Reliability Testing – Part II
Continuing on with “How many rounds would you say make up a legitimate ‘reliability test’ for a pistol?”
This is a comment to the 2023 post that echoed a comment I failed to notice and answer on the 2017 post.
“ ‘One of the mathematical analyses presented in the original Facebook discussion was that 5 malfunctions per 1000 meant more than one malfunction in a 17 round magazine (8.72%).’
You need to link to this math because it isn’t correct if you assume independence.”
Here is the person’s explanation, verbatim.
“Claude – 5 in 1000 is a 0.5% failure rate, or a 99.5% success rate per shot. The odds of shooting twice in a row is 99.5% X 99.5%, or 99.5% to the 2nd power. The odds of shooting 17 rounds with no problems is 99.5% to the 17th power, or 91.8%, leaving an 8.2% chance of failure.”
The problem is that the assumed 0.5% failure rate was the result of shooting twice. So double counting the failure and then raising it to the 2nd power is an inherent structural flaw in the analysis. I don’t claim to be a statistician but occasionally a structural problem in constructing a mathematical analysis will be immediately obvious to me. If the output of a mathematical analysis is obviously divergent from reality (Glock 17s do not average more than one malfunction per magazine), it means the math is flawed in one way or another.
What is the reliability of a Glock 17? During one class I was teaching at the elite Rogers Shooting School, I had two failures to go into battery with the Gen 2 Glock 17 I used as my School gun. I pushed the slide closed with my thumb (OMG, a diagnostic malfunction clearance) and went on with the drill. The malfunctions seemed odd to me because they were out of the ordinary. Upon further reflection, I realized the teaching season was nearly over (October) and I had neither cleaned nor lubricated the gun all year. It had fired, with various types of ball ammo, somewhere upward of 15,000 rounds without a malfunction. The other School guns performed similarly.
An analysis that determined a Glock 17 had a probability of one malfunction per magazine flew in the face of my experience. That’s the kind of thing I keep an eye open for. If an analysis doesn’t match up with a broad segment of reality, there’s probably something wrong with the analysis.
Having built a model rocket does not make you a rocket scientist.
Reliability Testing
A colleague asked me a few days ago:
“How many rounds would you say make up a legitimate ‘reliability test’ for a pistol?”
My response was 100 because that’s more than 99.9% of people will ever fire a pistol they buy. He was surprised about this answer because he thought it would be considerably more.
There’s a very detailed discussion about it in a post I wrote years ago. Most of the cognoscenti who were responded to the question then felt that 1000 rounds was the minimum desirable number. There were certain aspects of their analyses leading to that conclusion that I felt weren’t explored with enough depth.
https://thetacticalprofessor.net/2017/04/21/reliability/
Numerous justifications for 1000 round torture tests were presented to me by the cognoscenti. One of the mathematical analyses presented in the original Facebook discussion was that 5 malfunctions per 1000 meant more than one malfunction in a 17 round magazine (8.72%). My belief about that obtuse analysis remains the same.
“If I’m going to have at least one malfunction per magazine, I’ll just keep carrying a revolver.”
I’ll write a bit more about my latest revolver work for #wheelgunwednesday next week.
Hahaha. Alt Text autogenerated by Microsoft Word for the above picture:
“A board game with brown squares”
WWII Helicopter Rescue Mission – Unintentional Discharge Related
Dr. Mark Felton never ceases to amaze with his recounts of wartime exploits. The elaborate efforts made by the US Army to rescue a soldier involved a journey three-quarters of the way around the globe.
“A soldier based in a weather station atop a 4700 foot tall mountain [in Burma] had accidentally shot himself in the hand and infection had set in. He needed immediate evacuation to hospital.”
“On the 24th of January 1945, a helicopter undertook the first combat medical evacuation in history.”
Ironically, the first helicopter Medevac mission in history was not due to combat action but rather because of an Unintentional Discharge.
Cold War Memories – The Missile Batteries
#throwbackthursday
Trigger Warning! This series of posts has nothing to do with self-defense, hand guns, or Personal Protection.
My memories in Chicargo
The Missile Batteries
Another of my memories is the Nike-Hercules batteries that ringed the City of Chicargo during the Cold War. There were a lot of them. Probably the ones I remember seeing were in Jackson Park on the South Side because I loved going to the Museum of Science and Industry nearby.
In the early days, the batteries were equipped with Nike-Ajax, a relatively short ranged missile equipped with a conventional warhead to shoot down individual bombers. Later on, they were upgraded to the Nike-Hercules, which was nuclear capable.
Nike-Hercules was intended to shoot down whole fleets of Soviet bombers by using a nuclear explosion. Although which batteries in the US were actually equipped with nuclear warheads wasn’t publicly released, the general consensus was that at least some of the Chicargo batteries were. The warheads were switchable from 2 kilotons, a tac nuke, to 40 kilotons, larger than the bombs dropped on Japan.
Here’s an Army informational film about Nike Hercules.
Next week: The effects on the City in the event of a successful Soviet thermonuclear attack.
Memories of the Cold War – The Sirens
#throwbackthursday
Trigger Warning! This is a series of posts about my personal experiences. It has nothing to do with self-defense, hand guns, or Personal Protection.
I recently watched an entertaining video by Joey B Toonz, an Idiocracy commentator on YouTube. It is titled Starbucks Employee Crying Over Having to Work. The young fella was upset about having so many customers and having to work a full 8 hours.
https://youtube.com/clip/UgkxyTKxPH-MPuYQ01wF8lTlXRYExkYwjUoY
It got me to thinking about the things that concerned me while I was his age growing up in Chicargo. Unlike the Greatest Generation, I didn’t have to walk seven miles through the snow to school, only one. However, one of the things we Boomers did grow up with was The Cold War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_War and the accompanying specter of thermonuclear annihilation.
My Cold War memories in Chicargo
The Air Raid Sirens
My earliest memories of the thermonuclear specter are the air raid sirens that were tested mid-morning the first Tuesday of each month. I remember beginning to hear them around the time President Kennedy was assassinated when I was in Third Grade. Chicargo had many sirens, reportedly over 100, scattered throughout the city. The monthly tests continued long past when I joined the Army after I graduated from high school.
Probably once a year we would have an ‘Air Raid Drill’ at my elementary school. Because our classrooms had ‘cloak rooms’ where we hung our winter coats, we didn’t do “Duck and Cover.” We just all got up and went into the cloak room for a couple of minutes. In the case of an actual thermonuclear attack, we would have waited there for the building to be destroyed or completely set on fire by one or more 2.2 megaton thermonuclear explosions. More about the actual effects of what such an attack would have done to the city in a later post.
The loudest sirens were the Chrysler Victory sirens. They were marvels of engineering. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chrysler_Air-Raid_Siren Power for the siren was supplied by a Chrysler Hemi 180 horsepower engine and it produced a wail of 138 decibels, which is similar to the sound of gunfire. Hearing protection was required to operate them just like shooting a gun. They were mounted atop tall buildings, fire stations, and other such places that would allow them to be heard for miles.
A marvelous website called Victory Siren http://stall.net/victorysiren/ has a great deal of information about the Chrysler sirens. There is a recording on it http://stall.net/victorysiren/wav/sound.htm that sounds eerily similar to what I recall of those days. It is Sound Clip #10 – Warning Signal.
“This is a recording of Harry Barry’s Detroit siren as heard five miles away. Although the siren was pointed in Harry’s direction, it was not visible over a ridge between the two distant points. The siren was mounted on a trailer and not at optimum height for sound coverage. At this distance it takes the siren sound about twenty-four seconds (same length of time as this clip) to travel from the siren to the listener. The siren volume was estimated to be 55 to 58 dB at this distance!”
Next week: The nuclear armed anti-aircraft missile batteries surrounding the City of Chicargo back then.
The entire Joey B Starbucks boi video is here. https://youtu.be/KYf8HLDwNhs
Home Invasion – Part II
and that’s the first time I realized how difficult it was to try and remove somebody’s testicles by hand.
The gentleman was very angry that his wife and homestead had been attacked and he had been shot at.
He used a 6 inch revolver to shoot back. No results, unfortunately.
And with that I went back to retrieve my own firearm. So I went to the vehicle. I had a handgun, a 38 special with a 6 inch barrel.
Quite an amazing and educational story.
Part I https://thetacticalprofessor.net/2023/06/17/home-invasion-part-i/
Home Invasion – Part I
It’s not often that we are able to listen to such a detailed narrative of how a home invasion went down. Having the victim tell the story makes it even more remarkable. This is a very brave woman and family. The overhead view of the property and accompanying explanation of the movements are invaluable.
My thanks to the creator of the video. More about the story in the next post.
RIP Sheriff Gene Matthews
Subscribe to continue reading
Subscribe to get access to the rest of this post and other subscriber-only content.
Charlotte Bus Shootout
On May 18, 2023, an altercation occurred between a bus driver and a young criminal riding the bus in Charlotte NC. As the altercation escalated, the young criminal produced a pistol from his pocket and approached the driver. Upon seeing the young criminal’s weapon, the driver produced his own pistol and opened fire on the young criminal. The young criminal fired back. Multiple rounds were subsequently exchanged.
ABC News link https://youtu.be/IoRgLsiefdE
Both shooters were wounded in the engagement. The young criminal was hit once in the abdomen and required six days of hospitalization with life threatening injuries. The bus driver was wounded in the arm, treated, and released. The young criminal was arrested and charged with Assault With A Deadly Weapon Inflicting Serious Injuries, Communicating Threats, and Carrying A Concealed Firearm. The bus driver was fired from his job but has not been charged, at least yet.
Issues
There are numerous issues that can be discussed regarding the incident.
- De-escalation
- The driver was fired for not using de-escalation techniques as taught by his employer. At this point, there is no way of knowing whether de-escalation would have been possible.
- Preparation for combat
- Although the young criminal was carrying a weapon and ‘communicated a threat,’ he had to consider the situation after he pulled his pistol out.
- The bus driver was clearly prepared for the incident because his draw was a one second draw any firearm instructor would be happy with.
- Situational Awareness
- The bus driver, despite having to drive the bus, was immediately aware of the young criminal’s approach after he armed himself.
- Point Shooting
- Distances
- The initial exchange of gunfire took place at about 4 feet, the boundary between Personal Space and Social Space in Proxemics.
- Distances
- As the shootout continued, the distances increased dramatically with the final shot taking place at seven to 10 yards.
- Both shooters fired one handed. Neither used a Gangsta style shooting stance. The young criminal’s initial stance was a classic point shooting Square stance with weapon just below the eye-target line as described by Fairbairn and Sykes in Shooting to Live.
- As the young criminal retreated, the bus driver employed a ‘tactical blind fire’ method of continuing his barrage.
- Hits
- The results were that out of a magazine fired by each shooter, one hit was made by each. The young criminal was hit in the abdomen and the bus driver was hit in the arm. The hit ratio was less than 10 percent. Although the young criminal was seriously wounded, he was still mobile and unneutralized, as is often the case with abdominal wounds.
- Weapons used
- Glock 19
- SCCY
- Neither weapon appears to have malfunctioned.
- Both were equipped with iron sights.
- Anger management
- In Principles of Personal Defense, Jeff Cooper said “Now how do we cultivate an aggressive response? I think the answer is indignation. … Your response, if attacked, must not be fear, it must be anger. The two emotions are very close and you can quite easily turn one into the other. … Anger lets you do this.“ Although it is unlikely that the bus driver has ever read Cooper’s book, it’s very clear that he used Cooper’s philosophy.
- Actions after the initial exchange
- The bus driver fired three volleys.
- The initial exchange at the front of the bus, including the tactical blind fire.
- After the initial exchange of gunfire, the bus driver got up from his seat, opened the partition, had a verbal exchange with the young criminal, and then began shooting again.
- Finally, after the young criminal had exited the bus through the rear door, the bus driver debussed through the front door and fired one more round at the young criminal, who was now in the open seven to 10 yards away. This shot is problematic.
- The bus driver fired three volleys.
- Endangering innocent bystanders
- There were two bystanders on the bus. Both were endangered by the tactical blind fire of Volley 1 and the bus driver’s second volley.
- The second volley was unnecessary and irresponsible. The underlying motive for these shots was vengeance “You shot me!” not self-defense.
- The final round fired in the open as a parting shot menaced the entire area. Cooper’s anger principle is entirely inappropriate at this point.
- Gunhandling
- The bus driver had to switch hands twice. To undo his seat belt and open his partition, he had to switch his pistol to his left hand. After stepping past the partition, he transitioned back to his right hand. He was able to do this without having an Unintentional Discharge.
- Verbal commands
- The bus driver commanded the young criminal to “Get your a** back!” when the young criminal was at the back door. The young criminal refused, fearing he would be shot again.
- Self-aid for wounds
- Both the young criminal and the bus driver were wounded. Neither had any first aid equipment. Note in the video that the bus driver is holding his arm where he was wounded.
- Chasing fleeing criminals
- Getting out of his seat to maintain visual on the young criminal was entirely appropriate. Following the criminal out of the bus was not. We see time and again the chase instinct that occurs when the predator-prey relationship reverses. It’s an instinct that we need to be aware of and not give in to.
My analysis of the Point Shooting aspects are on my Patreon page. I will be going over other aspects of the shootout in more detail in my next few posts there. Click the image below to follow.
The Value of Historical Methods
A viewer of my Shooting to Live Advanced Methods demo YouTube video asked an interesting question.
“Do you think that there is any value added by practicing the WWII Combatives shooting methods beyond learning historical training firsthand?”
In a conversation with him, he further elaborated that he was asking from his perspective as a competent shooter who practices regularly using demanding time and accuracy standards. From that perspective, my answer was NO. The only value to him would be for historical academic interest. There is nothing that will be learned of practical value for someone with his level of proficiency.
However, I continued on by saying that to the millions of first time gun buyers of the past few years, MAYBE. Only a miniscule fraction of those people will ever take a class on gun safety and learn how to shoot to some standard, whatever that standard might be.
For those millions of first time gun buyers, studying actual WWII shooting combatives, such as Shooting to Live and Field Manual 23-35 Pistols and Revolvers (1946), could have some value. Shooting to Live and its immediately successor, US Army Combat Firing, at least provide some structure and standards for brand new pistol shooters. Any system based on real combat is preferable to going to an indoor range and randomly blasting away based on what’s shown on TV.
I began the long term series about ‘Unsighted Fire’ aka Point Shooting on Patreon for a very specific reason. It is that obviously the vast majority of people who write about point shooting or make YouTube videos on “Fairbairn Method” shooting have never really read or studied any of the literature about it, including Shooting to Live. From the perspective of an historian and researcher, this lack of fact based information is both annoying and disturbing.
The gunhandling and safety aspects of WWII pistol combatives alone have a great deal of merit. Gripping the pistol properly. A strong emphasis on practical gunhandling in addition to marksmanship. Including malfunction clearance in early stages of Live Fire. Equal weight on Dry Practice as Live Fire, especially prior to the initial firing practice. Highlighting the concept of treating a pistol as always loaded. Emphasizing the importance of muzzle direction when handling a pistol. Practicing clearing and making the pistol safe when less than a magazine has been fired. Those are all highly useful skills, probably even more so than the marksmanship standards, which were not very high.
But please avoid muzzling your instructors. We won’t be happy about that. We will try to keep away from putting ourselves in a position where you can.
While the hit standards Shooting to Live and Field Manual 23-35 Pistols and Revolvers (1946) establish are rudimentary, they do give new shooters an idea that they’re supposed to actually hit something when shooting. The standard in Shooting to Live is 50 percent hits on a silhouette for single presentations within Social Space (4 yards). The 1946 US Army standard was 100 percent hits for single presentations on an E Silhouette at 5 yards.
Although most proficient shooters today would consider the techniques obsolete and the standards mediocre, at best, they’re still better than practicing what’s seen on TV and in movies. TV and movies are where most gunowners’ training takes place and that’s bad news.
If you would like to follow my Patreon page to go into more depth about point shooting and personal protection incidents, click on the image below.
tacticalprofessor 
You must be logged in to post a comment.