MilitaryForums.co.uk

Please see

http://files-upload.com/125202/combat.pdf.html

to get the 1985 unarmed combat syllabus. This is password protected. The password is:

suprastar

The syllabus isn't too different from when I was in training in 2001, so I assume it hasn't cahnged a great deal since then.

Baz

this is most likey because of my computer but i cant download it can some one who has please put it into a diffrent format or email it to me thanks a mil

Do you have adobe acrobat installed?

yes i do but the web crashes when i go to the downloading screen

Sorry, but whats the point in this??

AJtothemax wrote:Sorry, but whats the point in this??

Whats the point in what? If you mean the original thread post, then it's plainly obvious what the point is.

No i was just hoping if someone would elaborate further on why they are posting royal self defence stuff up here, thats all. For what ever reason, just wondering how it benefits members properly.

No drama though.

kanedaRMC wrote:Cheers will hav a look at this,although when i went to an inside week at Lympstone they said they only learn a very simple form of judo, no offense just locks and blocks,so this should be a good read

somehow i think thats wrong.
a soldier like a RMC needs to be able to effective in multiple roles. simple does not always mean ineffective too.
blocking a upward knife thrust with a low cross block followed by a kick to the knee is a simple move. however, it doesnt mean its simple to carry out in a proper combat situation.

the above can be mastered in a matter of minutes in slow time, but to be effective, many hours of training need to take place.

secondly, a soldiers job is an offensive one, even in a defensive battle.
when defending a building, soldiers will still shoot offensively (ie to kill or wound out of action). defensive only unarmed combat is impracitcal for a soldier. in almost any situation, peacekeeping or war, a soldier involved in unarmed combat will need to take offensive action to defeat the attacker. nothing would end if all the soldier knew how to do was block and parry off attacks.

the RM boasts about how commando training is pretty much unchanged since WW2 (i remember seeing footage of soldiers training during ww2 doing the death slide between two massive cliff faces, with what looked like explosions spraying them with water half way through. however that probably doesnt happen anymore :-p).
i dont think that could be claimed if the commandos of ww2 were taught numerous 'silent' assination techniques, for sentrys and such, but the RMC's of today where not even taught how to break a nose or KO or stun an attacker.

im not saying your lying, its probably that either you misunderstood, or he wasnt truthful in what he said.

I dont know whether this has been dropped but i hope it is as i think its in the best interests of everyone.

None of us here know (excluding former and serving) about RM CQB techniques alright.

Probably best to leave it at that.

AJtothemax wrote:No i was just hoping if someone would elaborate further on why they are posting royal self defence stuff up here, thats all. For what ever reason, just wondering how it benefits members properly.

No drama though.

I can't understand why you think this. He's posting a document to give you an idea about RM hand to hand combat. Why don't you think members would be interested in this? I certainly am. People post youtub links to RT clips so why isn't this relevant or helping other members?

lodgi wrote:

AJtothemax wrote:No i was just hoping if someone would elaborate further on why they are posting royal self defence stuff up here, thats all. For what ever reason, just wondering how it benefits members properly.

No drama though.

I can't understand why you think this. He's posting a document to give you an idea about RM hand to hand combat. Why don't you think members would be interested in this? I certainly am. People post youtub links to RT clips so why isn't this relevant or helping other members?

Thats all fair and well but the risk of injury and trying it out without the proper instruction however is a risk not worth taking. In the end its up to the user isn't it.

But as i have said, no drama.

Yeah listen to uncle AJ, do as your told children . I don't think anyone's going to kill themselves looking at a combat syllabus mate. You could be right though, you now what them youngsters are like .

No drama, is a phrase my grandad used to use.
We don't all need mothering mate.

Just messing .

ADDiction wrote: Yeah listen to uncle AJ, do as your told children . I don't think anyone's going to kill themselves looking at a combat syllabus mate. You could be right though, you now what them youngsters are like .

No drama, is a phrase my grandad used to use.
We don't all need mothering mate.

Just messing .

I like you already ADDiction - it must be your name.

Yeah cheers I get that a lot. I guess you must to, to the max.

The reason why this has been posted is because there have been some questions recently about what the RM unarmed combat is like, what they teach etc. This is the mainstay of the syllabus they used to teach and that hadn't changed a great deal between 1985 and 2001 so equally I don't think it has changed much between 2001 and 2007. This will give an indication of what is invovled.

Baz