I will likely be doing a Hostage Rescue class in March 2014 but am still firming up dates. If you are interested in the above or want to host a class, get in touch.

Over the years I have been exposed to a bunch of “new” tactics, techniques and procedures. In some cases, those new things were beneficial and they were implemented by my team. Sometimes, they weren’t implemented even though I thought it might be superior to what we were currently doing. It is a team after all and I am only one voice.

I beleive that as professionals we have to take a hard look at what we are doing and ensure we have not become complacent or static in our processes. I have said it a million times that almost all training is good training if it gives you a different perspective on things. At the very least it increases your overall sophistication on the topic so you can speak intelligently if and when the topic comes up. However, just because you went to nationally known guy’s super course, doesnt mean he is spitting game from the pulpit. Its just his opinion.

I think a good instrucotr SHOULD have an opinion. That opinion should be forged from a crap-ton of training and experience with real missions. I think the instructor should give you his background, that way I can gauge whether or not I can make this TTP work on my team.

For instance, the instructor is from a 100 man team and they cycle through active missions and training on a month on, month off cycle. That team does 700-800 missions a year. Now on it’s face, that guy should be able to lay down some shiz that I want. However, I am on a 2 man team that trains for four hours every other month and we get 2-3 missions per year. Is it possible that we cant adopt his TTP’s because we lack the manpower, training time and mission time to get it right? I might be able to adopt some if his stuff, or flex it to make it work, but I probably cant print the powerpoint and write SOP on it, can I?

The same is true of a TTP that works like gangbusters with Simunition cartridges in a training environment. I hear guys say, “We didnt get shot once during the week using this super technique, it’s the best”. However when you probe them the technique features using doorframes as cover and barricading on them to make shots into a room. SO how many of those Sim rounds hit, and were stopped by the door frame? If the answer is a million, well I would bet that if some of those were real pills they would have hit you. And lets not forget the coward clause. My good friend Mark Renninger used to say that everyone is brave when its Simunitions, the reality is something different and I have to consider how that troll may affect my team as well.

Last, if I am buying what I’m hearing and the TTP is sound across a broad spectrum of circumstances, should I immediately adopt it? Well I have to consider the above with my teams training and mission tempo first. Its not just I want to, but can I? Secondly, if the new TTP is only as good as what Im currently doing, is the re-training effort worth it? Even if its just barely worht it because it fills a small niche, should I go through the re-training effort? If I have a month on, month off cycle maybe I should. If I get 4 hours every other month, maybe not. If it is clearly superior, then you must make the effort.

The way to  determine that is to run some objective testing. The testing should be as scientific as possible but allow variables for human error. Data should be recorded so that it can compiled and examined later. Try the technique with plastic sheeting so Sim rounds can go through it, like real bullets will. Record who fired first, cops or suspects, so we know if we are really scrambling OODA loops. Make note if the cops fire first, because real bullets may prevent the suspect from ever firing his first if they were hits. So on and so forth, this ain’t Bill Nye’s page to explain scientific process, look it up for chrissakes.

The point is to attend training to be exposed to new concepts. But before you adopt those concepts, be objective. Set up a testing process and let real data guide your decision, not the instructors panache or charisma. Or you can just stay the same and risk being called a Dinosaur, but I will end this by saying after 19 years there is nothing new in this game. It is mastering the basics.