Page 1 of 4 1234 Last
  1. #1
    DCS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,021
    Style
    Jits
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!

    FM 3-25-150 partially BS?

    I'm wondering if some of the contents of said Field Manual (3-25-150 US Army Combatives) can be considered with the Bullshido.

    Let's see, for instance:

    In Chapter 8, Section II, can be read


    (5) Unarmed Defense Against Low No. 5 Angle of Attack. (Figure 8-20). The attacker thrusts the bayonet at the stomach of the defender (Step 1). The defender shifts his body to the side to avoid the attack and to gouge the eyes of the attacker (Step 2). The defender's free hand maintains control of and strips the weapon from the attacker as he is driven backward with the eye gouge (Step 3).


    As this technique is very like to this
    aikido one, that makes the army combatives manual BS by default, isn't it?

    As i don't have at this moment any clip to show how this other:
    (2) Unarmed Defense Against No. 2 Angle of Attack (Figure 8-17). The attacker makes a diagonal slash along the No. 2 angle of attack (Step 1). Again, the defender waits until he is sure of the attack before moving. The defender then moves to the outside of the attacker and counterattacks with a thumb jab into the right armpit (Step 2). He receives the momentum of the attacking weapon and controls it with his free hand. He uses the attacker's momentum against him by pulling the weapon in the direction it is going with one hand and pushing with his thumb of the other hand (Step 3). The attacker is completely off balance, and the defender can gain control of the weapon.


    is a typical aikido kokyu nage, i'll stop here by now. Maybe later i can upload some things.

    BTW, the knife defense techniques at the same chapter deserve some comments by the FMA guys here. :)

  2. #2
    Gezere's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Rhineland Pfalz, Der Vaderland
    Posts
    10,560
    Style
    Kakutogi
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Yes we know some of the things in there aren't great and they are being reevaluated. If you knew what goes in to actually CHANGING established FMs you'd understand. Its a good thing that Mr Larsen (SFC ret.) got the changes in that he did.
    ______
    Xiao Ao Jiang Hu Zhi Dong Fang Bu Bai (Laughing Proud Warrior Invincible Asia) Dark Emperor of Baji!!!

    RIP SOLDIER

    Didn't anyone ever tell him a fat man could never be a ninja
    -Gene, GODHAND

    You can't practice Judo just to win a Judo Match! You practice so that no matter what happens, you can win using Judo!
    The key to fighting two men at once is to be much tougher than both of them.
    -Daniel Tosh

  3. #3
    DCS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,021
    Style
    Jits
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    The sense of humour of Lord Asia always amazes me.

    On a more serious note: I know these parts of the FM are old, but i'm not sure about the time they were included and the hows and whys they were included. Could you ellaborate a bit about the evolution of combatives FMs.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    East coast
    Posts
    656
    Style
    BBT/Flinging poo
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    I think those items were left over from the Vietnam era combatives. You should see the previous version of the FM.

  5. #5
    mrblackmagic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    right behind you.
    Posts
    3,404
    Style
    yang taichi
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    I guess military CQC should have leeway to be joke considering less than 3% of kills are within range to do it.

    Isn't L.I.N.E. some good stuff?
    Last edited by mrblackmagic; 6/29/2006 7:43am at .

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Posts
    1,041
    Style
    Kung Fu
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    I won't comment about the second one. But the first isn't *that* bad. The basic idea in any weapons defense is get off the line of attack and drive through the body. That's happening in that case. It isn't the best way necessarily of doing it (ie. just turning to the side), but the fundemental concept there isn't too far off.

    - Matt
    Student of Wan Yi Chuan Kung Fu,
    Kali, & what ever works
    Renaissance Martial Arts
    Rochester, NY

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    118
    Style
    HungGar
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    I could be wrong but I don't recognise that as being from FM 21-150 Dec. 30, 1970. That leaves 1942, 1963 and 2002 if I'm not mistaken. At any rate it looks silly.

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Posts
    1,041
    Style
    Kung Fu
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    It's from 2002.

    - Matt
    Student of Wan Yi Chuan Kung Fu,
    Kali, & what ever works
    Renaissance Martial Arts
    Rochester, NY

  9. #9
    mrblackmagic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    right behind you.
    Posts
    3,404
    Style
    yang taichi
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Who wrote the 1942? Was it Applegate?

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    242
    Style
    savate
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Bernius
    I won't comment about the second one. But the first isn't *that* bad. The basic idea in any weapons defense is get off the line of attack and drive through the body.
    Actually, the only problem I can see is that they showed one of the more difficult variants. Keep the thumb vertical, and it's a beginner's technique. Plus, the angle of torque you put on his head makes the strip much easier.

Page 1 of 4 1234 Last

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Log in

Log in
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO