Operating inside the Attacker: Part Five/ OODA Components (Act)

Author: Odhinn Kohout

  

The sense of finality (ACT) must be tempered with the Mens Rea needed for creating the prior “decide” category of Boyds theories.

The OODA loop draws its strength from the perpetual continuum or the cyclic nature of how he (Boyd) used the construct entitled “Unfolding Interaction with Environment” to REMIND the participant that the event must not be considered to be immovable and static but rather evolving and organic.

Boyd goes on to tie the final end state of ACTION intrinsically back (feedback) to OBSERVATION which adheres to all of our modern training principles in having the student take stock of their surroundings during the entirety of the engagement.

One example;

Students are taught rudimentary concepts of range safety that after a course of fire has been completed to complete a 180 deg visual sweep of their surroundings prior to holstering their weapon. This forces the student from being solely focused on only one aspect of their environment.

The OODA loop is not just four quadrants as I have seen it most often portrayed in reference to training and to compartmentalize it as such does a disservice to the amount of time Boyd invested in its creation.
 I would compare this to legendary SF Warrior Col. Nick Rowe and his vast contributions to the modern SERE program. Col. Rowe did not merely “escape” from his captors in Viet Nam but used an asymmetrical approach involving psychology, physical prowess, and mental toughness to CREATE the circumstances by which he DEFEATED his captivity.

The purpose of exploring the OODA loop with these articles is for you to come up with your own subjective observations of the Boyd matrix and by doing so dig a little deeper. I believe that this is ultimately what Boyd had in mind…

Be safe Gentlemen.

Operating inside the Attacker: Part Four/ OODA Components (Decide)

Author: Odhinn Kohout

DECISION HYPOTHESIS;

Boyd’s own diagram provides a pathway (feedback) between this component of the OODA loop and “his initial category entitled “observations.”

IMPLICIT GUIDANCE & CONTROL acts as a sort of aggregator in that it is the culmination of information (intel,/synthesis) from multiple sources including training… PRIOR to “the act.”

Let’s look at ONE possible example of this in a high risk setting.

An Assaulter, seconds before an actual door-kick and flashbang knows that the hostage and armed bad-guys are in there. Let’s establish this fact as a certainty before we go further and keep in mind we are NOT talking about specific tactics regarding room clearing. This is about the cognitive processes of the Soldier.

He (the Soldier) does not know the configuration of the players involved I.E. Is an Attacker using the Hostage as a shield? But has prepared for such an event many times in training.

To move faster through the loop than the Attacker the Assaulter will need to have both speed and aggression fully integrated with shot placement/accuracy which refers to Boyd’s implicit guidance and control terminology. What is a good sight picture if not “implicit guidance?”

The Assaulter must account for all his shots as to not endanger the life of the Hostage. The Attackers do not have to abide by this rule but…this fact also works against the Attacker and compresses valuable time slowing down their ability to react in the “Decide” aspect of the OODA loop.

Why?

Upon entering the room the Assaulter’s cognitive process enters familiar territory due to high repetition muscle memory and stress inoculation developed during reality based training scenarios. He acquires his targets fluidly moving him faster through the loop, this at the same time as his Attackers try to control their stress and fear as they feel their bodies being struck by well-placed rounds.

Let’s take this one step futher…

In work up training to this operation the Assaulters made shot accuracy a priority. Regardless of how dynamic the room entries were, each Soldier had to account for every round that he fired in practice. This was not merely pointing the firearm for approximation but having a good sight picture just prior to pulling the trigger.

The Hostage takers did nothing to prepare for the event and relied on intimidation and a false sense of security that all their demands would be met. They were wrong…

The “Decide” aspect of Boyd’s loop goes much further then self-assuredness and the ability to make a decision. The key is making the correct decision based on a culmination of Boyd's well thought out principles.

Be safe Guys!

Operating inside the Attacker: Part Three/ OODA Components (Orient)

Author: Odhinn Kohout

Boyd’s central component of the OODA loop (Orient) covers 5 distinct aspects that work in conjunction as a hub from which a holistic vantage point can be taken.

Cultural Traditions/Genetic Heritage-

In the era that Boyd was formulating his learning theories, Germany and Japan were two  of the main adversaries that the Allies were fighting. Some of the Japanese pilots signed up for one way “Kamikaze” missions and sacrificed themselves by crashing into Aircraft Carriers and other ships. The Luftwaffe on the other hand did not use its pilots for purposeful acts of suicide demonstrating the “Cultural Traditions” and differences that can be found between the two opponents.

Fast forward to Afghanistan and you will see the inherent genius of Boyd to predict the importance of understanding the cultural aspects of the Afghan people. In the Taliban you have an extreme right-wing Islamic group who use Sharia law as the catalyst for their behavior. Referencing Boyd’s terminology the “Genetic Heritage” of the Taliban can be found from the Mujahedeen founded in the late 70’s from local Arab groups of freedom fighters.

Al Qaeda also has historical ties to the Mujahedeen but became fixated with the creation of a Islamic Caliphate as its ultimate goal while focusing all its energies on attacking Western targets from beyond its borders establishing terrorist proxies and affiliates along the way which now span the Globe. Boyd’s theories have modern applications and relevance if you look at them in the context from which Boyd created them

Analysis & Synthesis-

Combination of breaking down all the intelligence/information that is gathered and using a cognitive approach (Analysis) to identify key aspects and components which can in turn be used against the enemy and not always in the sense of direct action but the shortest path to success.

Previous Experience-

Training… and field experience. The response to have the most chance at succeeding MUST at its core have been compiled from qualitative and quantitative measures.

New Information-

The ever changing environment or battlefield needs to be continually uploaded into the plan of attack. This can be illustrated in very simple terms in a Law Enforcement setting;

The Officer gets knocked down to the ground by the person he is trying to arrest. The Officer is gaining the upper hand when suddenly the bad guy produces a knife which was hidden in his clothing and attempts to stab the Officer who is still fighting off his back . This “New Information” changes the landscape of the altercation.

All of which feed into;

Decision/Hypothesis –

Good judgment and the ability to make split second decisions under extreme stress is the true relationship between reality based training (RBT) and a proper trained response versus a sports fighting platform of CQC built on a concept of the other party giving up or “tapping out.”

Your mind will search frantically for “default” training that has been learned in a critical incident of life/death/.

Chaos and violence cannot be navigated easily when it is uncharted territory  and the Officer can become overwhelmed by the effects of heart-rate, tunnel vision, auditory exclusion and a loss of fine and complex motor skills.

We will continue our in depth analysis of Boyd’s OODA loop in the next BLOG.

Be safe Gentlemen!

Vulnerability assessment and Threat assessment for reality based training (RBT)

Author: Odhinn Kohout

Training must define parameters for a “worst case scenario” or the possibilities (mathematically) are endless.

Define the threat. Is it possible, probable, inevitable and imminent?

What are the capabilities of the attacker? Is this known? (There is a more prominent separation between the Police and Military regarding this question)

What would be the impact or consequences of the threat? A risk management assessment prior to actually training would need to address these points as well.

What methodology are you teaching to counter the threat? Is it testable, reproducible, documented and defensible?

Reducing risk which will help to mitigate the consequences of the critical incident is a realistic an achievable goal ONCE all the prior research has been completed to identify “specific areas” of vulnerability to the Officer. This is rarely done. Random and disconnected techniques confuse the student, especially if they are in an initial learning phase and cannot draw on actual experiences for comparative analysis. 

Through the use of critical assessment, Trainers can give students a way to prioritize the kit that they wear in conjunction with impact factors to their health and safety (Ferry 2009) in the same way that this matrix was created for protecting key infrastructure from terrorist attacks.

If the rating system was 0-3(with 0 being no risk and 3 having catastrophic results) an issued firearm would be 3 on this scale. Now that this piece of kit has been identified as a 3 ask yours-self how competent are you in handgun retention tactics?

If you are an Instructor define if your syllabus adheres to this simple matrix example. This can be taken a step further and it may poke some uncomfortable holes in your current curriculum.

Earlier in the article we looked at both the capabilities of the Attacker and the probability variances associated with a “specific” worst case scenario. How can this (training)be immediately incorporated by the Instructor Cadre into a program that will produce measurable results and elevate Officer safety in conjunction with Departmental needs.

Example:  Some of the Officers in the class are assigned to a region of the city where there is high drug traffic and periodic shootings from gangs involved in turf wars. Since we have established the familiarity of firearms to gang-members,( the category of “capabilities of the attacker”) there is now some hard evidence to derive a training platform. This training could already be in place and only need a proper “context” to connect the student to the program being presented. A 10 minute pre-chat lecture addressing the importance of hyper awareness and continued vigilance due to the greater risk which has been identified/established because of the continued gang activity in the area is a great buy in for learning with your Officers. Scenarios that are incorporated later on can build on this and your students will get the benefit of theory, practice and stress inoculation working together to build a layered approach to defensive tactics which combine the cognitive and physical realms under one framework.

Use some assessment techniques prior to teaching your next class. Remain open minded..learning should be a perpetual state for Instructors.

Train Hard, Train Smart!