US Army Combatives FM 21-150
US Army Combatives FM 21-150 > https://tiurll.com/2tkzWy
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Army, 1971. Revised Edition. 157, wraps, 3-hole punched, illus., diagrams, bibliography, index, covers somewhat worn and soiled. Suprsedes FM 21-150, 14 March 1969. This manual reflects the state of knowledge and state of practice near the end of the Vietnam War. It contains information and guidance pertaining to rifle-bayonet fighting and hand-to-hand combat. Condition: good. Keywords: Military Manuals, Field Manuals, Combatives, Hand-to-Hand Combat, Bayonet, Disarming, Prisoner Searching, Military Training, Sentry Silencing [Book #47696]
Other combatives systems having their origins in the modern military include Chinese Sanshou, Soviet Boyevoye (Combat) Sambo, and Israeli Kapap. The prevalence and style of combatives training often changes based on perceived need, and even in times of peace, special forces and commando units tend to have a much higher emphasis on close combat than most personnel, as may embassy guards or paramilitary units such as police SWAT teams.
De-emphasized in the United States after World War II, insurgency conflicts such as the Vietnam War, low intensity conflict, and urban warfare tend to encourage more attention to combatives. While the United States Marine Corps replaced its LINE combat system with Marine Corps Martial Arts Program in 2002, The United States Army adopted the Modern Army Combatives (MAC) program the same year with the publishing of Field Manual 3-25.150. MAC draws from systems such as wrestling, Krav Maga, Brazilian jiu-jitsu, judo, sambo, Muay Thai, boxing and eskrima, which could be trained \"live\" and can be fully integrated into current close quarters battle tactics and training methods.
In recent years the major tenets of MAC, namely \"live\" training and using competitions as a tool to motivate soldiers and units to higher levels of training, have been adopted by many of the major combatives systems such as Krav Maga and the Russian military hand-to-hand combat systema.
The Combatives School teaches four instructor certification courses. Students of the first course are not expected to have any knowledge of combatives upon arrival. They are taught fundamental techniques which are designed to illuminate the fundamental principles of combatives training. The basic techniques form a framework upon which the rest of the program can build and are taught as a series of drills, which can be performed as a part of daily physical training. While the course is heavy on grappling, it does not lose sight of the fact that it is a course designed for soldiers going into combat. It is made clear that while combatives can be used to kill or disable, the man that typically wins a hand-to-hand fight in combat is the one whose allies arrive with guns first.
After years of developing the elite 75th Ranger Regiment's hand to hand program, he was assigned to the Ranger Training Brigade, the Combatives proponent at the time, to rewrite the Field Manual FM 21-150. Upon finishing this, it was published in 2002 as FM 3-25.150 (Combatives). He was asked by the 11th Infantry Regiment (a TRADOC unit) to develop a training course for their cadre. Advocacy for the Combatives doctrine was transferred to the 11th Infantry Regiment to follow him. An old, disused warehouse in Fort Benning, Georgia became the site of the school. Soon, units from around the Army were sending Soldiers to this course. Over the next several years, the program was developed around the idea of building virtually self-sustaining Combatives programs within units by training cadres of instructors indigenous to each unit. With the continued success of this approach, the school became the recognized source of instruction for the entire US Army.
The AETC included Larsen and Dave Durnil, who had run the Combatives program for the US Army's 1st Infantry Division at Fort Riley Kansas and a program for both Army and Air Force ROTC at Kansas State University (KSU). Also on the AETC were Ed Weichers Jr. who had been the Air Force Academy's boxing coach for more than 30 years, and representatives from each command in the Air Force who were currently conducting combatives training of various sorts, including the Air Force Security Forces and the Air Force Special Operations Command.
Combatives courses have been taught by the United States Military Academy for its entire history. The National Defense University's combatives program includes a course in Jigo Tensin-Ryu Jujutsu, also known as Combat Jujutsu. The Virginia Military Institute also has full-time civilian instructors for Level 1 Combatives that is offered to all students in addition to their mandatory boxing class. In 2005 the Modern Army Combatives Program began to spread to academia with its adoption at Kansas State University, where there are courses specifically tailored to military personnel (active duty and ROTC) and university athletes, in addition to those available to the general student body. The Kansas program is currently defunct.
Each of the SF groups has their own combatives facility. Usually the groups will run a one-week long SOCP. Each group has its own designated combatives instructors that teach not only foundational combatives but also advanced techniques that can be utilized in combat situation.
The surprising demands of hand-to-hand combat and close-combat fighting in Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom, perhaps similar to World War I, likely played a role in fostering a renewed emphasis on combatives in the Army. Several reports indicate that one in five soldiers (19 to 22 percent) from infantry brigade combat teams experienced hand-to-hand combat during the early years of Operation Iraqi Freedom.8 Additionally, leaders recognized the need to foster mental qualities for winning in the close-combat fight; Gen. Peter Schoomaker, former chief of staff of the Army, as well as commandants from the Maneuver Center of Excellence, advocated for increased combatives training.9 Research studies with leaders and soldiers throughout the Army further support the belief that combatives builds close-combat mental attributes.
In a survey of fifty field-grade officers (nineteen responded), the majority (82 percent) believed combatives was useful in building soldier confidence and unit esprit de corps.10 To complement the officer survey, a group interview with training noncommissioned officers found additional support for MACP as a mechanism for soldiers to build confidence and learn to cope with the fear of being hit (i.e., getting punched by an opponent).
Another study conducted in-depth interviews with seventeen soldiers about their personal experiences in hand-to-hand combat encounters during war. When these soldiers talked about their training, they emphasized that combatives was critical not only for developing technical fighting skills that saved their lives but also in fostering an overall confidence and a warrior mindset.11
The most expansive study on the value of combatives for developing close-combat mental strengths was a survey of over three thousand U.S. Military Academy graduates about their mandatory first-year boxing class.12 Ranging in graduation years from 1963 to 2001, the survey respondents indicated their boxing class contributed to developing qualities important for close-combat soldiers. The table summarizes the study findings and reveals the various qualities that the participants believed were enhanced in their mandatory course. Given the similarities between boxing and MACP (e.g., competitive, an actively resistant training partner, aggressive physical contact), the study is especially relevant to the current MACP and stands out because a large number of Army officers view their training as valuable for building close-combat attributes.
The Soldier Lethality Cross Functional Team seeks to improve human performance optimization through innovative means. With constrained resources, an enduring challenge for any Army modernization priority, finding collaborations of existing Army resources is one approach to addressing the aims of the lethality priority. The collaboration between division MACP and the R2 performance centers offers an example of existing resources. Rather than relying on the inherent experience of combatives to build close-combat attributes, the MACP teamed with R2 to foster a more deliberate approach to building both fighting skills and the human-performance qualities most needed for winning the close-combat fight.
The R2 performance centers (formerly comprehensive soldier and family fitness centers) are an integration of Army efforts that strengthens soldiers, optimizes performance, enhances resilience, and sustains personal readiness at twenty-six Army installations across the world. The performance centers are manned by DOD contracted performance experts (PEs) with advanced backgrounds in sport and performance psychology and other applied behavioral science backgrounds. PEs directly support local units by providing education and training in mental skills with a focus on increasing self-awareness and self-management based on how the mind affects behavior and performance. The R2 PEs teach specific mental techniques that can be individually applied, and with practice over time, coached to others. Mental-skills training provides a common language for soldiers, instructors, and PEs that demystifies stress responses and normalizes the difficulties of performing close-combat tasks. As mental skills are ingrained through repeated practice, soldiers develop confidence, composure, concentration, and resilience that apply to performance in a wide range of personal and professional arenas. An important part of any mental-skills training is the practice of such skills in challenging and stressful training environments. Fortunately, combatives provides a wide range of training situations that include appropriate levels of challenge and stress for soldiers. 59ce067264