If you’re shooting inaccurately, it could be due to poor alignment with the target, or it could be due to body movement or hand/arm tremors as you fire. There are now pistols equipped with lasers to help distinguish between these errors. The laser isn’t turned on until the shooter has aimed. If the laser centres on the target, then the problem is with body movement and not with aiming.
Because of the distance between the gun’s sight and the target, both cannot be seen clearly. So should one focus on the sight or the target? The general consensus is that you should focus on the sight. This makes sense, as it intuitively seems easier to put a clear object in the centre of a blurred ring, than trying to put a clear ring equidistant around a blurred object. It also explains why some short-sighted people have been excellent marksmen. But it does cause problems for older shooters.
Unless one is short-sighted, one’s ability to focus close objects, such as a gun sight, goes down as one gets older. It’s possible, however, to have a correcting lens for this, and there are special shooting spectacles which can be adjusted to ensure that the lens is perfectly positioned.
Ripoll et al (1985) compared the gaze strategies of international elite pistol shooters with national near-elite shooters. They found that the near-elite looked at their hand and weapon as they brought it up towards the target, whereas the elite shooters fixated the target, and then brought the pistol into line with their gaze before aiming and pulling the trigger. Compared with the near-elite, the elite shooters were quick to bring the pistol into line, but then took longer to aim and complete the shot.
Although this might appear to contradict the advice to focus on the sight, and not the target, it’s likely that the elite shooters did their final aiming adjustment fixated on the sight, but because the sight and target were in alignment, no difference in gaze would be found by the cameras monitoring them.
The gaze strategy of elite shooters goes beyond sport. For some, it’s been a matter of life and death.
Joan Vickers (of “Quiet Eye” fame) and Bill Lewinski (Force Science Research Centre) studied members of Britain’s Emergency Response Team. 11 were highly experienced, and 13 were younger rookies who’d just completed their training.
They set up a scenario in which the subjects were to provide security at an Embassy. A man gets into an argument with the receptionist, and at some point turns around, taking an object from his coat pocket, which is either a gun or a mobile phone.
In more than 60% of trials, the trainees fired when the assailant brandished a mobile phone, compared with only 18% of elite trials. When the assailant pulled out a gun, elite officers shot first 92.5% of the time, compared with 42% for the trainees. The elite officers were also more accurate in their shooting, with the trainees more likely to miss the target completely.
In the last half-second before aiming, in 82% of their tests the trainees took their eyes off the assailant and attempted to look at their own gun, trying to find or confirm the sight alignment as they aimed. Although 30% of the elite also looked at their gun, these fixations were before they aimed (and fired).
When most officers learn to shoot a handgun, they are taught to focus first on the rear sight, then on the front sight, and finally on the target, aligning all three before pulling the trigger. It seems that through experience, the elite officers had learned to keep most of their attention on the assailant’s weapon. Like Ripoll’s elite shooters, they kept their gaze on the assailant’s weapon and brought their gun up into their line of sight.
This research by Vickers & Lewinski is likely to result in changes to the way that officers learn to shoot. If this had been done before, might Jean Charles de Menezes still be alive today? DD
If you’re shooting inaccurately, it could be due to poor alignment with the target, or it could be due to body movement or hand/arm tremors as you fire. There are now pistols equipped with lasers to help distinguish between these errors. The laser isn’t turned on until the shooter has aimed. If the laser centres on the target, then the problem is with body movement and not with aiming.
Because of the distance between the gun’s sight and the target, both cannot be seen clearly. So should one focus on the sight or the target? The general consensus is that you should focus on the sight. This makes sense, as it intuitively seems easier to put a clear object in the centre of a blurred ring, than trying to put a clear ring equidistant around a blurred object. It also explains why some short-sighted people have been excellent marksmen. But it does cause problems for older shooters.
Unless one is short-sighted, one’s ability to focus close objects, such as a gun sight, goes down as one gets older. It’s possible, however, to have a correcting lens for this, and there are special shooting spectacles which can be adjusted to ensure that the lens is perfectly positioned.
Ripoll et al (1985) compared the gaze strategies of international elite pistol shooters with national near-elite shooters. They found that the near-elite looked at their hand and weapon as they brought it up towards the target, whereas the elite shooters fixated the target, and then brought the pistol into line with their gaze before aiming and pulling the trigger. Compared with the near-elite, the elite shooters were quick to bring the pistol into line, but then took longer to aim and complete the shot.
Although this might appear to contradict the advice to focus on the sight, and not the target, it’s likely that the elite shooters did their final aiming adjustment fixated on the sight, but because the sight and target were in alignment, no difference in gaze would be found by the cameras monitoring them.
The gaze strategy of elite shooters goes beyond sport. For some, it’s been a matter of life and death.
Joan Vickers (of “Quiet Eye” fame) and Bill Lewinski (Force Science Research Centre) studied members of Britain’s Emergency Response Team. 11 were highly experienced, and 13 were younger rookies who’d just completed their training.
They set up a scenario in which the subjects were to provide security at an Embassy. A man gets into an argument with the receptionist, and at some point turns around, taking an object from his coat pocket, which is either a gun or a mobile phone.
In more than 60% of trials, the trainees fired when the assailant brandished a mobile phone, compared with only 18% of elite trials. When the assailant pulled out a gun, elite officers shot first 92.5% of the time, compared with 42% for the trainees. The elite officers were also more accurate in their shooting, with the trainees more likely to miss the target completely.
In the last half-second before aiming, in 82% of their tests the trainees took their eyes off the assailant and attempted to look at their own gun, trying to find or confirm the sight alignment as they aimed. Although 30% of the elite also looked at their gun, these fixations were before they aimed (and fired).
When most officers learn to shoot a handgun, they are taught to focus first on the rear sight, then on the front sight, and finally on the target, aligning all three before pulling the trigger. It seems that through experience, the elite officers had learned to keep most of their attention on the assailant’s weapon. Like Ripoll’s elite shooters, they kept their gaze on the assailant’s weapon and brought their gun up into their line of sight.
This research by Vickers & Lewinski is likely to result in changes to the way that officers learn to shoot. If this had been done before, might Jean Charles de Menezes still be alive today?
"http://www.donneroptometrists.co.uk/sports-vision.htm"
No comments:
Post a Comment