Tactical Shooting Stances

[Chris Rhines]

Stances change. The head-up, stock-extended, bladed stance is probably better for standing still and delivering slow, aimed fire on a distant or low-probability target. The squared-up, hunched-over, extended arm stance lends itself to faster movement, faster transitions, and better splits on close targets.

No reason not to be familiar with all the major shooting positions, and switch between them as necessary.

-C

 

[Sheepdog1968]

In a real gunfight, I'd imagine both you and the opponent will be moving. I suspect given the rather dynamic event that is unfolding, there is a good change you will be shotting from all kinds of interesting positions.

 

[oneeyeross]

now, I'm a luddite and an old fart. That being said, rifle marksmanship as taught by the US Army has suffered over the years by trying to be too focused on rapid firing and moving around a lot. The marines, on the other hand, stayed focused on traditional long range rifle marksmanship....the army went to a 16" barrel, the marines stayed with 20"....

Regretfully, my former service doesn't shoot as well as the jar heads do....we look pretty moving around a lot and we put a lot of lead down range, but we don't shoot as well....

Or at least that is this old retired fart's opinion.

 

[Sam1911]

Regretfully, my former service doesn't shoot as well as the jar heads do....we look pretty moving around a lot and we put a lot of lead down range, but we don't shoot as well....

Wonder how that translates vis-a-vis enemy casualties and troops coming home safely?

 

[W.E.G.]

In a real gunfight, I'd imagine both you and the opponent will be moving. I suspect given the rather dynamic event that is unfolding, there is a good change you will be shotting from all kinds of interesting positions.

True dat.

 

[kwelz]

now, I'm a luddite and an old fart. That being said, rifle marksmanship as taught by the US Army has suffered over the years by trying to be too focused on rapid firing and moving around a lot. The marines, on the other hand, stayed focused on traditional long range rifle marksmanship...

Why would you focus on long range rifle marksmanship when most engagements happen within 100 meters? Standing there and trading shots with the enemy was phased out a LONG time ago for good reason. If you can't move you are dead. Plain and simple.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

The same fundamentals apply whether you are using an NRA High Power stance or a subgun stance while moving - sight picture, alignment and trigger control. You'll need to execute those fundamentals well to have success regardless of what stance you use. For me, the offhand High Power stance works the best in some scenarios (plenty of time, target obscured by a more stable position, a need to minimize muscle fatigue) and the subgun stance works best in others (moving and shooting, multiple targets requiring multiple shots in a short time frame).

Its like the difference between a flathead and a Phillips - I can unscrew a Phillips with a flathead given enough effort; but it is usually easier and faster just to reach for the different tool when I run across a Phillps head screw. Same idea with choosing offhand or subgun stance.

 

[Kwanger]

I'm checking out Magpul's "Art of the Carbine" DVD right now and I was surprised by the odd stances they're advocating. Off hand is almost flat to the target, supporting hand way way out in front, stock collapsed down and nose practically touching the receiver. Meanwhile the shooter is haunched over the carbine scrunched down with the neck at a very odd angle.

Check out this video :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AmFR4x-iXNU

More seriously though, I don't think there really can be any really defined stances in real life (or practical shooting competitions on the clock, come to that), so you just need to practice everything. Basic shooting stances, whichever one you decide is comfortable, are rarely the problem - the money is made on the awkward ones. A great take on it can be found in Kyle Lambs book "Green Eyes and Black Rifles" - he goes through just about every position you can get yourself into, and its a very good read.

 

[Cosmoline]

I've re-watched it and I found some good stuff. Part of it is I'm turned off by the "action" camera work and the amount of caffeine the instructors appear to have taken. I still cannot make the tucked-up dynamic posture work well. I do much better if I let myself adopt at least a partially bladed stance with some extension on the stock. Trying to keep the entire butt of the rifle below the line of my shoulder while tucking in my arms and pushing my neck down is absurd and painful. It's like trying to carry an egg pinched under my chin. After a minute of holding it I'm already sore and I would not want to see what kind of groups I could produce in that position. I'm also not convinced that much muscle stress is needed to absorb the minimal recoil.

I suppose stringing is a risk in very rapid fire, but so what? You're talking about an inch or two string at 25 yards. It isn't like a true full auto where you could string clear off the target unless you're muscling forward. They compare it to handgun stances, but a handgun is inherently much more difficult to keep on target than a carbine. The dynamic stances help keep it somewhat under control. If you have a nice ergonomic stock with a good shoulder stock and hand guard, you really have all you need for stability right there. You could shoot it any number of ways in close range fighting and still be on target.

I think it's like any other kind of training--you take what you can use out of it. I'm going to try some drills this weekend. I like their reload options and I've found some nice little tips when I keep the pause and rewind buttons close. They come and go real fast--like using a dented casing to raise or lower the front sight. Clint Smith speaks more slowly and old men like me can understand him better ;-)

 

[kwelz]

Trying to keep the entire butt of the rifle below the line of my shoulder while tucking in my arms and pushing my neck down is absurd and painful

There is a big part of your problem. The stock should NOT be on your shoulder. Move it further in. Really is should be at your collar bone.

Think of it like shooting a pistol. Put both arms out. Then bring your head down to line up the sights. Same idea goes for a rifle. Bore should be as central to your body as possible.

 

[JustinJ]

Is that the mag spring shooting out the bottom of the magazine of the guy on the ground in the picture above posted by WEG? That may cause a few feeding issues.

 

[Cosmoline]

I mean I'm trying to keep the top of the stock from sticking over the line of the shoulder, which they claim is necessary to control recoil (though I have had zero recoil problems with this carbine). On my collar bone, with the stock even partly collapsed, I can barely crank my head down there. I end up with a neck contorted and hurting. This carbine is simply too tiny for me to pull that off. Either that or my neck is too long.

For example, this is what I mean by the stock above the line of the shoulder:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Hawaii-convoy2003-12-17.jpg

The soldier has his weld, but the stock is not completely tucked in as the Magpul method insists it should be. Note the relatively straight and stable position of the neck, and how the solider has brought the rifle to his head not the other way around. If you imagine pushing the stock down and in, you also have to have the head and cheek weld follow it.

Here is a pic of the Magpul stance:

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=413222

That fellow looks shorter and smaller than I am, but even his neck is clearly held under considerable tension. Draw a line along the angle of his cervical spine to see what I'm talking about. Note also how the angle of his vision, if he looks straight ahead, is not through the scope but down to the ground. He has to look up in order to see through the scope, with his eye muscles also being stressed.

Maybe I need to get the Magpul Dynamics Tactical Yoga DVD.

Is that the mag spring shooting out the bottom of the magazine of the guy on the ground in the picture above posted by WEG? That may cause a few feeding issues

No that's a type of improvised grenade launcher using the magazine spring.

 

[kwelz]

Without seeing a photo I can't diagnose the problem. But I see people do it every weekend. I did it for 9 hours Sunday and had no issues.

 

[henschman]

I actually think it's best to start training with ideal, muscle neutral positions (a la high power style), so the shooter can learn all of the fundamentals of good marksmanship and see how truly accurate he can be with a rifle. Then he will know what he is giving up in accuracy, and what he is gaining in speed and mobility, with the dynamic positions. A lot of training is necessary in ALL positions, so the shooter will know when he needs to employ each method, and what the limits of his effectiveness are with each.

 

[W.E.G.]

Is that the mag spring shooting out the bottom of the magazine of the guy on the ground in the picture above posted by WEG? That may cause a few feeding issues.

The best laid plans rarely survive past the first contact with the enemy.

 

[dom1104]

I have nothing to contribute other than....

The reason I shoot square to the target is because its faster to change targets and... My body armor doesnt protect me from the side.

Dont know, and dont care if some video shows different, but Highpower stnaces are not 3 gun stances.

 

[Bovice]

I'm a big guy, I wouldn't say "tall" because there are quite a few men these days that are in the 6 foot range. I'm built like a brick house, so much so that bending my arm up to brush my teeth is awkward and I have to switch hands sometimes. I can't tuck my elbow in when using an AR either. It takes too much to hold it under there. The lanky guy running the class kept coming over and telling me to tuck my elbow. After he tried to tuck it for me, he realized my situation and said nevermind. I wasn't holding it so high as to make a 90 degree angle with my body, I was just letting it rest naturally at about 45. It was no hindrance whatsoever.

A vicious combination of push ups and pull ups over the years left me with the inability to put my arms flat against my sides. They just pop back out

As for the photo...

Somebody never told KeyShawn that the magazine is a poor substitute for a bipod!

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Here is a pic of the Magpul stance:

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=413222

Keep in mind that he is also using an ACS stock which has a collapsed length of pull of about 11.75". That is roughly 1" longer than an M4 Enhanced Telestock's collapsed length of pull or about 1/3 the adjustment range of a standard M4 telestock. The basic idea is to get your body in line with the bore to better control recoil. I'd run the stock at the shortest position that lets you do that comfortably. After all, it doesn't do much good to collapse the rifle and gain better leverage if you just end up straining a different set of muscles.

 

[kwelz]

Here are some photos from my class this last weekend.
As you can see most people use a version of the above grip. However most also don't use as extreme of a grip. I find it to tiring and harder to control the gun if I have my arm out strait. Having the bend in your elbow can help a lot.. but you need to keep it tucked.
Ooops Forgot the link.

http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?p=1033923#post1033923

 

[Cosmoline]

OK, I'll play around with it more this weekend. But it still seems to me that this is way too much fussing over virtually no recoil. It would make more sense with a light weight slug gun in bear defense.

 

[HorseSoldier]

Wonder how that translates vis-a-vis enemy casualties and troops coming home safely?

Makes no difference at the sharp end. I'm not aware of any actual empirical proof that marines are making more hits against real targets when downrange. There are some anecdotes, but they seem to be in the propaganda vein on par with the claim that WW1 Germans called Marines devil dogs.

As to whether the USMC's NRA High Power based qual course out to 500 is superior to the Army's reactive fire one out to 300, it's probably worth noting that within the last few years the USMC revised their qualification scoring system to put greater emphasis on Table 2 (closer range, more combat focused shooting). Table 1 -- the out to 500 meter course everyone always talks about -- is still an annual requirement for all personnel and the source of most points, but the increased importance of Table 2 shows that reality can occasionally harpoon even the most sacred of cows. Less officially, there's a lot of debate in USMC in-house publications about whether or not Table 1 should be scrapped or completely revised to make it more combat focused and modernized to make it a more efficient use of training time and resources (i.e. the Army stopped using ranges where 50% of the guys there are in the pits pulling targets like 40 years ago -- even if there's no change to the course of fire at all for Table 1, making it automated makes a lot of sense anyway you look at it -- except purely for traditions sake).

 

[Cosmoline]

I've been working at this for a few weeks now, both at home and in live fire. I bend my knees slightly, angle forward slightly, tuck in my arms, move the AR in, and put my supporting arm towards the end of the handguard.

I've overcome the neck cramp issues by remembering to lean forward, which naturally brings the head closer to the weapon.

The problem I'm having is that I'm shaking a lot. The position seems highly unstable due to the number of muscles I have under tension from bent legs to tucked in arms. Even at 25 yards my group is junk. 5" of garbage and shifted right for some reason. Looking at videos of my attempts, I can see the AR shaking under tension. It feels like I'm giving up the inherent stability of the rifle platform.

Is this normal? My bladed stance gives me solid 2" groups at 25 even off hand with no sling in play, so I know I'm not a completely horrible shot. Do I need to be pulling back hard on the front of the stock like some kind of Weaver stance?

 

[kwelz]

No that isn't normal. It sounds like your tensing up. Can you post the video?

 

[Cosmoline]

I'll put one up on YT and post it tomorrow. Basically there's a lot of choppy tension, not the usual smooth movement from breathing. And it gets worse the longer I hold the position. My right bicep is flexing hard to keep the arm tucked in and the hand back far enough to keep only the front joint of the finger on the trigger. If I relax it, my hand moves forward too far and my elbow goes out a bit.

 

[kwelz]

Ok man. Once you post I will take a look. I am having a hard time just from your description. For me the stance is as natural as can be. In fact I have trouble blading up anymore. I am in pretty bad shape butt can do a 9 hour 500+ round class without having the problems you describe soi am thinking it is just the need to tweak what you are doing.

As for accuracy I will not argue that on average bladed is more stable for accuracy. However we are expected to keep all shots within a 5.5 inch circle at 50 yards. These are the absolute minimum requirements and most do far better than that using the broad "tactical" stance.

I am thinking it could be a number of factors including LoP, support hand grip, etc. seeing the vid will help me narrow it down.