Flashlight Articles In American Rifleman

BruiseLee

Enlightened
Joined
Feb 2, 2003
Messages
207
Location
Los Angeles
The April 2003 issue of American Rifleman has two articles on tactical flashlights. One article concerns the Surefire Institute, the other covers the basics of the latest generation of lithium powered and rechargeable tactical/weapon lights. Interestingly, the author states a light with as little as 15 lumens of power can have applications in a tactical situation.

For those of you who don't know, American Rifleman is one of the official magazines put out by the N.R.A. If you aren't already receiving it, join the N.R.A. today and do your part to protect your Constitutional rights!

Bruise
 

Size15's

Flashaholic
Joined
Aug 29, 2000
Messages
18,415
Location
Kettering, England
Someone who know what they're doing can use a lit match stick to their advantage in a "tactical" situation. Having more light at your fingertips is one way to help things along at bit. A bit like taking the bag of throwing-stones off a SpecOp bloke and giving him an MP5 I suppose.

Thanks for the headsup. Is it much different from the Combat Tactics magazine?

Thanks

Ak
 

BruiseLee

Enlightened
Joined
Feb 2, 2003
Messages
207
Location
Los Angeles
[ QUOTE ]
Size15s said:
Thanks for the headsup. Is it much different from the Combat Tactics magazine?


[/ QUOTE ]
/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gifI never got a copy of Combat Tactics Magazine. It really sucks here in L.A., because none of the supermarkets carry any of the "good" magazines like Gun and Ammo, SWAT, Combat Handguns, etc., anymore. They have long since bowed to the gods of political correctness.

American Rifleman is a good, but not great magazine. It's a nice mix of product reviews, looks back at firearms history, news about the NRA, and updates about the current political situation as it applies to lawful gun owners.

The best part about it is I tend to trust what their writers say a little more than a more commercial magazine since I feel their loyalty is to their membership first, and to their advertisers second. Not quite as fun to read as some other gun rags, though.

Bruise
 

tkl

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Aug 24, 2002
Messages
2,332
Location
Tx
i tend not to read the gun rags as they choose advertisement dollars over honesty.
 

Blikbok

Enlightened
Joined
Apr 10, 2002
Messages
898
While I would also put the AR above most other gun magazines in the ethics department, it's not very far above. The thing is full of ads, sometimes near the products they review.

The Tactical Light article struck me as being written immediately after reading a Surefire catalog, and I dismissed it nearly immediately. While I am a fan of Surefire products, I am not a fan of the Surefire company, and I choose to buy their products because I like them, not because they say they are the best.
 

PieThatCorner

Enlightened
Joined
Feb 22, 2003
Messages
583
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Bruise,

I haven't read the AR article re: the application of a 15lu light for a tactical scenario, but was wondering if the writer articulated if it was for target ID discrimination.

In my experience, given the following scenario (low-light/no-light, no other light option available, force on force engagement), the 15lu is sufficient for the above mentioned identification of your target. For that matter, more than enough light to allow you to align the sights of your weapon on your intended target. I can functionally use my SF A2's three LEDs for a no-light CQB situation if needed; it's throw is not far, but for any close contact engagements (usually well within 7 yards), I can still visually ID my target given the worse case scenario of no ambient light.

I'd prefer the higher degree of light, of course, but it gives food for thought when packing away a backup light when you're confronted with a situation in which your life will depend on it. I've trained for many years for low-light armed confrontations, and one thing I've discovered that is true for many individuals is that once your primary light is dead, any useful light is better than none.

-Jim
 

Blikbok

Enlightened
Joined
Apr 10, 2002
Messages
898
I agree with Pie.

I believe the primary purpose of a combat light is to identify the target. http://www.nrahq.org/education/guide.asp "Know your target and what is behind" and around it. Since firearms intended for self-defense are often used in low-light, a flashlight with a momentary switch is a must-have.

The dazzle effect or combat-grip are secondary to the ability to not shoot the cat.
 

MP

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Mar 27, 2003
Messages
4
I too read the AR article on tactical flashlights. I believe the author was indicating that manufacturers make tac lights starting at 15 lummens and up (to about 500). It has been my experiance that while 15 lummens is not what I prefer, it would probably get the job done if needed. (This would probably fall inline with the age old debate of 9mm vs .45). Its easy to qualify the effectiveness of 15 lummens, take an ordinary 2 D-cell flashlight w/fresh batteries into a dark closet. Wait about 3-5 minutes for your pupils to dilate, then shine it in your own eyes. My experience is you will reflexively close your eyes or look away. Any one care to guess how many Lummens a common 2 D-cell flashlight is? By the way if you want a rag thats a great read try American Handgunner, it's one of the best on the market.
 

Blikbok

Enlightened
Joined
Apr 10, 2002
Messages
898
However, the reflexive reaction to bright light is easily overcome and can be fought through. In my experience, the "temporary blindness" is highly over-stated, and only becomes real beyond 300 lumens.
 

MP

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Mar 27, 2003
Messages
4
Blikbok,

I couldnt agree more with your posts (all 3 of them). Though I don't own a cat. My dog would appreciate not getting shot.

MP
 

PieThatCorner

Enlightened
Joined
Feb 22, 2003
Messages
583
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Bottom line is, 15 lumens is enough for target discrimination in a CQB scenario. It simply does not possess the ability to cause a substantial amount of the secondary benefit found in higher output lights.

Quite frankly, any advantage one gets from creating a temporary blinding effect, thereby distraction, during an armed conflict is always good. It's a force on force time issue. But first and foremost, target ID is the absolute must. Hell, I can do that with my Arc AAA in a 7 yard combat drill.

-Jim
 

brightnorm

Flashaholic
Joined
Oct 13, 2001
Messages
7,160
[ QUOTE ]
Blikbok said:
However, the reflexive reaction to bright light is easily overcome and can be fought through. In my experience, the "temporary blindness" is highly over-stated, and only becomes real beyond 300 lumens.

[/ QUOTE ]


There was some interesting discussion of this in PistolSmith. Here is pg 5 of that thread.

Brightnorm


LIGHT AS A FORCE OPTION - PISTOLSMITH THREAD - KEN GOOD
 
Top