Airsoft
- Thread starter Grifter
- Start date
Realistic replicas? Airsoft and others. Are plenty of them out there. Many good brands. Have had a good time with them too.
But? Something to keep in mind and be aware of though that usually didn't occur in society too often in years past. Possibly sounding like a spoiled sport or a turn off? On replicas, using or having something that looks like something it's not in this society, especially dangerous items like guns or knives, can lead to other more serious issues and confusion.
Is usually a good time and place for many things. Used to be, kids playing with toy cap guns and other real looking toys were a common sight and occurrence around neighborhoods. Now days, not so much. Some of it was the noise, some of it wasn't. Sometimes, society stinks?
Keeping that in mind, kids or sometimes adults, sometimes not knowing the difference of whatever, can cause serious issues for others with most any sort of replicas. Over years, have heard of kids and adults being hurt, shot or killed by others not knowing the difference. A simple orange or other color marking doesn't always make a difference if it's not seen or understood to mean non functioning, a training aid or a toy to some people.
Many people have been conditioned to think a dangerous tool is dangerous no matter the form, just by the shape. You may know something is not dangerous, but others may not? Again, time and place matters.
Article below is a review of the 12 best airsoft guns of 2021.
Hopefully it helps you out in finding what you're looking for:
12 Best Airsoft Guns of 2023 Reviewed | Airsoft Pal
Looking for the best airsoft gun on the market? My guide will show you the very best airsoft guns in 2023, ranked and reviewed. 100% unbiased reviews.
airsoftpal.com
The use for which I would want a Hellcat replica would be for training, especially working on creating good habits in drawing, firing and most especially reholstering. I'd like to do a lot of practice firing followed by holstering in which I am ingraining the proper finger placement on the replica prior to holstering without real bullets being used. Can't do that at live ranges i'm able to go to. Absolutely, the replica ( at least in my case) would be handled and stored as if it were the genuine article. I've seen those stories you mention as well. Just looking for an alternative to help my gun handling become safer through a safer mode of practice. I've got a Tier 1 appendix holster, hence my desire for an exact replica of the Hellcat so that I may practice with my EDC rig. Thanks for the link above. I will be glad to look at it in any case.
I've shared this picture here before, but it's relevant here, so I'm gonna eat up some more bandwidth. 
^ Airsoft on the left, training gun in the middle, carry on the right.
The differences in aesthetics helps me easily track with gun is which.
Whether airsoft is a good training tool is. as with any other such tool, up to the interpretation of the individual. Among top-tier instructors and other such industry personalities, this opinion varies from person-to-person, which really is to-be-expected.
Because of the dimensional similarities between the replica and the real-deal, airsoft is great to keep in-practice when it comes to the draw stroke as well as movements with the gun. However, even the most accurate and/or highly modified replicas will show a noticeable difference in weight distribution (i.e. "balance"), and similarly, there is virtually no way to properly simulate stoppages with airsoft. "Blow-back" forces can be quite decent in some models, and can also be tweaked...however, even with the best of the genre, it is still in the range of being below or only equivalent to a .22LR. Similarly, effective range is limited. Even with good or highly-modified gas-blow-back pistols, while a 6 to 8-inch diameter target can easily be hit from 10 to even 15 yards, unless you have a really highly modified replica, point-precision/accuracy is completely lost at that distance.
Tatsuya Sakai -a Japanese national who had until about a month before his competition date never touched a real firearm and practiced solely using airsoft- won the 2004 Steel Challenge. You can Google who he beat, but it suffices to say that they're not no-names by any stretch of the imagination. In a similar vein, T.REX ARMS hosted a Japanese airsofter for a live-fire training session a while back (let's not get into the weeds about the personality cult of Lukis Botkin, but instead remain on-point, here ):
And similarly, airsoft training can extend beyond pistol work. Travis Haley's Haley Strategic YouTube channel has a segment on "Airsoft X-Training" -
^ His points are probably best demonstrated by some of the content on the [Airsoft Japan] YouTube Channel -
^ Are the weapons-manipulations perfect? Is the footwork perfect? Are the techniques, tactics and strategies valid? It's really a sliding scale, no?
Airsoft has been seen as a legitimate training tool for many, many years now - going back to well before the time that we "Partied like it's 1999," with guys like Karl Rehn ( https://krtraining.com/newinst/karlbio.html ) being early adopters. But just like dry-fire, just like sub-caliber training, just like the SIRT or like other training tool or methodology, there will be instructors/schools/shooters who prefer one while downplaying another.
I dove into deeper detail with this old thread on XDTalk -
www.xdtalk.com
Hope you find this helpful!
^ Airsoft on the left, training gun in the middle, carry on the right.
The differences in aesthetics helps me easily track with gun is which.
Whether airsoft is a good training tool is. as with any other such tool, up to the interpretation of the individual. Among top-tier instructors and other such industry personalities, this opinion varies from person-to-person, which really is to-be-expected.
Because of the dimensional similarities between the replica and the real-deal, airsoft is great to keep in-practice when it comes to the draw stroke as well as movements with the gun. However, even the most accurate and/or highly modified replicas will show a noticeable difference in weight distribution (i.e. "balance"), and similarly, there is virtually no way to properly simulate stoppages with airsoft. "Blow-back" forces can be quite decent in some models, and can also be tweaked...however, even with the best of the genre, it is still in the range of being below or only equivalent to a .22LR. Similarly, effective range is limited. Even with good or highly-modified gas-blow-back pistols, while a 6 to 8-inch diameter target can easily be hit from 10 to even 15 yards, unless you have a really highly modified replica, point-precision/accuracy is completely lost at that distance.
Tatsuya Sakai -a Japanese national who had until about a month before his competition date never touched a real firearm and practiced solely using airsoft- won the 2004 Steel Challenge. You can Google who he beat, but it suffices to say that they're not no-names by any stretch of the imagination. In a similar vein, T.REX ARMS hosted a Japanese airsofter for a live-fire training session a while back (let's not get into the weeds about the personality cult of Lukis Botkin, but instead remain on-point, here
):And similarly, airsoft training can extend beyond pistol work. Travis Haley's Haley Strategic YouTube channel has a segment on "Airsoft X-Training" -
^ His points are probably best demonstrated by some of the content on the [Airsoft Japan] YouTube Channel -
^ Are the weapons-manipulations perfect? Is the footwork perfect? Are the techniques, tactics and strategies valid? It's really a sliding scale, no?
Airsoft has been seen as a legitimate training tool for many, many years now - going back to well before the time that we "Partied like it's 1999," with guys like Karl Rehn ( https://krtraining.com/newinst/karlbio.html ) being early adopters. But just like dry-fire, just like sub-caliber training, just like the SIRT or like other training tool or methodology, there will be instructors/schools/shooters who prefer one while downplaying another.
I dove into deeper detail with this old thread on XDTalk -
Airsoft trainning validity??
Hope you find this helpful!
Specific to your second question, @Grifter , since my XDms are my defensive handguns, their replica was what I chose. There is also a full-size (4.5-inch) variant available (I'm unfortunately ignorant as to whether a 5.25 variant is, also). If the XDm replica is what you seek, the cross-linked thread in XDTalk that I cited (https://www.xdtalk.com/threads/xdm-airsoft-line.209620/page-2#post-4305957) should give you an idea of what to expect in terms of durability and potential upgrades/modifications.
If 1911s and 2011s are your thing, you are in-luck, as the Japanese really love them, too.
For the ARs, I will have to bow-out of the discussion, as the replicas that I have all date to when I was active in the hobby - as-such, my knowledge/experiences are all isolated to that time-period, which happens to be close to around 20 years ago!
At that time, battery-operated "Automatic Electric Guns" (AEGs) led the tip of the spear where it came to skirmish gaming use, for primaries (i.e. carbines/rifles). Currently, it is my understanding that modern gas-blowbacks have started to lend more realism to this sector as well, but that at the same time -as demonstrated in [Airsoft Japan]'s videos, modern AEGs now also take into account.
If 1911s and 2011s are your thing, you are in-luck, as the Japanese really love them, too.
For the ARs, I will have to bow-out of the discussion, as the replicas that I have all date to when I was active in the hobby - as-such, my knowledge/experiences are all isolated to that time-period, which happens to be close to around 20 years ago!
At that time, battery-operated "Automatic Electric Guns" (AEGs) led the tip of the spear where it came to skirmish gaming use, for primaries (i.e. carbines/rifles). Currently, it is my understanding that modern gas-blowbacks have started to lend more realism to this sector as well, but that at the same time -as demonstrated in [Airsoft Japan]'s videos, modern AEGs now also take into account.
Bassbob
Emissary
Not a fan. For a couple reasons. Handling them and shooting them is not realistic. There is no recoil, there is no noise and there is no realistic correlation between where the projectile impacts. Frankly they just aren't that fun. Something I find completely ridiculous is that many firearms stores here offer training classes, many of which are taught by the dude behind the counter, which utilize airsoft or "Simunition" guns ( which you will have to buy) and which run in the neighborhood of $500 for a 4 hour course. Obviously these courses target people new to firearms who will then go home and think they know what they're doing.
I'm sure there are some classes and instructors who make good legitimate use of them and are renowned and respected. I'll pass.
I'm sure there are some classes and instructors who make good legitimate use of them and are renowned and respected. I'll pass.
^ This is a great discussion point, and I'll venture my viewpoint.
The problem isn't the tool.
If we could shoot real firearms at each other, then yes, that would be a great way to get used to the stress. But alas, our physiology is prohibitive of that intense of a training regimen.
And certainly, live-fire in a 360-degree training environment such as the shoot-house makes for amazing training in real-time problem-solving and decision-making within the context of the active gunfight, but its focus is restricted to techniques, tactics, and marksmanship - even with a remote-controlled robot target, only so much can be done.
Simunition as well as other substitutes such as UTM and RAP4/T4E and the like, along with "lesser" simulators like airsoft all induce a bit of stress via some level of pain, but it's really less about the stimulus than it is the value for which it gives the training. The pain isn't the real value: the value is the ability to simulate real-life decision-making, with another real-live person on the other end of the muzzle.
Our current understanding of how we as humans process information and perform tasks is that we aren't truly able to "multitask." Rather, that we are instead able to "stack" tasks simultaneously. The degree to which we can successfully stack tasks depends on just how much mental/physical resource we have: at some point, our ability to stack as based on those resources is overwhelmed by either the complexity or number of tasks. At that instant, while the mastered fundamentals remain, tasks for which we are challenged to perform become the first points of failure. We can see such failures in both training and in real-life. I've cited my fellow students' shortcomings (i.e. when a fellow student literally froze-in-place after he verbally challenged the threat target, instead of flipping off the safety and engaging) as well as my own (https://www.thearmorylife.com/forum/threads/red-dot-sight-assistance.521/page-2#post-9159 , https://www.thearmorylife.com/forum/threads/lets-see-your-ar-setups.258/page-2#post-3579, and https://www.thearmorylife.com/forum/threads/what-kind-of-plate-carrier-rig-do-you-run.436/#post-7264) in the shoothouse. And in much the same way, I've cited incidents such as when ex-officer Potter mistook her service weapon for her TASER, as well as this unintentional discharge in Las Vegas - Video: officer almost shoots partner and suspect . The lack of sufficient stress-inoculation means that we are overwhelmed that much sooner.
Much like why martial-artists spar or a new surgeon engages in his/her craft under the eyes of a watchful master, the idea is to gradually increase stress: to allow the individual to become hardened through the crucible - and this is essentially what Force-on-Force training is. It's about "pressure cooking" techniques and tactics in real-time, versus a "thinking" opponent (note here that the scenario often becomes the constraint of exactly what kind of interactions can be had - unscripted, open-ended combatives is extremely hard to incorporate into a coherent training regimen), with as-realistic of physical stimuli as can be provided, whether it's being shot with a Sim/UTM/rubber or paint projectile/BBs, being touched with a No-Lie Blade or Shocknife, or getting to pound on each other with High Gear suits.
The primary goal is that we stress-inoculate our decision-making processes so that should the time come, we are better able to "stack" more critical tasks.
You're absolutely right: airsoft is a poor substitute for the real thing where it comes to weapons manipulation. Simunition/UTM allow for much more realistic training in terms of weapons manipulation, as these tools not only typically function the same as their live-fire counterparts (oftentimes these tools are one and the same as their live-fire counterparts, only with critical components substituted so that they can only discharge training ammunition, not live cartridges), but their unique training cartridges/barrels/bolt-assemblies/magazines sometimes have the propensity to actually induce more stoppages than what's typically seen of their corresponding live-fire counterparts (Warrior Poet Society's free YouTube videos as well as their Network FoF content really demonstrates this very well) . Not only that, but as they are functionally nearly identical to their live-fire counterparts, heir stoppage-reduction/remediation methods are thus also identical to that of their live-fire counterparts. So, unless weapons manipulation is the actual point of the training -in which case the incorrect training tool was chosen- then it should be considered that there may well be other reasons for which those classes are held (it should also be remembered that there have been times in their lives that some now highly thought-of and sought-after individuals in the industry have taken side-gigs as gun-shop clerks in order to make ends meet: Varg Freeborn is among today's most well-known integrated-combative instructors, with seminars offered at some of today's most highly-regarded training symposia, but at one time, he was making ends meet with just such a side-gig, while he built-up his training business).
Similarly, you're also absolutely correct in that the 6 mm, 0.20 to .36 gram plastic airsoft BB (usually limited to < 1.5 Joules of muzzle-energy for safety) has limited effective range and sometimes horrible external ballistics. However, at typical "CQB" ranges (including typical engagement ranges for most "unknown contact" scenarios in real-life, even outdoors), quality airsoft replicas can deliver that BB just as accurately as either Sim/UTM conversions or the live-cartridge firearm. To-wit, IPSC Action Air is an internationally recognized competitive shooting sport (especially popular in those areas of the world where handguns and/or their licensing are either legally prohibited or ownership otherwise limiting), and uses the same basic principles as IPSC (here is a post from the early-oughts on the Brian Enos Forums - https://forums.brianenos.com/topic/11690-reduced-scale-targets/ - and yes, you can probably guess who "DumboRAT" was, by the writing style
), only with target distances/sizes scaled to allow for airsoft engagement:
(Vitaly Kryuchin makes an appearance about a third of the way through this RedWolf Airsoft sponsored video)
Just as any of these training tools can be used in a less-than-ideal manner, so can airsoft. Force-on-Force itself can be turned into a game (due to inadequate scripting or simply bad organization - or improper participation by either the role-players or the student: of the latter, students can get "Train-itis," whereby their goal shifts to that of wanting to "win" the scenario, instead of proceeding through the scenario as they would have done in real-life, and maybe failing, but actually learning something from it ), and combatives training can be in-turn physically worthless (i.e. insufficient resistance/effort offered by training-partners or role-players) to dangerous (folks who interpret the training paradigm of "uncooperative and competitive" to be synonymous with going at it 10/10ths).
I've participated in some really great Force-on-Force. I've participated in some really bad: either due to improper equipment (I've yet to use Sim, but I've used all of the other tools that I'd listed in this thread....oh, and to be completely up-front, I've only played with UTM, I haven't actually yet participated in a class that used UTM), instruction, or role-players....or, yup, even problems caused by yours truly, who didn't know better at the time. It's not the tool's fault.
Besides, we've all seen farces made of both flat-range (VODA comes to mind) as well as shoot-house (remember when 10th Mountain officially apologized?).
The problem isn't the tool.
If we could shoot real firearms at each other, then yes, that would be a great way to get used to the stress. But alas, our physiology is prohibitive of that intense of a training regimen.
And certainly, live-fire in a 360-degree training environment such as the shoot-house makes for amazing training in real-time problem-solving and decision-making within the context of the active gunfight, but its focus is restricted to techniques, tactics, and marksmanship - even with a remote-controlled robot target, only so much can be done.
Simunition as well as other substitutes such as UTM and RAP4/T4E and the like, along with "lesser" simulators like airsoft all induce a bit of stress via some level of pain, but it's really less about the stimulus than it is the value for which it gives the training. The pain isn't the real value: the value is the ability to simulate real-life decision-making, with another real-live person on the other end of the muzzle.
Our current understanding of how we as humans process information and perform tasks is that we aren't truly able to "multitask." Rather, that we are instead able to "stack" tasks simultaneously. The degree to which we can successfully stack tasks depends on just how much mental/physical resource we have: at some point, our ability to stack as based on those resources is overwhelmed by either the complexity or number of tasks. At that instant, while the mastered fundamentals remain, tasks for which we are challenged to perform become the first points of failure. We can see such failures in both training and in real-life. I've cited my fellow students' shortcomings (i.e. when a fellow student literally froze-in-place after he verbally challenged the threat target, instead of flipping off the safety and engaging) as well as my own (https://www.thearmorylife.com/forum/threads/red-dot-sight-assistance.521/page-2#post-9159 , https://www.thearmorylife.com/forum/threads/lets-see-your-ar-setups.258/page-2#post-3579, and https://www.thearmorylife.com/forum/threads/what-kind-of-plate-carrier-rig-do-you-run.436/#post-7264) in the shoothouse. And in much the same way, I've cited incidents such as when ex-officer Potter mistook her service weapon for her TASER, as well as this unintentional discharge in Las Vegas - Video: officer almost shoots partner and suspect . The lack of sufficient stress-inoculation means that we are overwhelmed that much sooner.
Much like why martial-artists spar or a new surgeon engages in his/her craft under the eyes of a watchful master, the idea is to gradually increase stress: to allow the individual to become hardened through the crucible - and this is essentially what Force-on-Force training is. It's about "pressure cooking" techniques and tactics in real-time, versus a "thinking" opponent (note here that the scenario often becomes the constraint of exactly what kind of interactions can be had - unscripted, open-ended combatives is extremely hard to incorporate into a coherent training regimen), with as-realistic of physical stimuli as can be provided, whether it's being shot with a Sim/UTM/rubber or paint projectile/BBs, being touched with a No-Lie Blade or Shocknife, or getting to pound on each other with High Gear suits.
The primary goal is that we stress-inoculate our decision-making processes so that should the time come, we are better able to "stack" more critical tasks.
You're absolutely right: airsoft is a poor substitute for the real thing where it comes to weapons manipulation. Simunition/UTM allow for much more realistic training in terms of weapons manipulation, as these tools not only typically function the same as their live-fire counterparts (oftentimes these tools are one and the same as their live-fire counterparts, only with critical components substituted so that they can only discharge training ammunition, not live cartridges), but their unique training cartridges/barrels/bolt-assemblies/magazines sometimes have the propensity to actually induce more stoppages than what's typically seen of their corresponding live-fire counterparts (Warrior Poet Society's free YouTube videos as well as their Network FoF content really demonstrates this very well) . Not only that, but as they are functionally nearly identical to their live-fire counterparts, heir stoppage-reduction/remediation methods are thus also identical to that of their live-fire counterparts. So, unless weapons manipulation is the actual point of the training -in which case the incorrect training tool was chosen- then it should be considered that there may well be other reasons for which those classes are held (it should also be remembered that there have been times in their lives that some now highly thought-of and sought-after individuals in the industry have taken side-gigs as gun-shop clerks in order to make ends meet: Varg Freeborn is among today's most well-known integrated-combative instructors, with seminars offered at some of today's most highly-regarded training symposia, but at one time, he was making ends meet with just such a side-gig, while he built-up his training business).
Similarly, you're also absolutely correct in that the 6 mm, 0.20 to .36 gram plastic airsoft BB (usually limited to < 1.5 Joules of muzzle-energy for safety) has limited effective range and sometimes horrible external ballistics. However, at typical "CQB" ranges (including typical engagement ranges for most "unknown contact" scenarios in real-life, even outdoors), quality airsoft replicas can deliver that BB just as accurately as either Sim/UTM conversions or the live-cartridge firearm. To-wit, IPSC Action Air is an internationally recognized competitive shooting sport (especially popular in those areas of the world where handguns and/or their licensing are either legally prohibited or ownership otherwise limiting), and uses the same basic principles as IPSC (here is a post from the early-oughts on the Brian Enos Forums - https://forums.brianenos.com/topic/11690-reduced-scale-targets/ - and yes, you can probably guess who "DumboRAT" was, by the writing style
), only with target distances/sizes scaled to allow for airsoft engagement:Just as any of these training tools can be used in a less-than-ideal manner, so can airsoft. Force-on-Force itself can be turned into a game (due to inadequate scripting or simply bad organization - or improper participation by either the role-players or the student: of the latter, students can get "Train-itis," whereby their goal shifts to that of wanting to "win" the scenario, instead of proceeding through the scenario as they would have done in real-life, and maybe failing, but actually learning something from it
), and combatives training can be in-turn physically worthless (i.e. insufficient resistance/effort offered by training-partners or role-players) to dangerous (folks who interpret the training paradigm of "uncooperative and competitive" to be synonymous with going at it 10/10ths).I've participated in some really great Force-on-Force. I've participated in some really bad: either due to improper equipment (I've yet to use Sim, but I've used all of the other tools that I'd listed in this thread....oh, and to be completely up-front, I've only played with UTM, I haven't actually yet participated in a class that used UTM), instruction, or role-players....or, yup, even problems caused by yours truly, who didn't know better at the time.
It's not the tool's fault. Besides, we've all seen farces made of both flat-range (VODA comes to mind) as well as shoot-house (remember when 10th Mountain officially apologized?).
Last edited:
^ ETA, another shoothouse antic from the past - https://soldiersystems.net/2012/11/...ner-regarding-the-recent-accidental-shooting/
There's always the specter of less-than-great training being taught, regardless of the type of class. Just because one instructor/school may use airsoft (or another tool) doesn't mean that it is any less (or more) legit than any other.
Karl Rehn was among the first to bring FoF to open-enrollment civilian training (publishing in SWAT in 2003, IIRC, with presentations at The Rangemaster conferences in later years). Similarly, TDI (Tactical Defense Institute - https://www.tdiohio.com) used/uses airsoft for some of their upper-tier decision-making classes, such as F.I.S.T.
Just trying to expand on the topic.
There's always the specter of less-than-great training being taught, regardless of the type of class. Just because one instructor/school may use airsoft (or another tool) doesn't mean that it is any less (or more) legit than any other.
Karl Rehn was among the first to bring FoF to open-enrollment civilian training (publishing in SWAT in 2003, IIRC, with presentations at The Rangemaster conferences in later years). Similarly, TDI (Tactical Defense Institute - https://www.tdiohio.com) used/uses airsoft for some of their upper-tier decision-making classes, such as F.I.S.T.
Just trying to expand on the topic.
Last edited:
Air Venturi XDM Air Pistol — XDMAN.com
The XDMAN uses the Air Venturi XDM officially licensed Air Pistol to set up a back yard range day.
www.xdman.com
Classified
Professional
I prefer green gas (gas fills in magazine with ammo) and AEG (electric) simply due to the similarities with the real thing. While it may not be identical it does help to build one familiarity, especially with DA/SA systems.
Bassbob
Emissary
^ This is a great discussion point, and I'll venture my viewpoint.
The problem isn't the tool.
If we could shoot real firearms at each other, then yes, that would be a great way to get used to the stress. But alas, our physiology is prohibitive of that intense of a training regimen.
And certainly, live-fire in a 360-degree training environment such as the shoot-house makes for amazing training in real-time problem-solving and decision-making within the context of the active gunfight, but its focus is restricted to techniques, tactics, and marksmanship - even with a remote-controlled robot target, only so much can be done.
Simunition as well as other substitutes such as UTM and RAP4/T4E and the like, along with "lesser" simulators like airsoft all induce a bit of stress via some level of pain, but it's really less about the stimulus than it is the value for which it gives the training. The pain isn't the real value: the value is the ability to simulate real-life decision-making, with another real-live person on the other end of the muzzle.
Our current understanding of how we as humans process information and perform tasks is that we aren't truly able to "multitask." Rather, that we are instead able to "stack" tasks simultaneously. The degree to which we can successfully stack tasks depends on just how much mental/physical resource we have: at some point, our ability to stack as based on those resources is overwhelmed by either the complexity or number of tasks. At that instant, while the mastered fundamentals remain, tasks for which we are challenged to perform become the first points of failure. We can see such failures in both training and in real-life. I've cited my fellow students' shortcomings (i.e. when a fellow student literally froze-in-place after he verbally challenged the threat target, instead of flipping off the safety and engaging) as well as my own (https://www.thearmorylife.com/forum/threads/red-dot-sight-assistance.521/page-2#post-9159 , https://www.thearmorylife.com/forum/threads/lets-see-your-ar-setups.258/page-2#post-3579, and https://www.thearmorylife.com/forum/threads/what-kind-of-plate-carrier-rig-do-you-run.436/#post-7264) in the shoothouse. And in much the same way, I've cited incidents such as when ex-officer Potter mistook her service weapon for her TASER, as well as this unintentional discharge in Las Vegas - Video: officer almost shoots partner and suspect . The lack of sufficient stress-inoculation means that we are overwhelmed that much sooner.
Much like why martial-artists spar or a new surgeon engages in his/her craft under the eyes of a watchful master, the idea is to gradually increase stress: to allow the individual to become hardened through the crucible - and this is essentially what Force-on-Force training is. It's about "pressure cooking" techniques and tactics in real-time, versus a "thinking" opponent (note here that the scenario often becomes the constraint of exactly what kind of interactions can be had - unscripted, open-ended combatives is extremely hard to incorporate into a coherent training regimen), with as-realistic of physical stimuli as can be provided, whether it's being shot with a Sim/UTM/rubber or paint projectile/BBs, being touched with a No-Lie Blade or Shocknife, or getting to pound on each other with High Gear suits.
The primary goal is that we stress-inoculate our decision-making processes so that should the time come, we are better able to "stack" more critical tasks.
You're absolutely right: airsoft is a poor substitute for the real thing where it comes to weapons manipulation. Simunition/UTM allow for much more realistic training in terms of weapons manipulation, as these tools not only typically function the same as their live-fire counterparts (oftentimes these tools are one and the same as their live-fire counterparts, only with critical components substituted so that they can only discharge training ammunition, not live cartridges), but their unique training cartridges/barrels/bolt-assemblies/magazines sometimes have the propensity to actually induce more stoppages than what's typically seen of their corresponding live-fire counterparts (Warrior Poet Society's free YouTube videos as well as their Network FoF content really demonstrates this very well) . Not only that, but as they are functionally nearly identical to their live-fire counterparts, heir stoppage-reduction/remediation methods are thus also identical to that of their live-fire counterparts. So, unless weapons manipulation is the actual point of the training -in which case the incorrect training tool was chosen- then it should be considered that there may well be other reasons for which those classes are held (it should also be remembered that there have been times in their lives that some now highly thought-of and sought-after individuals in the industry have taken side-gigs as gun-shop clerks in order to make ends meet: Varg Freeborn is among today's most well-known integrated-combative instructors, with seminars offered at some of today's most highly-regarded training symposia, but at one time, he was making ends meet with just such a side-gig, while he built-up his training business).
Similarly, you're also absolutely correct in that the 6 mm, 0.20 to .36 gram plastic airsoft BB (usually limited to < 1.5 Joules of muzzle-energy for safety) has limited effective range and sometimes horrible external ballistics. However, at typical "CQB" ranges (including typical engagement ranges for most "unknown contact" scenarios in real-life, even outdoors), quality airsoft replicas can deliver that BB just as accurately as either Sim/UTM conversions or the live-cartridge firearm. To-wit, IPSC Action Air is an internationally recognized competitive shooting sport (especially popular in those areas of the world where handguns and/or their licensing are either legally prohibited or ownership otherwise limiting), and uses the same basic principles as IPSC (here is a post from the early-oughts on the Brian Enos Forums - https://forums.brianenos.com/topic/11690-reduced-scale-targets/ - and yes, you can probably guess who "DumboRAT" was, by the writing style
(Vitaly Kryuchin makes an appearance about a third of the way through this RedWolf Airsoft sponsored video)
Just as any of these training tools can be used in a less-than-ideal manner, so can airsoft. Force-on-Force itself can be turned into a game (due to inadequate scripting or simply bad organization - or improper participation by either the role-players or the student: of the latter, students can get "Train-itis," whereby their goal shifts to that of wanting to "win" the scenario, instead of proceeding through the scenario as they would have done in real-life, and maybe failing, but actually learning something from it
I've participated in some really great Force-on-Force. I've participated in some really bad: either due to improper equipment (I've yet to use Sim, but I've used all of the other tools that I'd listed in this thread....oh, and to be completely up-front, I've only played with UTM, I haven't actually yet participated in a class that used UTM), instruction, or role-players....or, yup, even problems caused by yours truly, who didn't know better at the time.
Besides, we've all seen farces made of both flat-range (VODA comes to mind) as well as shoot-house (remember when 10th Mountain officially apologized?).
When I typed the last sentence in my post I was pretty much directing it at you. I figured in certain applications these things would have some use. Just not in anything resembling marksmanship or in most cases weapon manipulation.
My biggest reason for looking for an airsoft Hellcat is for use in practicing draw, presentation, firing a few rounds, then
getting my finger up and off the trigger, then reholstering safely. The realism of the actual shooting is not what I'm looking for. Looking to build up muscle memory of acutally removing finger from trigger after firing a few rounds. I could draw and dry fire a single shot and reholster, but the rack after one shot is something I'm looking to not have to do, muscle memory issue again. I was just in contact with Coolfire Trainer and it seems they may finally close to developing a Hellcat system for sale. That may make airsoft a moot point for me. But they've been working on it for a long time and nothing yet.
Bassbob
Emissary
We do it with the iTarget app. You don't have to fully rack it, just enough to reset.
I thought so, too. It's hard to pick up on non-verbal cues when we're not sitting across the table and enjoying a steak with each other! Yup, manipulations remain an issue in all but a few very, very specific cases (i.e. there are shotshell-fed/ejecting shotgun replicas with manual pump-action as well as gas-fed semi-automatic action, and also cartridge-fed revolver [including grenade launchers, but I doubt that the average defensive firearms user is gonna need to practice that kind of reloading!
]).How well these lightweight, spherical, 6 mm BBs can perform with regard to holding external ballistics usually somewhat surprises folks who've only seen what the spring-cocking Wal-Dollar-Store toys can do. Glad I was able to help open things up a bit, here.
-----
* Emphasis added.
If this is the case, consider that you don't actually need the trigger to reset, at all.
One thing that Robert Vogel (who, by the way, sees little to no use for airsoft training) was really vocal about was how fixated most of us are about the trigger fully resetting during dry-fire (he's a huge proponent of dry-fire: but ask this same question of Hackathorn, and he'll suggest that dry-fire is best suited to novices and beginners). His view was that during live-fire under pressure, that reset isn't likely going to be something that we will actually feel/notice. So after that first break on dry-fire practice, he just manipulates the "dead" trigger through whatever travel it has, while concentrating on sight package (and whatever else he's practicing, like movement), repeatedly as he simulates going through a full competition stage.
Vogel's advice, when reduced to its root, mirrors that of many of the top-tier trainers that I've had the opportunity/luck to study with: that effective practice and training both starts and ends with the mind. "Envision what you want." Pretend.
The best example? Those "range theatrics" - they truly are just theatrics unless the shooter is actually making use of them. "Scan 360" only works when the shooter actually "sees," instead of just going through the motions: if there's no surprise targets being put up by training partners, one should actively imagine threat/non-threat targets as they scan through, and, if range-safety allows (i.e. 270-degree berms), "engage" the pretend threats. "Following the threat to the ground?" That's only valid if the threat actually falls to the ground after being engaged, no? Instead of making it a rote, default movement, actually envision in your mind the threat falling - OR NOT - and follow-up with the proper actions: maybe instead of following that threat to the ground after the drill's two shots to the chest, you'll immediately re-engage with an NSR, and only then follow that "fallen" threat to the ground.....
"Why don't you hate that piece of cardboard as much as you would hate the person who's holding your daughter hostage, Allen?" - that was a seminal moment in my training/practice, as-voiced by an instructor of mine who passed just a few years ago. That really caused me to frame-shift.
So, with that in-mind, if your goal is to put away that weapon carefully, why do you need a trigger reset?
Neither watching the muzzle nor insuring that your trigger finger and other possible problems are out of the trigger guard on the re-holster requires a reset trigger.
One certainly could make a good argument that a reset trigger with cocked striker -should that striker fall- can be a more certain indicator of proper technique being abridged....but if that is the case, then why complicate the practice session with shooting from the draw initially? Why not instead pretend to engage by touching the trigger (and maybe even taking out the slack in the trigger all the way to the point that you're at the wall), and save that cocked trigger for the actual holster stroke? Or, alternatively, break that trigger on the first shot out, but take a moment to reset the trigger after "engaging" the threat (during your simulation/practice of the post-shoot assessment) - before you return the gun to the holster.
Every training tool (and even training environment) has its shortcomings - it's up to us to work our way around them.
Air Venturi XDM Air Pistol — XDMAN.com
The XDMAN uses the Air Venturi XDM officially licensed Air Pistol to set up a back yard range day.
^ Just be sure you don't use this in FoF!
Pitdogg2
Professional
Personally none of these should be black or any other color that could be confused as a REAL firearm. They all should be bright fluorescent neon colors.
The whole orange tip/stripe is easily removed or changed.
Many of the hood rats have started buying them and several have been used in armed robberies.
The whole orange tip/stripe is easily removed or changed.
Many of the hood rats have started buying them and several have been used in armed robberies.
^ That brings up an excellent point, and I thank you for doing so.
But that's a an issue of crime: not an issue of the item itself. Misuse is misuse. (@TidalWave 's reply in the "Knives vs. Rifles thread shows the absurdity in some other countries that continue to blame the tool, instead of actually addressing crime and criminals - https://www.thearmorylife.com/forum/threads/knives-vs-rifles-some-data.9280/#post-117119 )
And remember that obviously toy-looking items can just as easily be re-painted for nefarious purposes, too:
https://abcnews4.com/news/crime-new...sguised-to-look-like-toy-gun-during-drug-raid - this is just one example, but a Google search will provide plenty of others that date back many, many years.
Besides, those who are of an older generation will remember playing with cap-guns back in the day.
Those who are among my generation will remember Entertech water-guns and the like.
One could argue also make the "think of the kids argument," with perhaps the Tamir Rice incident being one of the harshest reminders of the "what looks like a gun is a gun" warning:
abcnews.go.com
^ But again, misuse is just that. That event occurred when my daughter was only a couple of years younger than Rice. As with many of these types of tales, I used it as a learning tool for my daughter. When I asked her what would happen if she were to take one of my airsoft replicas out to the playground, her first response wasn't that the police were going to be the problem: rather, it was that I would be furious at her, and that she would be in trouble with me. As a parent, my heart aches for Tamir Rice's parents - but a part of me also very strongly feels that they have failed their child in allowing such misuse to land him in the way of mortal harm. For as vocal as they have been after the event, I ask myself why did they not invest that kind of energy into making sure that Tamir would fear their wrath in the same way that my daughter feared mine?
-----
Remember also that in their native lands, these items are "replicas" for a very specific reason: it's so that *_adult_* hobbyists who are unable to enjoy the freedoms that the 2A guarantees (or who simply cannot afford the oftentimes outrageous sums required to obtain not just the firearm, but legal licensure of its sporting use) can enjoy something similar to what we often take for-granted.
But that's a an issue of crime: not an issue of the item itself. Misuse is misuse. (@TidalWave 's reply in the "Knives vs. Rifles thread shows the absurdity in some other countries that continue to blame the tool, instead of actually addressing crime and criminals - https://www.thearmorylife.com/forum/threads/knives-vs-rifles-some-data.9280/#post-117119 )
And remember that obviously toy-looking items can just as easily be re-painted for nefarious purposes, too:
https://abcnews4.com/news/crime-new...sguised-to-look-like-toy-gun-during-drug-raid - this is just one example, but a Google search will provide plenty of others that date back many, many years.
Besides, those who are of an older generation will remember playing with cap-guns back in the day.
Those who are among my generation will remember Entertech water-guns and the like.
One could argue also make the "think of the kids argument," with perhaps the Tamir Rice incident being one of the harshest reminders of the "what looks like a gun is a gun" warning:
One of These Is The Toy Gun Tamir Rice Was Holding: Prosecutors
The toy gun is "functionally identical" to the real gun, the office says.
^ But again, misuse is just that. That event occurred when my daughter was only a couple of years younger than Rice. As with many of these types of tales, I used it as a learning tool for my daughter. When I asked her what would happen if she were to take one of my airsoft replicas out to the playground, her first response wasn't that the police were going to be the problem: rather, it was that I would be furious at her, and that she would be in trouble with me. As a parent, my heart aches for Tamir Rice's parents - but a part of me also very strongly feels that they have failed their child in allowing such misuse to land him in the way of mortal harm. For as vocal as they have been after the event, I ask myself why did they not invest that kind of energy into making sure that Tamir would fear their wrath in the same way that my daughter feared mine?
-----
Remember also that in their native lands, these items are "replicas" for a very specific reason: it's so that *_adult_* hobbyists who are unable to enjoy the freedoms that the 2A guarantees (or who simply cannot afford the oftentimes outrageous sums required to obtain not just the firearm, but legal licensure of its sporting use) can enjoy something similar to what we often take for-granted.
Last edited:
Grifter
Custom
So the wife got us some airsoft rifles for my birthday.
Today we went out and played with them and I have some observations.
I can definitely see some training opportunities with them. Sure they don’t have recoil or noise like the real deal, but they shoot plenty fast enough and handle similar enough to the real thing to use as a cheaper alternative to live ammo.
I can also see training with them for other scenarios.
Overall I was pleasantly surprised by the range and accuracy of them. Had no issues hitting cardboard targets at 50 yards. Also surprised that they break skin when you get hit at relatively close range
Today we went out and played with them and I have some observations.
I can definitely see some training opportunities with them. Sure they don’t have recoil or noise like the real deal, but they shoot plenty fast enough and handle similar enough to the real thing to use as a cheaper alternative to live ammo.
I can also see training with them for other scenarios.
Overall I was pleasantly surprised by the range and accuracy of them. Had no issues hitting cardboard targets at 50 yards. Also surprised that they break skin when you get hit at relatively close range
Snake45
Professional
No experience with airsoft, but I've bought five new airguns--all replicas--this year and am having fun and getting in some good training time in my basement, rain or shine. Three in particular work well--Springfield Armory M1A in .22 pellet, SA MilSpec 1911 CO2/BB, and SA M1 carbine CO2/BB. The latter two are particularly authentic in both operation and feel. More if you're interested.