What does CQB Mean to You?

[NousDefionsDoc]

Define CQB

[Solid]

Is this an SF-only thread, or do I get to reminisce about beating people up?

Solid

[NousDefionsDoc]

Have you ever done CQB?

[Solid]

Not in the proper sense, no; I was just kidding. I thought it would be a good idea to check on behalf of everyone, though.

Solid

[Jack Moroney (RIP)]

Define CQB? Talk about perception being reality, I guess it depends on what your point of reference is. I think that the biggest difference between CQB and other forms of combat is that instinct and intensive training will define the difference between success and failure. There is not a whole lot of time to think or to discriminate between friend and foe. To me the ultimate CQB challenge is a hostage scenario where you have to check the hands of the target to ensure that you are not about to take out the hostage rather than just engaging a target in close quarters. In "normal" situations visibility, room to manuever, collateral damage, fire, ballistics (especially penetration of the rounds throught walls and the like), noise, lack of covering fire, communications restrictions all create unique challenges. Team work, while essential in any combat situation, takes on even more importance in CQB as do a variety of unique skill sets not normally trained for folks engaged in other types of combat. I am not implying that CQB is just limited to structures or in densly poplulated areas. It can occur anytime you close with an enemy any where in any scenario, but the most limiting aspects, at least IMHO, occur within structures or in restrictive terrain such as caves, wadiis, etc. That is as brief as I can be, sorry for the excessive verbiage.

Jack Moroney
Für die Sicherheit

[NousDefionsDoc]

Excellent post sir. So, the "close quarters" are literal and not necessarily relative to the distance from the enemy?

Oh, and not necessarily urban?

I think if you asked the veterans of the combat in the Huertgen Forest, they would say it was close quarters battle.

[NousDefionsDoc]

Originally posted by Greenhat
I think if you asked the veterans of the combat in the Huertgen Forest, they would say it was close quarters battle.

LOL - I once had a discussion with a young, very gung ho troop (expert) that told me that you could only use certain weapons (M4, etc.) for CQB - that the weapon is a critical item. I told him we would have to tell that to some of the WWII vets that did it with Garands and the Marines at Hue, etc., that used M14s.

[CommoGeek]

I'd say within grenade range (35m) or closer (inside of 25m), regardless of terrain. At that distance, things can happen quickly and there is less room for error than if engaging at say 100, 200, 300 m.

[QRQ 30]

We conducted joint traing with the SAS and they trained us in their CQB. It was basically what you would call quick, instinctive firing. There was no time to raise the weapon and aim. The actual surroundings are probably immaterial. I tought my yards to fire accurately from the hip (ala Brit CQB) . Their system called for three quick rounds.rounds starting at the base of the torso . The final round would be somewhere near the top of the torso. I saw my point man cutdown an NVA soldier before the soldier had a chance to raise his weapon and take aim.

Interesting tidbit: The SAS required us to count our rounds and firing on an empty chamber resulted in numerous push-ups -- another life saver.

[Jack Moroney (RIP)]

NDD wrote: "So, the "close quarters" are literal and not necessarily relative to the distance from the enemy?

Oh, and not necessarily urban?"

This gets down to the old business of trying to explain how far is far. You know, remember those old road crossing drills when someone went to all the trouble to try and state a distance about how far to the left and right you were supposed to put out your security and then how far the clearing party was supposed to clear the area on the other side of the road? I'd be damned if I don't remember that they were doing stupid things like saying 5 to 10 meters to the left and right of the crossing site etc rather than letting folks use common sense and place folks where they could acutally do something smart-you know like being far enough out to actually detect a threat and be in a position to either neutralize it or provide early enough warning to keep the threat from detecting them. Anyway, I digress. If I had to get down and dirty and give out distances I would say anything within pistol range becomes "close quarters" but even then it really depends on the situation at the time. There are times when you want to use a pistol and suppressor to take out someone but the threat to you and your troops really isn't a problem unless you miss the target. Close quarters to me means that you have lost some of the ability to use those systems or tactics, techniques and procedures that you would have rather used to resolve the situation and now it is down to nut cutting time. Now I am sure that even this is relative and sort of boils down to what you and your troops are trained to do and how comfortable they are in CQB situations. I can think of any number of situations where CQB could actually benefit you by taking away the other guys ability to do what he is trained to do. Sort of like getting inside the perimeter and negating his use of final protective fires or covered positions. I also think that CQB means different things to different types of troops. For those guys that wander around the battlefield wrapped in 60 tons of "homosexual" steel CQB to them might mean when they are able to wander around inside the other guys armored formations negating his ability to maximise the use of his long range guns etc. My comments are really directed more at those of us that would be dealing with being close enough to smell the other guys sweat. Just a thought.

Jack Moroney
Für die Sicherheit

[NousDefionsDoc]

I like point shooting. I need to practice it more.

[BMT (RIP)]

What ever happened to putting 3-5 tracer rounds in the mag first??

BMT
FOG

[Jack Moroney (RIP)]

NDD wrote: "I like point shooting. I need to practice it more."

Absolutely. Here is a quick tale for you. We got a new guy in and like all the new guys he was put thru some pre-training to get him comfortable with the weapons he would be using and some of the TTPs. The 180A, who will remain nameless here and is actually a good troop regardless of what follows, was going to give the new guy the quick down and dirty of instinctive shooting. We usually started folks off by having them look at a point on the ground and then look up as they raised their pistol and engage four inch circles to their front using double tap procedures. At the time we were using H&K P7s which has an insidious squeeze cock safety in the pistol grip and in order to fire you have to hold the grip tight to depress the safety. Guys that were comfortable with the pistol instinctively depressed it as the drew it but it was not a good system (which I got rid of shortly). So to make a long story short the 180A trying to be the best he could and impress the new team member got ahead of himself and placed a round directly in front of his foot. That evening in a little gathering we presented him with a boot with an small target extended off the toe so he could "safe face" and explain that that was what he meant to do but the target had fallen off before the demonstation.


Jack Moroney
Für die Sicherheit

[Team Sergeant]

Originally posted by BMT
What ever happened to putting 3-5 tracer rounds in the mag first??

BMT
FOG

BMT,

If I read your post correctly, we now use laser sighting systems for what you are thinking.

TS