Impressive side-by-side video

[Derbel McDillet]

The video depicts an unrealistic scripted response.

When the pistol fails to fire the first immediate action is tap/rack. If tap/rack fails to get the pistol running then, if time and conditions permit, you progress to the next immediate action which is attempt to perform a combat reload. It may be more important to do something else to keep from being shot, stabbed, beaten, etc., before you attempt a combat reload.

A slide that appears locked open may be caused by something other than an empty magazine, such as an in-line stovepipe, a failure to feed, or a doublefeed.

 

[TunnelRat]

A slide that appears locked open may be caused by something other than an empty magazine, such as an in-line stovepipe, a failure to feed, or a doublefeed.

None of those would lock a slide back to the full position of an empty magazine. You can always use your Mk. 1 eyes to confirm (fairly quickly too). Doing a tap, rack, bang before every mag change seems a bit extreme imo.

 

[Sharkbite]

When the pistol fails to fire the first immediate action is tap/rack. If tap/rack fails to get the pistol running then, if time and conditions permit, you progress to the next immediate action which is attempt to perform a combat reload. It may be more important to do something else to keep from being shot, stabbed, beaten, etc., before you attempt a combat reload.

This depicts a TOTALLY non-diagnostic approach to malfunction clearence. With a modicum of training, a quick glance at the pistol rapidly shows the problem

Brass high in the gun
Brass low in the gun
No brass in the gun

Apply the correct solution and continue...

Now, ive never had a stoppage during a real engagement...i have had more then a couple crop up in training. Most times my teammates hardly noticed my gun being "out of the fight".

 

[JohnKSa]

• Some pistols don't lock open on the last round.
• Some pistols don't have exposed slide releases.
• Some manufacturers state that they don't make guns with slide releases, they make them with slide stops which shouldn't be used as releases.
• Some guns have slide releases which are difficult to operate.
• Some guns have slide releases which are oddly placed.

If none of those things apply to any of your carry/defense guns then use the slide release if that's more comfortable and faster for you.

 

[Derbel McDillet]

You can always use your Mk. 1 eyes to confirm (fairly quickly too). Doing a tap, rack, bang before every mag change seems a bit extreme imo.

Your mk 1 eyeball will often "see" what you expect to see. How many times have you experienced an in-line stovepipe or failure-to-feed? Chances are very few, if any, therefore your eyes aren't accustomed to seeing these kinds of stoppages and you have no training/experience to quickly discern the differences. In a fight you may become injured or fatigued, which increases the possibility these types of stoppages will occur. (Low light also inhibits your ability to see and confirm.) If you misdiagnose the stoppage, perform a combat reload and disengage the slide lock (because it's "faster") then your pistol will still be out of action and your OODA Loop will reset as you try to figure out what's wrong.

When your pistol doesn't fire and you're in a fight for your life pausing to look at your pistol to figure out "what's wrong" can cause you to become preoccupied with trying to fix the problem. Your attention gets sucked into the dealing with the gun instead of reacting to the danger.

Tap/rack can be performed in the blink of an eye and solves many potential problems. Then, if tap/rack fails to get the pistol running, you automatically progress to performing a combat reload (if time and conditions permit - as the first rule of a gunfight is "Don't Get Shot!"). If, while performing the combat reload, you can't insert the magazine into the pistol, then you automatically progress to clearing a doublefeed. (Depending on the type of stoppage, particularly stovepipes, tap/rack will sometimes induce a doublefeed - which is why you must be conversant in clearing doublefeeds.) After clearing the doublefeed and after you seat the magazine you must RACK the slide to chamber a round because the slide will be in battery.

You RACK the slide to load, unload and clear stoppages. It's a common movement used to perform multiple tasks. I operate the slide lock only when I want to lock the slide open for unloading or clearing a stoppage. I don't release the slide lock to put to put the slide into battery after I seat a magazine because because "seat/rack" is virtually identical to "tap/rack". Using a different technique to release the slide increases decision-making, which can lead to making the wrong decision or indecision during a fight - which increases your downtime and vulnerability.

 

[TunnelRat]

Your mk 1 eyeball will often "see" what you expect to see. How many times have you experienced an in-line stovepipe or failure-to-feed? Chances are very few, if any, therefore your eyes aren't accustomed to seeing these kinds of stoppages and you have no training/experience to quickly discern the differences.

Actually I've practiced them for literally hours over a series of courses and at home. You have more than eyes as well. A click and no bang could mean a badly seated mag and then a tap, rack, bang. A squishy trigger and you may be in a failure to extract situation, failure to eject, or empty mag. The weight of the pistol can also be an indicator but I have to be honest and say that if it was say on the last or next to last round I wouldn't be able to tell the difference compared to empty.

When your pistol doesn't fire and you're in a fight for your life pausing to look at your pistol to figure out "what's wrong" can cause you to become preoccupied with trying to fix the problem. Your attention gets sucked into the dealing with the gun instead of reacting to the danger.

And performing a technique that won't actually fix the problem could easily cost you more time than the split second it takes to diagnose the problem and start implementing the correct solution.

You RACK the slide to load, unload and clear stoppages. It's a common movement used to perform multiple tasks. I operate the slide lock only when I want to lock the slide open for unloading or clearing a stoppage. I don't release the slide lock to put to put the slide into battery after I seat a magazine because because "seat/rack" is virtually identical to "tap/rack". Using a different technique to release the slide increases decision-making, which can lead to making the wrong decision or indecision during a fight - which increases your downtime and vulnerability.

Now you're back to the issue of which technique you prefer more than the idea of defaulting to a tap, rack, and bang.

If you want your default action to be tap, rack, bang no matter what your senses tell you, rock on. It's not something I've seen advocated before.

Let's do a quick scenario. Late at night (can't see the brass), gun stops shooting. If it's a failure to feed when you go to pull out that mag it won't go. Now you're in a double feed situation and you clear it without the need for the tap, rack, bang you mentioned. It it's a failure to eject situation and you drop that mag and rack the slide the spent casing will fall out in the process. In both those cases you're back in the fight. In the first case faster than defaulting to tap, rack, bang, and the second case a bit slower.

You'd be right to point out you're out that magazine though, so maybe not tossing that mag and feeling the top of it for a cartridge would be a good idea if you have the cover. Also a good reason to carry a backup and multiple backups if at home (at home the spill from my weapon mounted light would let me see if there was or wasn't brass in that ejection port when the firearm stopped). So it would seem the failure to eject situation is the big loser for the different order of operations and I have to say again that even in low light the slide will be locked to a noticeably different location. If it's pitch black then I am not sure what I am doing shooting without being able to identify a threat. Again my default action isn't to automatically do anything, it's to take a split second and assess.

I guess my point is each order of operations has its advantages and disadvantages. What you said though about low light makes me think that defaulting to tap, rack, and bang in low light might well be a good point. You might counter with the thought that I should use the same order of operations no matter the time of day and I might even agree there, however when we drive cars we typically leave more distance between them when driving in bad weather as opposed to good. We're creatures of habit but we can adapt too. You've given me something to think about though.

 

[raimius]

For a practiced shooter, the slide release method is likely to be quicker, as shown.

I used it for a while. Then, I ran into an issue. On a cold day, my fingers started to go numb. Pressing the slide release suddenly became a difficult task. (Magazine release wasn't pleasant either, but being a direct push rather than a sliding motion, was manageable.) Wearing thick gloves induced some of the same issues. I switched to the overhand method after that.

...then I started shooting the M9 more, and occasionally decocked it by accident. That took some training to overcome, since I wanted to stick with the overhand method.

So, to me, the tradeoff is a little bit of speed or a little bit of reliability. I went with the reliable option.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

If you want your default action to be tap, rack, bang no matter what your senses tell you, rock on. It's not something I've seen advocated before.

You haven't?

Tap-rack-bang is so widely taught that I would have said it's universal.

 

[TunnelRat]

You haven't?

Tap-rack-bang is so widely taught that I would have said it's universal.

As a required action before every reload? No. I'm certainly aware of its usage to clear malfunctions.

 

[Bongo Boy]

Heck, I can't even keep track of rounds fired when I slow-fire my revolver.

On my M&P 40 Pro, both slide release tabs broke off completely (not at the same time), and it's the gun I used to shoot ESP division in IDPA. So, no slide release to use at all. I actually left it that way for almost 2 years as I never it found it that easy to find or use in a hurry. So, +1 for using the gorilla mitt method.

I've also come close to gashing my palm wide open releasing the slide with the reach-over-and-grab method. This is on one or two guns I own that have nifty razor-sharp rear sights (my Witness Hunter comes to mind). This simply comes from not getting that left hand out of the way fast enough, and having a rear sight substantially taller than the slide. There's +1 for using the slide release.

The great thing about practice is that, hopefully, the shooter doesn't get all flustered when one specific technique doesn't work for whatever reason. Another great thing about it--it often means shooting more. That's nice.

 

[Derbel McDillet]

And performing a technique that won't actually fix the problem could easily cost you more time than the split second it takes to diagnose the problem and start implementing the correct solution.

Actually I've practiced them for literally hours over a series of courses and at home.

Manually inserting a specific type of stoppage to train how to clear it is entirely different than encountering an unexpected stoppage of any given type when you’re shooting to save your life and attempting to identify it and diagnose it in a split-second. A high-intensity fight, in which your pistol unexpectedly stops firing, increases the risk of misidentification and misdiagnosis. Your training and expectations are hypothetical because you cannot realistically train the way you plan to fight.

You have more than eyes as well. A click and no bang could mean a badly seated mag and then a tap, rack, bang. A squishy trigger and you may be in a failure to extract situation, failure to eject, or empty mag. The weight of the pistol can also be an indicator but I have to be honest and say that if it was say on the last or next to last round I wouldn't be able to tell the difference compared to empty.

A diagnostic technique takes more time to process mentally and this is where the illusion of “faster” is lost.

With a diagnostic technique you sequence through the OODA loop in serial fashion: Observe – Orient – Decide – Act.

A diagnostic technique requires time to Observe, Orient and Decide. A “click”, “no bang”, “squishy trigger” and “visual examination” all require time to sense (Observe) and determine what the problem might be (Orient). Then you have to consciously make a Decision - what technique do I use to clear the stoppage? It requires greater mental effort. The decision-making process is susceptible to being corrupted by faulty Observation and/or Orientation.

A non-diagnostic technique (Observe – Act) using a progressive series of immediate actions is quicker because it short-circuits the Orientation and Decision phases and it is more reliable under stress. It also allows you to train as you plan to fight because you don’t care what is causing the stoppage – you simply progress through a series of immediate actions until you get the pistol running again. When you Observe that the first immediate action (Tap/Rack) didn’t clear the stoppage you instantly progress to the next Action (Combat Reload). When you Observe, during the Combat Reload, that you cannot insert the fresh magazine into the magazine well because the “depleted” one didn’t jettison you instantly progress to the next Action (put the fresh magazine between the ring and pinky fingers of your firing hand, clear the double-feed and finish the Combat Reload).

 

[TunnelRat]

A high-intensity fight, in which your pistol unexpectedly stops firing, increases the risk of misidentification and misdiagnosis. Your training and expectations are hypothetical because you cannot realistically train the way you plan to fight.

Then why bother training at all? We do the best we can given the limitations of reality with the hope that training will help improve our ability to deal with an actual situation. It's that or I pay someone to shoot at me, and that's not in the cards.

With a diagnostic technique you sequence through the OODA loop in serial fashion: Observe – Orient – Decide – Act.

A diagnostic technique requires time to Observe, Orient and Decide. A “click”, “no bang”, “squishy trigger” and “visual examination” all require time to sense (Observe) and determine what the problem might be (Orient). Then you have to consciously make a Decision - what technique do I use to clear the stoppage? It requires greater mental effort. The decision-making process is susceptible to being corrupted by faulty Observation and/or Orientation.

A non-diagnostic technique (Observe – Act) using a progressive series of immediate actions is quicker because it short-circuits the Orientation and Decision phases and it is more reliable under stress. It also allows you to train as you plan to fight because you don’t care what is causing the stoppage – you simply progress through a series of immediate actions until you get the pistol running again. When you Observe that the first immediate action (Tap/Rack) didn’t clear the stoppage you instantly progress to the next Action (Combat Reload). When you Observe, during the Combat Reload, that you cannot insert the fresh magazine into the magazine well because the “depleted” one didn’t jettison you instantly progress to the next Action (put the fresh magazine between the ring and pinky fingers of your firing hand, clear the double-feed and finish the Combat Reload).

I'm aware of the OODA loo. It's really a decades old concept that has seen revitalization by certain trainers who heard of it in passing and found it interesting or, imo, think it sounds cool.

Your notion of just doing Observe and Act is also not new. However, whether declared or not when you diagnose that one technique didn't work you are in fact Orienting and when going to the next technique you are still Deciding, otherwise you'd just try the same technique over and over. Removing them from the diagram and still performing them implicitly doesn't actually gain you anything.

The idea of turning the human mind into a machine is appealing in that a machine is typically faster than a human. However the greatest strength a human has is the ability to think outside of a set of rigid protocols and adapt. The true machine alternative would have us standing there trying to jam the magazine into the gun over and over assuming that eventually it will work.

I understand what you're suggesting is having a technique so ingrained in behavior that it becomes essentially automatic and having a natural progression of techniques to solve a problem. I'm not opposed to this. However, what this requires is extensive training, which is ironic as you regarded this as "hypothetical" above (I'm not sure hypothetical is the right word here; the training actually happened and the clearance procedures and types of stoppages are based on established reality). Completely removing the Orient and Decide phases puts you at risk of encountering a malfunction you haven't seen before and blindly repeating your known clearance methods without an actual solution. By all means streamline the best you can, but never lose the ability to think when you need to.

 

[Derbel McDillet]

Then why bother training at all? We do the best we can given the limitations of reality with the hope that training will help improve our ability to deal with an actual situation.

A non-diagnostic technique provides realistic training because it is not sensitive to any given stoppage. The immediate actions you perform in training are the same exact immediate actions you perform in a fight – the experience is identical.

However, whether declared or not when you diagnose that one technique didn't work you are in fact Orienting and when going to the next technique you are still Deciding, otherwise you'd just try the same technique over and over. Removing them from the diagram and still performing them implicitly doesn't actually gain you anything.

The “Implicit Guidance and Control” in Boyd’s OODA Loop illustration (above), which in essence bypasses the “Orient” and “Decide” phases, is the reason why we train. We want our actions to be intuitive – we “Observe” and then we quickly progress to “Act”. There is very little conscious thought. We read the situation as it happens and react to it as it unfolds. This is how we operate at a faster tempo.

Pistol failed to fire?: Tap/Rack
Tap/Rack fails to get the pistol running?: Combat Reload
Can’t insert the magazine?: Clear the double-feed and complete the Combat Reload.

I understand what you're suggesting is having a technique so ingrained in behavior that it becomes essentially automatic and having a natural progression of techniques to solve a problem. I'm not opposed to this. However, what this requires is extensive training…

No more extensive than randomly putting a dummy cartridge in every magazine when you train. No more extensive than shooting the pistol to slide-lock when you train. The only stoppage you have to manually insert is a double-feed. Any other stoppages you actually encounter during training are a bonus.

…which is ironic as you regarded this as "hypothetical" above (I'm not sure hypothetical is the right word here; the training actually happened and the clearance procedures and types of stoppages are based on established reality).

“Hypothetical” in the fact that you cannot realistically train to quickly identify and diagnose an unexpected stoppage of any given type.

Completely removing the Orient and Decide phases puts you at risk of encountering a malfunction you haven't seen before and blindly repeating your known clearance methods without an actual solution. By all means streamline the best you can, but never lose the ability to think when you need to.

I didn’t come up with this concept myself. I learned it from former Navy SEAL Jeff Gonzales, who runs Trident Concepts - http://www.tridentconcepts.com/

 

[TunnelRat]

A non-diagnostic technique provides realistic training because it is not sensitive to any given stoppage. The immediate actions you perform in training are the same exact immediate actions you perform in a fight – the experience is identical.

And I'm saying you may well encounter the need to diagnose in a fight so writing it off entirely isn't a good idea.

The “Implicit Guidance and Control” in Boyd’s OODA Loop illustration (above), which in essence bypasses the “Orient” and “Decide” phases, is the reason why we train. We want our actions to be intuitive – we “Observe” and then we quickly progress to “Act”. There is very little conscious thought. We read the situation as it happens and react to it as it unfolds. This is how we operate at a faster tempo.

I'm not sure who this royal we is, and I already noted that I understand the notion of streamlining. My point is whether they are implicit or explicit Orient and Decide are still occurring. You are establishing a ready made list of ordered actions to perform to reduce the amount of Orienting and Deciding that needs to be done and I get that.

No more extensive than randomly putting a dummy cartridge in every magazine when you train. No more extensive than shooting the pistol to slide-lock when you train. The only stoppage you have to manually insert is a double-feed. Any other stoppages you actually encounter during training are a bonus.

I'm not sure where I stated anything that disagrees with this. I've already mentioned that I do these already. That sentence was a lead up to my next point.

“Hypothetical” in the fact that you cannot realistically train to quickly identify and diagnose an unexpected stoppage of any given type.

But that is exactly what you are doing, you are just doing implicitly instead of explicitly. I also disagree with the notion that you cannot think when engaged. If you can train for every possibility that you can think of then great and you should do so, no disagreement there. But there is always the possibility of the situation you didn't anticipate and in that case you need to be able to think outside of your already established bag of tricks.

I didn’t come up with this concept myself. I learned it from former Navy SEAL Jeff Gonzales, who runs Trident Concepts - http://www.tridentconcepts.com/

I'll look into it thanks. There are a lot of trainers out there with numerous concepts or variations of different concepts. There's merit in everything and I try to stay open-minded.

 

[Derbel McDillet]

And I'm saying you may well encounter the need to diagnose in a fight so writing it off entirely isn't a good idea.

What stoppage would I diagnose that I couldn’t quickly clear with these progressive immediate actions?

But that is exactly what you are doing.

You’re not diagnosing a SPONTANEOUS and unexpected stoppage during training. Your training to diagnose the stoppage is not the same as what you will experience in a fight.

I also disagree with the notion that you cannot think when engaged.

The risk is becoming mentally preoccupied with diagnosing/misdiagnosing a gun problem and not paying enough attention to the danger. Immediate actions free your mind to deal with tactical problems.

 

[TunnelRat]

What stoppage would I diagnose that I couldn’t quickly clear with these progressive immediate actions?



You’re not diagnosing a SPONTANEOUS and unexpected stoppage during training. Your training to diagnose the stoppage is not the same as what you will experience in a fight.



The risk is becoming mentally preoccupied with diagnosing/misdiagnosing a gun problem and not paying enough attention to the danger. Immediate actions free your mind to deal with tactical problems.

Who knows? Murphy's Law is a pain.

I don't get it. Training is both simultaneously adequate and inadequate by your definition. It would seem that to you the only way to train appropriately is to follow the teachings of the one trainer you mentioned. You also have no idea what I will or won't experience in a fight (even my own knowledge of that is extremely limited) nor do you know anything of my own abilities. You're just parroting what you were taught without allowing the possibility of alternate methods. One of the most useful instructors I ever took a course with constantly encouraged us to consider if what we were learning from him 1. made sense 2. was applicable to us. His point was for us to not blindly digest his instructions and to be open in the future to other teaching styles and ideas.

I have repeated this before and said I understand streamlining. What I am saying is the ability to diagnose a previously unseen situation is also important.

 

[Derbel McDillet]

I don't get it. Training is both simultaneously adequate and inadequate by your definition.

How does one train to quickly identify, diagnose, and clear an in-line stovepipe, a failure to feed, and a double-feed? Tell us how it readies us to RELIABLY do the same under extreme stress, in unfavorable conditions.

It would seem that to you the only way to train appropriately is to follow the teachings of the one trainer you mentioned.... You're just parroting what you were taught without allowing the possibility of alternate methods.

Not to get personal, but this isn't my first rodeo. I'm former LEO. I've trained both professionally and personally under many instructors. I've trained, used, and evaluated several methods for clearing stoppages. I've CCW'd as a private citizen for 30 years. I take what works and discard the rest. If I've given you the impression that I'm attacking you personally, then I apologize. I'm not here to do that nor am I here to feed my ego. I'm here to discuss what I know and my rationale without taking offense or getting personal.

 

[TunnelRat]

How does one train to quickly identify, diagnose, and clear an in-line stovepipe, a failure to feed, and a double-feed? Tell us how it readies us to RELIABLY do the same under extreme stress, in unfavorable conditions.



Not to get personal, but this isn't my first rodeo. I'm former LEO. I've trained both professionally and personally under many instructors. I've trained, used, and evaluated several methods for clearing stoppages. I've CCW'd as a private citizen for 30 years. I take what works and discard the rest. If I've given you the impression that I'm attacking you personally, then I apologize. I'm not here to do that nor am I here to feed my ego. I'm here to discuss what I know and my rationale without taking offense or getting personal.

With the same repetition that has been mentioned numerous times now. The same repetition inherent in your own suggestions.

We're obviously not connecting on the same wavelength. I respect your experience. Best of luck.

 

[Bongo Boy]

the secure gateway has terminated the VPN connection...

 

[dgludwig]

QUOTE: Some guns, like the Beretta, as shown in the Vickers video, don't take well to the hand-over method -- as it's easy to decock the weapon if you're not careful.

This is very true and inadvertently decocking certain pistols (including Third Generation Smiths) can also occur when clearing a stovepipe jam by sweeping your support hand over the top of the slide. This (arguably remote) possibility is something to be mindful of with many pistols having the decocker/safety lever mounted on the slide.