Thank you for the occasion to answer these questions. It gives us the rare opportunity to showcase One Shepherd capabilities.

Q. How long has your training facility been in operation and do you have a publishable list of references from agencies, units, or previous clients who would offer an independent review of your training?

A. One Shepherd was absorbed as a division under TacComp Media, LLC in the State of Missouri in 2007. Unquestionably, that date makes One Shepherd a newcomer to the commercial contract training. Yet we are not new to training.

One Shepherd’s Student Leadership Program (SLP) has been in existence since 1981. The SLP is a 3-year course that includes 42 days of field training. This program has produced more than 200 alumni members over the past three decades. Today our alumni serve in all four branches of US military service, law enforcement and security agencies, as well as OGA and NGO.

The short answer is – Yes, individual references and recommendations can be provided upon request. References are not made public. So – No, there is no published review other than those customers who allowed us to use their quote for marketing purposes. You’ll see those comments listed throughout our web site at the bottom of each page.

Q. While you paint the picture with very broad strokes, many of us here have multiple combat tours, not "campaigns," and are fairly versed in a wide variety of tactical shooting techniques and advanced firearms tactics. What else do you offer that might pique our interest?

A. The US military recognizes Full Spectrum Operations (FSO) – specifically Kinetic Operations (KO), Counterinsurgency (COIN), Peace Operations (PO), and Stability and Reconstruction Operations (SARO). While all of these operations are “campaigns”, traditionally speaking the military considers only KO and COIN to be “combat operations”. The rest are called Military Operations Other Than War (MOOTW).

Thus, the word “campaign” is simply meant to be more inclusive.

That’s important because we don’t want to appear to minimize anyone’s contributions to national security. Take for example the current SARO in Haiti. Haiti presents a very austere environment. There are numerous security agencies and even military personnel involved in this campaign. And if One Shepherd appears to only value combat tours, then by exclusion we would then seem to devalue other campaigns.

It’s not merely semantics. It’s recognizing the contributions of military, law enforcement and security professionals as a whole to national defense.

As for piquing the interest of potential clients, I’d expect that the professionalism of the One Shepherd cadre instructors would do that. And yes, an aggregate perspective of any organization is, by design, a broad stroke that’s intended to as a marketing tool. Yet it is also easier for potential clients to internalize. For example, saying that our cadre have 95 years of higher education is a bit abstract. Saying instead that on average our cadre possess a bachelor degree is more concrete.

For better or worse, what seems to pique more interest than anything is that One Shepherd is the sole commercial provider of MILES gear worldwide. Yes, other commercial companies have it, but because they obtained this simulation system through a Homeland Security grant, they are forbidden by law to use if for anything other than that specific client!

One Shepherd on the other hand makes MILES available to a wide variety of clients. Otherwise, you’ll have to enlist four years in a combat arms branch to use it. So yes, MILES piques interests.

Q. Please describe the capabilities of your live fire ranges with regard to target array, lane size and firing order size that can be accommodated, and if you have reactive targets.

A. One Shepherd does not teach marksmanship. We recognize marksmanship as a critical skill; however our clients come to our training having already obtained some mastery of marksmanship.

As delineated above, One Shepherd currently employs MILES 2000 for almost all of our training. MILES allows for force-on-force engagements out to maximum effective range of the assigned weapon, and beyond!

No other force-on-force simulation platform can claim this. The M4/M16 series weapon suited with MILES can engage targets from 25m out to 500m with a 95 percent Probability Kill (Pk) ratio. Additionally this weapon simulation system can score kills out to 900m with a 20 percent Pk ratio.

MILES interfaces with all other weapon systems and vehicle platforms – from the AKM carbine to the AH64 Apache helicopter to the M1 Abrams main battle tank. No other simulation does that. And you have to ask yourself, would you want to be hit by a 120mm paintball traveling at 350 fps?

Bottom Line: All targets are “reactive” because your opponent will be a thinking, moving target that is working in concert with his teammates to destroy you! All One Shepherd training involves 360? firing ranges.

Q. What Sims / UTM offerings are available and do you provide the converted weapons and ammunition? Are your instructors certified in this training aid?

A. One Shepherd surveyed our clients as we set up operations in 2007. A representative from one local LE agency told us that his unit had plenty of Simunitions platforms in terms of handguns and sub-machineguns. He then stated emphatically that they use almost exclusively airsoft in their training.

Obviously I asked why. He clarified that although they do use Simunitions for training twice each year, the expense of the Sim/UTM round was so significant that their department couldn’t afford to use them often enough to get comfortable with the platform.

That left us with a conundrum. MILES gear isn’t effective at ranges under 25m. This is where other force-on-force training platforms excel. So, we had to decide if we were going to employ Simunitions, airsoft, or paintball. (We ruled Nerf guns out immediately.)

Ultimately we decided on airsoft due to price and availability. But frankly, not just any old airsoft system would do!

The Professional Training Platform (PTP) Gas Blow Back (GBB) are designed specifically for military, law enforcement and security training use. They cost twice as much as a standard airsoft pistol, but replicate the intended weapon system in size, weight, operation, disassembly, and effective range out to 35m.

One Shepherd employs PTP GBB Airsoft simulation for all CQM training. And yes, we’re well versed with its capabilities and limitations.

Q. Would you be willing to offer a course to one of the forum members so that a firsthand review from a known entity could be obtained?

A. The short answer to that question is, yes. The caveat however is that One Shepherd understandably has expectations of the reviewing source.

The first expectation is that a fair review is conducted. For example, if the reviewing source happens to be an owner, staff or cadre instructor for another company or agency, that’s okay – as long as it is disclosed up front and clearly for the reading audience. In short, bias has to be disclosed.

The second expectation is that the reviewing source must have an identified target community, and must be recognized as an authoritative voice within that professional community.

Of course One Shepherd cannot ask for a positive review. We’re confident enough that we’ll achieve that. However we must ask that the results of the review are shared with an identified professional community. Otherwise, One Shepherd is spending considerable energy that gains nothing in return.

If you’ve got someone in mind, or even just a specific One Shepherd course in mind, please contact us.

Thanks again for this opportunity to showcase One Shepherd training capabilities!

Thanks Brock.

It seems like most of what you offer is related to MILES. It's very cool to be specialized and remain focused.

I think that for our membership, some will likely be very interested in what you have to offer. I do hope so, but would be concerned about varying skill levels, instructor to student ratio (class size,) and student group skill levels.

From the answers you have provided it seems that your organization is well prepared to train or facilitate training for DoD clients. You have made no mention of security related course or material and do not provide marksmanship training.

Is there a driving program or material that is directly related to the security industry? After all, this is SecureAspects, not a forum comprised of active or NG component folks. What I was looking for is something to pique the interest of our membership and quite honestly, citing professionalism is not the greatest tactic in this crowd. A high level of instructor professionalism is the standard and anything less would be met with disdain.

What I (we) are looking for is what is it that will cause a private military contractor, detail member, or security agent to want your training at your facility?

Just to clear up something. It absolutely isn't semantics. There is, as you or your staff with actual combat experience will recognize, a definite difference in a campaign and a gunfight, getting blown up by an IED, or shot at with RPGs and the like. What I said wasn't to lessen the contributions made by anyone but to differentiate in the realism of training required to satisfy the client.

Dynamic training can be accomplished with MILES but it is just an expensive version of laser tag. There is no immediate recognition of who shot who (blue/blue) and there is no determination of "is that guy with blanks actually shooting at me or my friend 10 yards away?"

We recognize marketing as marketing. What we're after is a straight up review from one of our own or someone else in the PMC / Security community. If you can provide us with that, it would truly be of benefit to the forum.

Thanks.

Brock wrote:

And to clear up one final misconception. Chris Larsen did start the SLP for students, spent time in the sandbox training the Iraqi military, and was the writer of The Small Unit Tactics SMARTbook: Recognized as a doctrinal reference standard by military professionals around the world. He however does not have any sons.

Hey, memory is faulty, but I remember him being rather proud of the young man that was with him when we went shooting who had just enlisted, and I believed him to be his son.

It's been a few years, though. Pardon the error.

Kpel308, please understand no offense was intended. Just having some fun. The Marine was one of the former SLP members, and Christopher is very proud of them and the tradition they represent.

Reference:

Jody, we’re working on locating a client from the security community as a point of reference. Frankly, the people that come to mind immediately are several One Shepherd cadre instructors. One of our instructors is former LE from St. Louis PD, another is a Tactical EMT from central Missouri, yet another is an NRC security officer from Missouri. Two former clients come to mind also, but both are serving in either security or training capacities in Afghanistan currently.



This is a “due out” that we’re working on.



Of course, a recognized voice from within the SAG community would probably be best. And again, that offer is still open as well.



MILES 2000:

We understand the apprehension of MILES from military veterans. Older versions were just fancy versions of laser tag, true. Today’s MILES is an evolutionary breakthrough.



This is not to say that MILES is the be-all, end-all to live simulation. That’s simply not true. NO simulation acts like a bullet – except an actual bullet. And that’s fatal.



Yet advanced generations of MILES actually DO tell you “who shot whom” via a Player Identification (PID). Yes, we absolutely can tell fratricide on the BLUFOR and OPFOR training teams.



Furthermore, the “Near Miss” indicator clearly identifies when the blanks are being pointed at YOU and not the man standing 10m away from you. This is a very powerful simulation system that simply is not replicated by any other force-on-force simulation in the world. That’s why MILES accounts for more than 85 percent of all live simulation training conducted by the US Army.



Now, having said that, the US Army still manages to “get it wrong”. Get out to one of the Combat Training Centers (CTC) such as Hohenfels Germany, or Ft. Polk LA, or Ft. Irwin CA. What you’ll see is that TAS-C issues MILES to each BCT en masse. That means as the 3,500 Soldiers and Marines are issued MILES, there is no time, no manpower to zero these weapons. All too often the case is that MILES is simply slapped on the weapon for training, as if to say, “That’s good enough.” But it’s NOT good enough.



That’s why One Shepherd maintains our own weapons. We mate the MILES to each weapon, zero and confirm this zero at least twice per year. YOUR WEAPON IS ZEROED! And that’s absolutely critical for confidence in the weapon system for training.



Security Courses:

Jody, you are correct in saying that One Shepherd currently offers no courses with a specific focus on security professionals. True. But we do offer courses that apply to your profession.



Gunfighting Courses were first introduced by One Shepherd with a focus on the patrol officer. With that in mind, our Gunfighting Courses are applicable to LE, military, and certainly security forces armed with rifle or carbine. More recently we’ve introduced a handgun phase to these courses, and continue to tailor the Gunfighting Courses to each client agency. Our handgun simulation currently includes the Glock 17 and the Beretta M9, for obvious reasons.



The Insurgent Warfighter Course (IWC) has raised the eyebrows of training professionals in several government agencies, including security services – which honestly surprised us. After discussing the IWC further the reason became apparent.



Just like DoD agencies, security services have a great need to “know thy enemy”. The IWC offers precisely that. Note: the IWC is NOT COIN. Instead it is insurgency from the perspective of insurgent organizations! That’s a completely different animal.



The IWC covers insurgent warfighting from a tactical view. That means command and control, logistics, task organization, and yes – small unit TTP.



Unbeknownst to us at the time, it turns out that One Shepherd is apparently the only company offering this training! The US Army’s Red Team University offers this training (only to DoD clients) at the strategic and operational level of warfare. True. But Red Team University doesn’t offer this information at the tactical level of warfare. One Shepherd does.



In armed combat, the enemy gets a vote, too. And that’s why the IWC should be of specific interest for all security professionals.

I'd like to join in but I'm afraid I will not be as eloquent as my friend Brock. I am part of the cadre for 1 Shepherd. I am former LEO but I am re-certifying with the MO POST at the end of the month. I've worked primary as LEO but I have been a Process Server for the last 3 years.

I joined 1 Shepherd through the Student Leadership Program (SLP) because of my oldest son (I have 3 sons still at home). The SLP is part of what 1 Shepherd provides as a leadership skills and tactics training program. I am the only current father son team in the SLP. 2 of my sons are currently involved in the 3 year program. There have been other father son teams who have participated in the past, but they are the exception not the rule. The SLP is only one facet and probably not what you would be looking at for your particular application. I would suggest you look at thier Force on Force, AR15 course, Lightfighter or Insurgent warfare courses.

The questions you have asked are good one but they reflect a industry mindset. I have been through all types of department paid training from red handle gun course, FATS, defensive rifle and other reactionary shooting drills. I would not use any of them to describe 1 Shepherd.

1 Shepherd uses the Miles which is different than anything the police academy can offer. If fills the gap that Airsoft or Simunation leaves. The ranges miles offers is limited by your marksmanship and the terrain your operating in. After Mumbai I was a range officer for a LEO/DoD "Force on Force" course. Miles allows them to enter into ranges that extend beyond the accuracy or other training platforms. The people taking that course were allowed to engage target using all their training. They had situations with moving (screaming) people and terrorist with AKs and miles. We were able to give a safe training environment where the officer had to move, find cover confirm targets and shoot from multiple angles while being shot at. It was not the old stump the chump training.

The down side to miles is it does not lend itself well to the close range interaction drills. If I wanted to approach and cuff the suspect, miles system wouldn't be my first choice. However all the training I have ever been to was close in with sim or redhandle. Longer ranges were left to paper and live rounds. The miles allows a training platform that extends the range of training and provides a training environment with live thinking reacting targets.

I also have learned a lot about 4th generation warfare through 1 Shepherd. This training was not offered through the department and I still think it's a gap most officers need to fill. Police, Security & EMT professionals are moving into a new era of emergency work. All you need to do is look at Israel and other countries to see where we might be heading. We need the platform that miles offers and we need training for those situations before we are faced with these types of emergencies.

Sorry for the length and please ask me anything about the training
Dan R
St Louis, MO

While your input is welcomed, you have already stepped on your own toes by not posting an introduction. Let that be your next step please, Warlord.

Most of the membership here has trained with MILES. Though I'm not sure what units Brock was referring to, as we zeroed miles before every exercise. EVERY system was zeroed. I agree that as a tool it has its place. In mid and low intensity conflict, especially in built-up areas, I would view it as a limited tool. With no pain consequence, no splash to observe or recognize... it is just not the training aid of choice for me.

Asking DIRSEC or some of the other guys who have used sims, milsim-fx kits, UTM, Paintballs would likely reveal that when there is a pain consequence or an added sense of realism in the exercise it is of much greater benefit to the student.

The benefit of inoculation to stress is the primary factor I recognize as being absent from MILES training. Toss in the skewed perception and gaming due to cover vs concealment in real life vs MILES and you have another drawback.

Brock, one more question I do have regards the training of other than US citizens. Do you offer your training to anyone other than those from the US or is it restricted? We have numerous members here from nearly every continent and I'm sure they'd like to know.

Our training is open to everyone (as long as they're not a felon). Although some events are closed to specific clients, those are not posted or advertised.

We also do completely understand the benefit of the "pain consequence" in training. Stress inoculation is a very important part of training, and it needs to be included in training. However even without the pain of a Sim round, I bet you would be surprised at how stressful MILES can be when implemented correctly. Sims, paintball, UTM and other similar platforms are a very strong simulation platform when the fighting is directed more towards a close in fight. These systems excel at ranges from 0-25m, and this is the range that MILES just starts to begin to shine. Correct me if I am wrong, but I seem to remember reading that the average distance of a firefight in Afghanistan is over 300 meters.

As to the skewed perception on concealment vs. cover, we are confident that professionals know the difference. They would be attending to better themselves; Not to play stump the chump hiding behind a pile of leaves.

I don't mean to take away from the validity of any of your points as they are all very strong. As well, they are all very serious issues that we contemplated before jumping onto the MILES simulation platform.