy Lord knows I agree with you gents. I got some Defensive Tactics training when I went through Security Reaction Force training (one of the MA1s teaching us had a blackbelt in jiu jitsu and judo. It was hilarious to watch him through a mouthy TM1 eight feet across the mats with a picture perfect sacrifice throw). But the Navy/Air Force with the latest shift in mentality, could use a service wide H2H program. It'd benefit people and not to mention be a great way to relieve stress on ships.

Couldnt agree more.
It would be a definate plus to incorporate it in normal pt. Even make proficiency quals out of it. Hell make a ribbon out of it too.

 

[MBuzzy]

uh huh, like we need more BS ribbons....

The AF Program is under development and has started to be taught at Basic, but due to the vast differences in structure of the Army and AF/Navy, it will be hard to propagate. The Army's program is perpetuated by unit structure and training. That is why it works so well. The army has the H2H mentality. That is something that will need to be built in the other services. For the most part, the AF and Navy are not happy about having to do Army missions. In fact, the ILO mission was supposed to END in 2007, but it has grown since then.

Honestly, except for some curricular issues, the Army's program is the right thing for the right people. While I think that weapons should go first and that full gear should be integrate more intimately, it does serve to build soldier's "warrior ethos" by putting them in a fighting mindset.

 

[DergaSmash]

I'm not a fan of the Army Combatives. It was fun to learn and goundfighting is important to know and understand. But the Army likes to get things wrong, a lot. The man credited with creating the Modern Army Combatives has an interesting quote "The guy who's buddy shows up with a weapon first, wins." Interesting.

I was always curious that we are allies with Israel, why don't we adopt Krav Maga? It has been working for them for a long time! Use whatever is available first, fists and feet second, ground last. Makes sense to me.

 

[LoneRider]

Well, my friend, allow me to argue the devil's advocate position. We have AARs in the military for a reason. So if enough soldiers, especially guys with big combatives backgrounds (former cops, etc...) put well stated AARs in, Big Army should be persuaded to tweak the program.

MACP is far superior to the old LINE system that used to be taught years ago.

I think MACP is useful training, but could use a few tweaks as previous posters have mentioned. And you bring up a good AAR line yourself with:

Use whatever is available first, fists and feet second, ground last. Makes sense to me.

Now if enough of you guys bring this up post training AARs, especially if your combat arms, people will listen, somewhere in the chain of command.

Stay safe out there bro, from a fellow Sandbox deployer...

 

[sgtmac_46]

I am currently helping a few guys at my gym that are getting ready for boot camp and a couple that are getting ready to deploy. I am working their fitness and standup. Why? Have you tried to grapple with someone wearing a vest and a ton of stuff you are going to be carrying? It is extremely difficult. I am not against the ground game. Quite the contrary. But if it were me, I don't want to grapple in a combat zone.

Rifle first.
Pistol second.
Knife third.
Hands and feet, a very distant fourth.


JMO and I am sticking to it.

I agree absolutely.......but that begs the question, however, if you DO end up in a situation where an enemy combatant is at close quarters range, it's not likely he's going to be trading punches........my guess would be that he's either attempting to disarm, or attempting to put a knife in your gut, all while avoiding the end of the muzzle, which means he'll get extremely close, to grappling range.

I could be wrong, but I don't see a lot of punches or kicks being thrown in that format........the real question is how 80 pounds of gear is going to effect all of that.

 

[LoneRider]

I'll take a stab (pun intended) at it. Well with the vest and helmet, the amount of areas he has to stab you are less. And as far as 'striking' goes, I'd say using the rifle as a striking tool (muzzle strikes, butt strokes, shoving with the center of the weapon) can work.

 

[sgtmac_46]

I'll take a stab (pun intended) at it. Well with the vest and helmet, the amount of areas he has to stab you are less. And as far as 'striking' goes, I'd say using the rifle as a striking tool (muzzle strikes, butt strokes, shoving with the center of the weapon) can work.

That's true, leaving the only available targets for the knife the neck, underarm, groin and legs.

 

[BLACK LION]

Military soft armor is not stab rated, maybe level 1 at best. Also, it doesnt stop them from bricking a soldier in the face. It also doesnt stop them from torching a soldier with a molotov cocktail or some other accelerant/flame combo.....

 

[LoneRider]

I was referring strictly to stabbing type weapons. I in no way stated body armor makes you invulnerable.

 

[MBuzzy]

Military soft armor is not stab rated, maybe level 1 at best. Also, it doesnt stop them from bricking a soldier in the face. It also doesnt stop them from torching a soldier with a molotov cocktail or some other accelerant/flame combo.....

If you're off base in a combat zone, no one is wearing soft armor though. At the least, the plate in IBAs will stop stabs - not that it improves the situation, there are still plenty of targets, plus the bricking idea...and on top of that, the plates and IBA only serve to slow you down and make you less mobile.

 

[BLACK LION]

I think it would serve better to work to manipulate field gear to the advantage of the end user. All that gear means more weight and leverage behind your body weapons which equates to amplified trauma on target.
Takedowns, drops, dumps and throws can be amplified by securing field gear such as the vest, ach, packs, coms wires, drop leg pouches etc.

It may not always transfer to every theatre since in Irag most combatants are not decked out like the 82nd airborne or infantry. But it helps to intstill a knowledge of the shortcomings of ones own gear and its advantages.