there is a reason why so many people return on their own dime
DARC vs. ALERRT
- Thread starter Matt Landfair
- Start date
Akfirecop
Practical Tactical Podcast
I'm a huge fan of DARC. So much so that over the last 3 years I've spent something like 8 weeks there. That's almost 800 cumulative hours learning and teaching the techniques. And I am but a new jack as compared to most of the instructor staff there.
It will change you. Go.
I've seen everything from seasoned SWAT dudes to patrolmen who've never held an AR. All greatly benefitted.
There have only been a few duds. And they were notable. Lol
Having left our team, in part because of my vehement proponent stance on DARC (assassin school according to a couple of head up ass administrators) and having to endure annual in service which is ALERRT based, I can say without a shadow of a doubt DARC is a better system.
It will change you. Go.
I've seen everything from seasoned SWAT dudes to patrolmen who've never held an AR. All greatly benefitted.
There have only been a few duds. And they were notable. Lol
Having left our team, in part because of my vehement proponent stance on DARC (assassin school according to a couple of head up ass administrators) and having to endure annual in service which is ALERRT based, I can say without a shadow of a doubt DARC is a better system.
Y'all fools on the crack!
borebrush
Not Pumpkin
If you aint havin fun, what are ya havin? Dont clear your schedule yet though. Its gonna be a while before I can afford anything new, cool, or fun.
Dr. No
Regular Member
For those of us that are a day's drive away from DARC, I'd like to talk a little about ALERRT.
I've trained extensively at ALERRT for the last 3 years as it's in my back yard and our team utilizes the facilities quite a bit. Several of my team are instructors. I've never experienced "Anti-SWAT" mentality, and I am thinking that poster mis-interpreted the instructors because most of the instructors who are non-mil are active SWAT commanders, team leaders, and operators. In the active shooter response they will tell you that SWAT is not going to help you and that shit will be over before they can get there. SWAT type tactics (surround and call out) are not good choices in an active shooter as it will result in innocents getting murdered. Patrolmen, Detectives, the guys on the street are the ones who will be up front and need to be the hunters. It is your duty to put your body between this psychopath and the people he's trying to slaughter and then shoot him in the face.
The active shooter program ALERRT put together has been instrumental in changing the tactics for everyone all over the country. Like every other class I've ever been to, some techniques are not what I agree with or prefer, but overall the program is absolutely solid and has already saved children's lives. The fact that the FBI stole it and are now pushing it out across the country is a big message.
There are multiple levels of training offered there too, not just basics. They also offer an excellent TCCC program which has been adopted by my department and others in this area. There have been numerous civilian saves already based on that training.
Best of all, we all know the only thing cheaper than a cop is two cops... and ALERRT classes are free. The tuition is funded through federal grants and Southwest University. This is a huge step in getting a lot of smaller departments on board with the program and making sure we as a community are all on the same page.
I have never been to DARC and this is in no way meant to disparage it, so chill out on your sacred cow. These facilities are on different sides of the world and both offer excellent training.
I've trained extensively at ALERRT for the last 3 years as it's in my back yard and our team utilizes the facilities quite a bit. Several of my team are instructors. I've never experienced "Anti-SWAT" mentality, and I am thinking that poster mis-interpreted the instructors because most of the instructors who are non-mil are active SWAT commanders, team leaders, and operators. In the active shooter response they will tell you that SWAT is not going to help you and that shit will be over before they can get there. SWAT type tactics (surround and call out) are not good choices in an active shooter as it will result in innocents getting murdered. Patrolmen, Detectives, the guys on the street are the ones who will be up front and need to be the hunters. It is your duty to put your body between this psychopath and the people he's trying to slaughter and then shoot him in the face.
The active shooter program ALERRT put together has been instrumental in changing the tactics for everyone all over the country. Like every other class I've ever been to, some techniques are not what I agree with or prefer, but overall the program is absolutely solid and has already saved children's lives. The fact that the FBI stole it and are now pushing it out across the country is a big message.
There are multiple levels of training offered there too, not just basics. They also offer an excellent TCCC program which has been adopted by my department and others in this area. There have been numerous civilian saves already based on that training.
Best of all, we all know the only thing cheaper than a cop is two cops... and ALERRT classes are free. The tuition is funded through federal grants and Southwest University. This is a huge step in getting a lot of smaller departments on board with the program and making sure we as a community are all on the same page.
I have never been to DARC and this is in no way meant to disparage it, so chill out on your sacred cow. These facilities are on different sides of the world and both offer excellent training.
Dr No, there are weaknesses to ALERRT as it is being pushed to patrol, and there are differences as to what MACTAC, ALERRT and DARC LECTC do. The fact that the oh-so-holy FBI has scooped up ALERRT doesn't sway me. They've had enough turds that they've pushed before that I don't blindly follow their recommendations, and do due diligence in researching it still. My opinion is they stole it and are using it because they needed a program immediately because of the presidents requirement, and the ALERRT one was ready and able for them to promote without any effort or additional costs.
One of the problems with ALERRT as I see it only focuses on the individual response, and not any coordination or building of the responses as the scope of the potential threat increases like MACTAC was developed for. I feel there are also problems with the focus on not entering a room and doing everything from pinning and threshold evaluations. You say ALERRT may have already saved lives, but it is a matter of time before failing to take into account those walls is going to get LEO's killed.
My state just worked with ALERRT this past year to develop our own program based on ALERRT. They expanded what our LE training calls Tactical Response. There are problems I have identified and am trying to figure out how to fix when I see recruits come from the academy, like stopping in doorways and staying there because they are evaluating the threshold.
The anti-SWAT sentiment I feel has come out a couple different ways. Some have experienced instructors in ALERRT methods that were not SWAT trained or assigned that bad mouthing SWAT methods. Ego was apparently involved. Another way I feel it has come out is the elimination of anything to do with room entries. The constant "This isn't SWAT" kinda creates a division between patrol and SWAT, so instead of working together with the focus of the response needed with elements of similar methods, the message of anti-SWAT has been promoted or interpreted and passed along by various instructors or students.
One of the problems with ALERRT as I see it only focuses on the individual response, and not any coordination or building of the responses as the scope of the potential threat increases like MACTAC was developed for. I feel there are also problems with the focus on not entering a room and doing everything from pinning and threshold evaluations. You say ALERRT may have already saved lives, but it is a matter of time before failing to take into account those walls is going to get LEO's killed.
My state just worked with ALERRT this past year to develop our own program based on ALERRT. They expanded what our LE training calls Tactical Response. There are problems I have identified and am trying to figure out how to fix when I see recruits come from the academy, like stopping in doorways and staying there because they are evaluating the threshold.
The anti-SWAT sentiment I feel has come out a couple different ways. Some have experienced instructors in ALERRT methods that were not SWAT trained or assigned that bad mouthing SWAT methods. Ego was apparently involved. Another way I feel it has come out is the elimination of anything to do with room entries. The constant "This isn't SWAT" kinda creates a division between patrol and SWAT, so instead of working together with the focus of the response needed with elements of similar methods, the message of anti-SWAT has been promoted or interpreted and passed along by various instructors or students.
Curt
Amateur
You can't compare LECTC to an ALERRT Level 1 class if you have been to both. The difference is light years. As I said on the FB page, ALERRT is good to go to while you wait to get to LECTC. The immersion experience, OPFOR, , train-ups, SOP's, multi-layered exercises and the roller coaster ride of emotions and pain make the DARC course vastly superior to any LE training course (since 1983) I have attended. I have my own gripes about the ALERRT program to include the apparent inferiority complex our instructors had including the incessant: "ok SWAT guys, it's not SWAT tactics." We had a fish cop as a primary as well. He kept to his little bundle of cards on his belt thankfully.
Quote from Dr. No: "The active shooter program ALERRT put together has been instrumental in changing the tactics for everyone all over the country"
Many LE organizations were teaching Rapid Deployment/Active Gunman several years before the ALERRT program was started. My intent is not to slam the program, or Dr. No, just point out that many states and organizations were tackling this before ALERRT's stated founding in 2002.
I am happy that training is occurring and that lives may be impacted by the training.
If we want to discuss tactics, further, we should start another conversation in the restricted area.
Many LE organizations were teaching Rapid Deployment/Active Gunman several years before the ALERRT program was started. My intent is not to slam the program, or Dr. No, just point out that many states and organizations were tackling this before ALERRT's stated founding in 2002.
I am happy that training is occurring and that lives may be impacted by the training.
If we want to discuss tactics, further, we should start another conversation in the restricted area.
Last edited:
WayneF
Member
Road trip.
ronin0829
Newbie
I work in Oklahoma. Our agency that oversees training (CLEET) jumped on the ALERRT bandwagon a few years ago and I went through the train-the-trainer program. In two years I have not taught an ALERRT class.
Most agencies in Oklahoma are small, as in, for about a year I worked in a town where I was the only police officer. Team tactics are kinda useless when you don't have a team. Now I work at a regional state university, and all of our officers have been through ALERRT, but still most times we only have one officer on duty.
We have focused on single officer response, as we may not be able to wait for our neighboring agencies to respond. This is where I found the ALERRT program lacking, for my situation/circumstances. Their instructors wouldn't talk about single officer response. The answer we got when several in the class asked was that it wasn't something they promoted, taught, or discussed during their class.
I have not bee to DARC, its on the short list of places to train.
I have been through the NCBRT LASER train-the trainer program, and it was so similar to ALERRT that it was cut down from 24 to 8 hours for those of use already trained in ALERRT.
I teach single officer response based on the RAIDER program of the ALICE Training Institute, and for our agency, in our situation and circumstances, it is a better fit. I do incorporate things from the other two programs, such as officer link-ups, in to my single officer response classes.
Most agencies in Oklahoma are small, as in, for about a year I worked in a town where I was the only police officer. Team tactics are kinda useless when you don't have a team. Now I work at a regional state university, and all of our officers have been through ALERRT, but still most times we only have one officer on duty.
We have focused on single officer response, as we may not be able to wait for our neighboring agencies to respond. This is where I found the ALERRT program lacking, for my situation/circumstances. Their instructors wouldn't talk about single officer response. The answer we got when several in the class asked was that it wasn't something they promoted, taught, or discussed during their class.
I have not bee to DARC, its on the short list of places to train.
I have been through the NCBRT LASER train-the trainer program, and it was so similar to ALERRT that it was cut down from 24 to 8 hours for those of use already trained in ALERRT.
I teach single officer response based on the RAIDER program of the ALICE Training Institute, and for our agency, in our situation and circumstances, it is a better fit. I do incorporate things from the other two programs, such as officer link-ups, in to my single officer response classes.
BklynBacon
Amateur
I've been debating back and forth, whether I should attend Basic SWAT first, or DARC LECTC first. I have done ALERRT, and LASER train-the-trainer already. My department doesn't have a tac team, but we do have several individuals that have already attended basic/advanced SWAT and basic sniper..I don't know when the job is gonna get their heads out of their asses and get a team together..but I'm starting to think LECTC may be more beneficial to my education and tactical toolbox...
Grizzly
Regular Member
Among the many benefits of LECTC it will give you exposure to working with people that are not trained or trained differently than you. And the clusterfun that can grow from those training differences. Which sounds beneficial to your current situation.
BklynBacon
Amateur
Good point my brother..if I'm going to spend a week away from my house, I want to get the most out of it.
I've never attended DARC, but I have attended several TtT courses from ALERRT. Because I have not attended DARC courses, I will stay away from comparing the two.
First, those that experienced the anti-SWAT sentiment either had a few bad instructors, or just got their team panties in a bunch. The majority of my instructors were current or former SWAT guys, and about half of my classmates were on teams. All comments I heard were in reference to "This isn't SWAT, those tactics are different, this is what we teach and why".
Which brings me to my second point, these tactics are kept simple to be taught to line level guys, who may or may not have any interest in training, who more often than not work in rural regions without any type of tac team, who don't have any advanced training, and have only a few days to learn everything. Dumping team tactics and multiple advanced clearing techniques, and expecting guys to understand and retain it all in 2-3 days is unrealistic.
You have to understand the program was created to deal with mentally ill, active shooters, for the line level guy that may or may not have any back up coming. You can see that in the focus of Dr. Blair's study in 2013.
Is it the end all be all? Absolutely not, why would any of us seek additional training any where, if there was perfect, all encompassing training somewhere? Does it have a place, and is it beneficial? Absolutely. I've witnessed ALERRT training spark an interest in many people to seek advanced training, because it opened their eyes. That's worth the cost of federal grants alone, in my humble opinion.
First, those that experienced the anti-SWAT sentiment either had a few bad instructors, or just got their team panties in a bunch. The majority of my instructors were current or former SWAT guys, and about half of my classmates were on teams. All comments I heard were in reference to "This isn't SWAT, those tactics are different, this is what we teach and why".
Which brings me to my second point, these tactics are kept simple to be taught to line level guys, who may or may not have any interest in training, who more often than not work in rural regions without any type of tac team, who don't have any advanced training, and have only a few days to learn everything. Dumping team tactics and multiple advanced clearing techniques, and expecting guys to understand and retain it all in 2-3 days is unrealistic.
You have to understand the program was created to deal with mentally ill, active shooters, for the line level guy that may or may not have any back up coming. You can see that in the focus of Dr. Blair's study in 2013.
Is it the end all be all? Absolutely not, why would any of us seek additional training any where, if there was perfect, all encompassing training somewhere? Does it have a place, and is it beneficial? Absolutely. I've witnessed ALERRT training spark an interest in many people to seek advanced training, because it opened their eyes. That's worth the cost of federal grants alone, in my humble opinion.
JCSpringer
Regular Member
I'm currently in my departments ALERRT inservice program. This is my first formal introduction to it. It is better than the modified T formation thing we were doing before but still uses the flying T as the engine to get us down the hallway. I'm already forming opinions but I'm going to try and keep an open mind and attitude about it. Really I'm just gonna open my little box of crayons and shut my mouth.
I do not like the idea of not addressing the dark corner first. An FBI fof study was cited expressing that the path of least resistance was better in that the shooter, who likely is in the dark corner, would shoot at the guy first in and ignore the second guy through the door..... more latee.
I do not like the idea of not addressing the dark corner first. An FBI fof study was cited expressing that the path of least resistance was better in that the shooter, who likely is in the dark corner, would shoot at the guy first in and ignore the second guy through the door..... more latee.
JCSpringer
Regular Member
According to the academy staff teaching us, our SOP is an combination of ALERRT and some Northern Red (delta cool guy....) stuff. A point which I found both applicable and wasteful was calling everything with an audible (dude at the center top of the T, "open door left, moving left"), never mind if we ever have gas masks or lots of noise on the scene.... Another of the primary concepts which I disagreed with is that control of the hallway is always released as a matter of "putting all of the guns in the room" as you have. Coming from the DARC school essentially the last dude in the room holds the door frame (keeps a toe hold on the hall, and easily maintains the direction of travel). Dumping everyone into the room it was easy for groups to exit and flow the way they came in before realising the error and turning about. Some other things not emphasised like physical link up (t-rex arms or nut to butt) to prevent solo entry were not coached. They had us squeeze up on the triceps but then let go entirely of the officer in front of you.
I really struggle with the notion that a hallway is impossible to hold and is nothing but a death machine and must be avoided at all cost. I don't see how Fighting for the same terrain repeatedly is good. This is tough to do with my thumbs but I'm happy to speak with anybody if it helps.
I really struggle with the notion that a hallway is impossible to hold and is nothing but a death machine and must be avoided at all cost. I don't see how Fighting for the same terrain repeatedly is good. This is tough to do with my thumbs but I'm happy to speak with anybody if it helps.
Txsapper
Amateur
Justin,
I have attended numerous ALERRT classes as it's right in my backyard and I work with quite a few of the instructors. I can't speak to DARC as I've never attended any of their classes.
In regards to giving up the hallway, I've never been in a class where giving up the hallway was recommended. Someone is always at the door frame covering the hallway. Why would you give up the known and not keep eyes on the unknown (rhetorical question)?
I have attended numerous ALERRT classes as it's right in my backyard and I work with quite a few of the instructors. I can't speak to DARC as I've never attended any of their classes.
In regards to giving up the hallway, I've never been in a class where giving up the hallway was recommended. Someone is always at the door frame covering the hallway. Why would you give up the known and not keep eyes on the unknown (rhetorical question)?
Announcing actions/intentions is pretty standard fair for all active shooter tactics/methodologies that I've seen. The idea is when dealing with mentally driven active shooters, not ideologically motivated ones, statistics say most give up or self select ar the first sign of resistance. Announcing actions/angles does two fold, 1)announces you're presence as a potential means of deescalation 2)it forces the person who may never receive, attend or practice these tactics ever again to think about what they are doing as they announce. Right, wrong or indifferent that's they why.
These and similar tactics are aimed at the first responder, not team guys. They're also designed for a very specific threat. A lot of these tactics may be subpar for dealing with ideologically driven threats or skilled threats.
I'll second txsapper, I don't know where the giving up the hallway comes from. Even the DHS single officer response is limited penetration to maintain the hallway. Unless you're talking about an engagement, not just clearing/scanning.
These and similar tactics are aimed at the first responder, not team guys. They're also designed for a very specific threat. A lot of these tactics may be subpar for dealing with ideologically driven threats or skilled threats.
I'll second txsapper, I don't know where the giving up the hallway comes from. Even the DHS single officer response is limited penetration to maintain the hallway. Unless you're talking about an engagement, not just clearing/scanning.
JCSpringer
Regular Member
[QUOTE="Txsapper, post: 21534,
In regards to giving up the hallway, I've never been in a class where giving up the hallway was recommended. Someone is always at the door frame covering the hallway. Why would you give up the known and not keep eyes on the unknown (rhetorical question)?[/QUOTE]
I was told they "want as many guns in the room..." I think it's coming from some Northern Red 4 man hunter cell technique. I guess if it works for Delta... because, you know, SF.
Certainly these half way techniques work great for dudes looking for excuses to self select. I mean that's why some fool's recommended cranking a round into the parking lot to make dude think he's getting shot at, right? But chase 2 motivated guys moving like the Dallas incident and I can only see my departmental guys getting filled in fighting into, out of and across rooms.
In regards to giving up the hallway, I've never been in a class where giving up the hallway was recommended. Someone is always at the door frame covering the hallway. Why would you give up the known and not keep eyes on the unknown (rhetorical question)?[/QUOTE]
I was told they "want as many guns in the room..." I think it's coming from some Northern Red 4 man hunter cell technique. I guess if it works for Delta... because, you know, SF.
Certainly these half way techniques work great for dudes looking for excuses to self select. I mean that's why some fool's recommended cranking a round into the parking lot to make dude think he's getting shot at, right? But chase 2 motivated guys moving like the Dallas incident and I can only see my departmental guys getting filled in fighting into, out of and across rooms.