2LT ReidI at the range with the Revision Sawflys getting in some personal practice time.
Plastics have revolutionized our world and the eyewear industry is no exception. Today's goggles and glasses are far lighter, stronger, and more durable than the simple aviator-type goggles of the World Wars. The US military figured out in the late 20th century the issue and mandatory wear of eyewear fitted with ballistic lenses lowers casualties and can reduce the severity of battlefield wounds.
Out of the set of most recent conflicts, several manufacturers of ballistic eyewear have emerged on top with a line of tough, battle proven products to keep our men and women in uniform stay safe “over there.” One such company is Revision Eyewear.
I was first introduced to Revision Eyewear products back in my time on the USAFA CST. Revision Eyewear graciously donated enough shooting glasses to equip the entire team. They were quickly adopted by all for one primary reason: they didn't fog. When your designated range time is 1700-1900 in the mountains of Colorado during the dead of winter, things tend to get rather cold. Among the shivering bodies that inevitably moaned and groaned at times, not once did I ever hear a complaint about our Sawfly glasses fogging. Even with a balaclava on, the Sawfly stayed clear. After going through three other name-brand goggle/glasses that inevitably fogged up after the first half-hour, the Sawfly truly seemed miraculous
Fast forward to the summer of 2009. I was down in Tucson, AZ where the typical high is over 100 F. Granted, you don't have the humidity floating around like in the southeastern states, but you can easily sweat a gallon/hour under exertion . Even with this temperature extreme, vision remained unimpeded through training, practice, and ACTS matches.
Putting them to the real test, I took them on a 15 mile ruck march through the Rincon mountains east of Tucson. While sweat rolled down my forehead down the front and back of the Sawfly, the worst issue I had was the salt left over on the lense from evaporation. Rubbed that off and I was good to go for the next mile.
The same set of coatings that prevent fogging also provide a scratch resistant surface. I have dropped these in the dirt multiple time and taken plenty of spent shells to the face, but I can recall on two incidences leaving marks on the Sawfly. First, and most embarrassing, I ran face-first into a door that, moments before had been opened to clear a room during training. I'll leave out the details, but lets just say situational awareness pays off if you don't like running into things. The glasses survived with only a slight mark in the bottom left of the lense while I left with a golf-ball size bruise on my left cheek and a bloody lip. Lesson learned.
The second incident involved a reloaded .45 ACP round with a double charge. The round blew the bottom off the magazine while sending a good chunk brass into the shooter's nose. He bled like a stuck pig, but the Sawfly glasses seemed unfazed, leaving only a small spattering of dust-sized blemishes that wouldn't buff out. I have no doubt the glasses saved the shooter from a series of painful surgeries to restore his eyesight. Revision Eyewear claims the Sawfly can withstand a shotgun blast of #6 shot at 16 feet with no penetrations and I believe them 100% after witnessing this incident.
For the blind or nearly blind among us, all of Revision Eyewear's products take a proprietary vision correction insert that fits in the majority of their goggle systems. Clarity was very good overall, with the only distortion occurring at the periphery, no doubt due to the wrap-around design. I never found this a hindrance, however, and movement on either side was easily picked out when eyes were focused forward. I was a bit skeptical on the mounting of the insert inside the glasses (they simply snap in – no gee-golly, whiz-bang here). Throwing the insert/goggle duo forcefully against the wall neither dislodged the insert nor changed its orientation, but left a nice dent in my just-painted drywall. Six months of regular use on the range and hiking revealed the mounting to be a complete non-issue. Simple and sturdy - I like that.
Having now worn a variant of the sawfly for over two years now, I will confidently take these on future deployments. Variant you say? Yep. I managed to get a hold of an older pair of Sawflys and put them side by side (older on the left, newer on the right).
The differences aren't striking, but they are important. For us glasses wearers who are forced to use inserts, the newer design sits more squarely on the face, resulting in better vision correction There was a small, but noticeable difference between the amount of distortion when wearing the older design with inserts versus the newer. The slight angle change also results in the third point of contact – the nose – being more in contact with the nose piece. No doubt this change will vary widely with all the different facial features on there, but the newer design results in a more secure fit for me. Finally, the plastic chosen for the arms has been altered in the current design to what feels like an almost rubber material. Whatever polymer they are using, the increased flexibility will undoubtedly increase user comfort across the spectrum. I can remember the earlier design I used in the CST, when worn with ear muffs for more than few hours, would leave a nice divit in the side of your head and the beginning of a headache. Not so with the newer, “rubberized” arms. I recently spent six, 8-hour days in Nacogdoches, TX attending Combat Shooting and Tactics Tactical Pistol Instructor Course. With a lot of shooting going on, I wore these pretty much straight through each day, never once feeling any discomfort, even with muffs. The new design is a significant improvement.
So, whether you're infantry kicking in doors, a behind the wire “fobbit” on the receiving end of an occasional mortar, a street cop taking down hardened punks in L.A., or just a civilian getting some range practice, the Revision Eyewear Sawfly glasses will not let you down. If you have an older frame design, you might want to give the current model a try. At a working-man's price, the Sawfly won't break the bank. Remember, just because you have two eyes doesn't mean you get two chances to keep your vision.
With the Cold War at an end, the massive machine that was the US Military faced the chopping block. No longer could we justify the thousands of tanks in Europe for a massive land battle across Poland or the hundreds of nuclear armed B-52s ready to ensure MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction). During the Clinton era drawdowns of the 1990's, a great many personnel across the services were cut in just a few years as the Soviet threat tumbled. The Army, probably wisely, kept as many of their combat units as possible while sacrificing the support. The top brass probably reasoned that it was easier to train up “those in the back” should we need them than to rebuild combat units.
Fast forward to 2003. The invasion of Iraq hits off and it is obvious to all that the Army simply doesn't have the personnel to meet their war time requirements. They need support, badly. The air war finishes in record time, leaving the Air Force to CAS (Close Air Support) missions. Now stuck in a war that, by itself, cannot justify the new F-22 fighters, the Air Force struggles to come up with a reason why it should not receive a reduced budget. The stage is set: the Army needs bodies, the Air Force needs justification.
All of a sudden, AF personnel trained in communications, logistics, intel and a multitude of support functions are handed a rifle and keys to a truck. “Convoy up and deliver stuff – watch out for IEDs and guys with AKs.”
To be fair, the AF scaled up their training for those going “over there.” Smallarms, convoy, and even CQB can be garnered from various AF and joint Army courses. For a culture that has long relied on brains rather than brawn, however, the change is slow. What we need is more people with experience in instructor roles filling the gap.
On the advise of Kelly H., I enrolled in the the Tactical Pistol Instructor Course taught by MSgt (USA, Ret.) Paul Howe at his facility in Nacogdoches, TX. As Kelly H. has already written an in-depth report on the class, I'll merely be adding my two cents and a few additional comments. I highly suggest you read his report first to clarify my comments. Now, brace yourself for highly stream-of-consciousness writing!
After driving two days from AZ through a storm that insisted on following my every move, I made it to the barracks. Awesome place, and for six nights, $100 bucks is well worth it. The facility itself is well thought out, but I benefited most by the conversations held in the common room after hours. Housed with me were a full-time banker/ part-time pistol instructor from Colorado, a nuclear scientist from NM, another civilian from Alaska, a soon-to-be-retired Army Sgt., along with two military contractors. Not staying with us were an additional two contractors and a doctor. As one might guess, conversation revolved around weapons and war stories. What strikes you about these gentlemen is the overall lack of chest thumping, war-hero crap I see so much on gun forums. Half of the people there had combat experience, but the stories were honest and to the truth. I can't speak highly enough about the men I trained with and I learned a lot from just listening.
Then there is Paul Howe. There is a presence he carries with him that is hard to describe. An aura, if you will, of confidence, humility, and competence. I had never seen the man before I entered CSAT, but it was instantly obvious what body matched the name. A truly honorable man who went out of his way to make sure you were good to go. During those six days, I never felt like a student, but a fellow soldier. It is a rare gem to find a man who has all the qualifications, is a competent instructor, and projects confidence onto his trainees.
I did, however, get to see his disciplinary side kick in. I don't mean this in bad way – there is a time to kick someone's butt and get them back in line for the good of everyone around. In this case, during the final two days when the student class trained, we had a young man come in with a lot of skills but little common sense. He truly was a good pistol shooter, but had zero real-world experience outside of competition. Mr. Howe teaches shooting techniques in a ladder fashion. One skill should complement the next, whether you are defending your home or storming a city. He has his own, proven methods, and they may differ slightly from the mainstream. Once learned, they make perfect sense when applied to the real world.
It was clear that this young man didn't quite understand this. Fine. You paid your money to come here and you can have your opinion. No problems. But to challenge the instructor, at his school, in front of other students, is bad tact. I'm not talking about simply asking for clarification or a reason why the technique is designed the way it is, but flat out saying your method is superior. Msgt. Howe calmly, but forcefully, demonstrated to him why he was wrong by placing him in his “superior” position and then showing what happened if your combat buddy bumped into you. It left the young man sprawled on the ground, but unhurt, hopefully having learned why the technique was taught.
Unfortunately, that is not the end of the story. Hubris is a hell of a thing, and tends to get one into trouble. I wasn't there, but this is a summary of what I was told:
After lunch the second day, clearly having his pride hurt, the young man challenged Paul to a short steel match ending in the words akin to “I bet I could beat you.” Paul agreed, so long as he could fight him afterword. Clearly taken aback, our young misfit stammered, “But, but you're bigger than me.” Needless to say, he didn't take Paul's offer. Maybe he just needed a kick in the butt, but he fell into line for the remainder of the day. Hopefully he takes the lesson seriously for the rest of his shooting career, or, better, the rest of his life.
Other than that speedbump, the class went smoothly. Of key importance to me, I came back with a solid curriculum for teaching core pistol skills to new and intermediate shooters, whether military, LE or civilian. I certainly feel I can adequately reproduce his curriculum in a manner tailored to my airmen back at my home station. Paul is gracious enough to give handouts to help teach the class as well as provide the mode for new instructors to practice teaching his methods. His pistol shooting standards are superb and difficult, capable of gauging core competencies in just 25 rounds and correcting deficiencies along the way. The standards, along with each module of instruction are simple to setup and demonstrate which is key in giving students take-aways they will remember. Furthermore, this class can be taught without significant overhead in terms of equipment and gear.
As a fairly new shooting instructor I would have like to have seen more shooter diagnostic drills; that is, drills that help show the shooter what they are doing incorrectly/inefficiently. The line, ball-and-dummy, and Mary-Katherine drills are superb in the aspects they handle, but a few more “dummy proof” (I'm the dummy) evaluation-type drills would have been great. I imagine this issue will fade as I aquire more hand-on time training other shooters and develop a keen eye for the less common mistakes/bad habits, however.
Finally, I came away from the class refreshed and re-motivated to take my shooting and teaching to the next level. For those that have never had the opportunity to attend a formal shooting class, the camaraderie among students is generally fantastic. Everyone is there to learn what they love doing, and shooting requires a level of trust found in few other sports. I appreciate the enthusiasm, professionalism, and knowledge that is expressed and we all come away better for it. I can guarantee I'll be attending other classes by Paul in the future and have no hesitation in recommending him to any Constitution-following American.
Written by 2LT Reid I.
All information is the intellectual property and copyright of TTELLC.net and may not be reproduced by any means, known or unknown without prior written authorization.