New Fighting Tomahawk Designs

Sun_Helmet said:
Thanks BW Skipper.



Makes sense, different strokes and all that. I don't see anything wrong with carrying a blunt force trauma "tool". It all depends on one's comfort level and training. I think it is a disservice that we have soldiers deployed with knives and "crowbars" who have had little to no training in how to use them effectively. They have to wing it or find training on their own.

My POV is that whether you're carrying a hawk, knife or crowbar, if your life might depend on it then training properly is very important.

A simple example that most everyone can relate to is the SAVING PRIVATE RYAN scene where the US soldier is mounted on top of the enemy and he doesn't know how to use his knife. With proper training, he would easily target both femoral arteries on the lowline. However he tried to muscle it at chest level against a stronger guy. He was actually in one of the most superior positions in empty hand fighting and he had a knife... but got killed by his own weapon.

Same here, you can hand everyone a crowbar , but if the enemy was such that they knew how to fight with one better than the user - then it isn't the best scenario at all to be in. It applies to the hawk (any hawk) and every other weapon.

The reason we have the "exotic" handles/grips is to actually minimize having to retrain muscle memory that is already honed thru hours of reps. If you've shot a gun more than swing an axe, then handing you an axe without training is not a way to make the soldier better. But if you are handed an axe that feels close to the grip of a gun then you're already cut down the time of learning. If you have done thousands of mag changes, then you can use a similar movement with this hawk that will lead you to many practical applications.

Perhaps even on a subconscious level, the positive response to the look of the hawk may even relate to recognizing familiar tried and true shapes. It looks right somehow and when you pick it up - it feels right.
Click to expand...


Here lies the deeper problem, your comparing that which happens on TV (FANTASY) with that which happens in the real world (REALITY) and they are two entirely separate matters. Sometimes I think, you, Sun Helmet, confuse your day job with real world experience and certainly your audience is well left in the dark about your actual fighting experience which from what I hear equals a sum total of 0 versus your being on a handful of warrior movie sets and creating hundreds of warrior comic books.

They say a picture is worth a thousand words, posting a bunch of "Me and Joe Tactical Photo Ops" pictures says more than my words ever will about Sayoc. A virtual, see me standing next to, hanging out with, so and so validation of knowledge. How about some pictures of you chopping down a few trees, ripping up some plywood, even killing a farm animal or two instead of all the theory?
 
Bubbanumber1 said:
Here lies the deeper problem, your comparing that which happens on TV (FANTASY) with that which happens in the real world (REALITY) and they are two entirely separate matters. Sometimes I think, you, Sun Helmet, confuse your day job with real world experience and certainly your audience is well left in the dark about your actual fighting experience which from what I hear equals a sum total of 0 versus your being on a handful of warrior movie sets and creating hundreds of warrior comic books.

They say a picture is worth a thousand words, posting a bunch of "Me and Joe Tactical Photo Ops" pictures says more than my words ever will about Sayoc. A virtual, see me standing next to, hanging out with, so and so validation of knowledge. How about some pictures of you chopping down a few trees, ripping up some plywood, even killing a farm animal or two instead of all the theory?
Click to expand...

There goes Bubba again!
Let's see YOUR pictures, Bubba!! Why don't you come out of the hiding and tell us who you are and what your background and credentials are, as the same goes for you, LOL.

As for showing pictures, most people involved with training and working with elite military groups understand that they should not compromise levels of confidentiality and privacy of the people involved in the training. I'm really surprised that you don't get that? Just how serious is your own relationship with such military groups that you don't get that?

As for why the reference to a movie? He's just trying to get across an idea or concept that the many can relate to.

Where are YOUR combat records, how much fighting and how much fighting experience do you have? I know lots and lots of guys that served in Iraq, actually not many of them have actual combat experience despite being there. Isn't that very often the case in reality? How many soldiers have to get up close and personal?

Again, it's been mentioned before, Mr Kayanan did not go seeking marketing. The group was contacted and their services sought out. So because an elite group felt there was a value to the Kayanan's service, and you don't... why is Mr. Kayanan's background so important to YOU?

As a guy who repeatedly has questioned, challenged and criticized while remaining anonymous, and demonstrating no credentials of your own, again you invalidate anything you have to offer and critique. Dang, why not just post a picture and tell us who you are so we can all know why we should listen to you??
 
On the thread that Mr. Emerson posted validating Mr. Winkler's work with the SOF, bubbanumber1 posted an apology to Mr. Winkler.

Yet he continues to conveniently IGNORE and OMIT the logical conclusion that if Mr. Emerson vouched for Mr. Winkler's work with SOF and Mr. Winkler vouched for mine/STG's by cross -referencing with his own clients then this is no longer a point of contention.

It is as if this obvious FACT is ignored so that he can continually ask insipid questions and moving his arguments around to suit his visceral albeit odd reactions to all things Sayoc.

It is as if he actually believes the readers of this thread are not intelligent enough to follow basic explanations.

It is as if repeatedly apologizing and qualifying his remarks that his incessant ranting does not somehow insult Mr. Winkler's own judgement and integrity.

What's the point of writing these National Enquirer type level of investigative journalism of yours if you can not even concede to previous points which have been answered?

1. Contracts exist
2. Everyone in the know has verified STG
3. INFOSEC is vital to National Security and the safety of our troops.
4. STG has SOF members and high quality instructors within the group.
5. Creating a fake/fantasy hawk and advertising it as an SOF weapon does not even make sense if one considers the individuals involved.
(Why not just promote a traditional tribal hawk by the bladesmith of LAST OF THE MOHICANS and the knife advisor from THE HUNTED?) Anyone here not think it won't sell better?

BN1 asks for proof, yet when proof is given (as much as public online posting goes), he finds another question to skirt around the fact that his whole point of posting in this thread is to try and diminish the efforts of those who actually are doing something about REAL world issues.


As I stated earlier, NOTHING I post will satisfy bubbanumber1 and his "friends" bubbanumber2.5 and bubbanumber90021. Not even taking him to an actual training session and having him experience first hand that all his suspicions and rants were figments of his fragmented logic. Why? because if he exposes his identity then it will actually ALLOW me to prove my points much easier. By exposing his identity he will then have to stand by his rants and the tactical clients we are involved with can read this thread and see who this "expert" is.

By sidestepping this, it allows him to vent/rant/accuse/circle talk.

Bubbanumber1 said:
I think, you, Sun Helmet...
Click to expand...

Change this to I "project" and you will gain more credibility in these parts.

BN1 - How many polite requests from numerous forum members will it take to cease embarrassing yourself and degrading the quality of this forum?
 
Last edited:
Hey Raphael, may I volunteer to do a review of your new up-coming Tomahawk DVD? It was me who did the review of the short hawk clip on your Sama-Sama '03 DVD and a another instructor's hawk DVDs. If you're interested, shoot me a PM or email or something and we'll get together offline. Otherwise I refuse to believe you have anything to do with SOF or the military or even know what a tomahawk is. LOL ;)

-Ryan
 
FSCJedi said:
Hey Raphael, may I volunteer to do a review of your new up-coming Tomahawk DVD? It was me who did the review of the short hawk clip on your Sama-Sama '03 DVD and a another instructor's hawk DVDs. If you're interested, shoot me a PM or email or something and we'll get together offline. Otherwise I refuse to believe you have anything to do with SOF or the military or even know what a tomahawk is. LOL ;)

-Ryan
Click to expand...


Sure thing Ryan! We're waiting on getting our trainers cut and made and getting past all the holiday commitments to put the DVD together.

Thanks for the review.

I believe Andy Prisco of ATC also posted a very positive review of my tomahawk segment here in these forums. I used the VTT trainer for that segment. The ATC hawks are also very fine hawks!
 
Last edited:
Sun_Helmet said:
On the thread that Mr. Emerson posted validating Mr. Winkler's work with the SOF, bubbanumber1 posted an apology to Mr. Winkler.

Yet he continues to conveniently IGNORE and OMIT the logical conclusion that if Mr. Emerson vouched for Mr. Winkler's work with SOF and Mr. Winkler vouched for mine/STG's by cross -referencing with his own clients then this is no longer a point of contention.

It is as if this obvious FACT is ignored so that he can continually ask insipid questions and moving his arguments around to suit his visceral albeit odd reactions to all things Sayoc.

It is as if he actually believes the readers of this thread are not intelligent enough to follow basic explanations.

It is as if repeatedly apologizing and qualifying his remarks that his incessant ranting does not somehow insult Mr. Winkler's own judgement and integrity.

What's the point of writing these National Enquirer type level of investigative journalism of yours if you can not even concede to previous points which have been answered?

1. Contracts exist
2. Everyone in the know has verified STG
3. INFOSEC is vital to National Security and the safety of our troops.
4. STG has SOF members and high quality instructors within the group.
5. Creating a fake/fantasy hawk and advertising it as an SOF weapon does not even make sense if one considers the individuals involved.
(Why not just promote a traditional tribal hawk by the bladesmith of LAST OF THE MOHICANS and the knife advisor from THE HUNTED?) Anyone here not think it won't sell better?

BN1 asks for proof, yet when proof is given (as much as public online posting goes), he finds another question to skirt around the fact that his whole point of posting in this thread is to try and diminish the efforts of those who actually are doing something about REAL world issues.


As I stated earlier, NOTHING I post will satisfy bubbanumber1 and his "friends" bubbanumber2.5 and bubbanumber90021. Not even taking him to an actual training session and having him experience first hand that all his suspicions and rants were figments of his fragmented logic. Why? because if he exposes his identity then it will actually ALLOW me to prove my points much easier. By exposing his identity he will then have to stand by his rants and the tactical clients we are involved with can read this thread and see who this "expert" is.

By sidestepping this, it allows him to vent/rant/accuse/circle talk.



Change this to I "project" and you will gain more credibility in these parts.

BN1 - How many polite requests from numerous forum members will it take to cease embarrassing yourself and degrading the quality of this forum?
Click to expand...


Sun Helmet, It figures you would try to use the comments by Emerson to vet yourself and gain "Military" credibility yet you "Rafael" nor Sayoc was ever mentioned by him.

I read it just the opposite as you in this way, He started off talking negatively about training groups then went on to vouch for Winkler. I understood it to mean these are two separate entity's, one he can vouch for and one, well one has nothing good to say about.

I would be shocked if Emerson would stand up for Sayoc but he is free to do so if he wishes. Evidently he is well aware of my comments concerning all of this. I wonder if Emerson knows anything about you guys "Training Rig Fiasco" where you suggest one carry upwards of ten knives or whatever crazy number of knives it is you guys train with? No explanation needed as your own documents speak for themselves. Im sure "Special Warfare" has a contract for these too.

http://sayoc.com/adobe/Rig.pdf

I have never doubted that some in the military have chosen to train with you guys. What I am saying is that your overall claims are bogus. Because you are having a relationship with individuals within the military is no excuse for exaggerating, claiming, your the go to guys for military knife training and you working with a few guys concerning tomahawks does not equal you knowing shit from shinola concerning what your advocating since there is no known standard and some folks are easily impressed with the graphics of comic books.


My identity must remain a secret because I pissed off a SNIPER! :yawn:​
 
Raphael: I sure would like to see that DVD too. It finally dawned on me what the shape of that hawk heard reminded me of. The Kujong blade! Some years back I trained with Guru Bryant Smith on that weapon and learned the first 6 Jiros. Do the techniques have any carry over from that? This really looks like very interesting stuff. Keep going man.

Best
Dwight
 
Bubbanumber1 said:
No explanation needed as your own documents speak for themselves. Im sure "Special Warfare" has a contract for these too.
Click to expand...

"No need" but why not direct any interested parties to the actual TRAINING RIG FAQ?

The military uses a "rig"/kit to carry their gear. Knife Instructors who know how to utilize that - where to access blades so they do not inflict wounds on themselves, how to draw from it if you have to retain your long gun, how to keep it away from your mags, how to keep it secure, how to keep it concealed undercover, etc. is very useful info to them.

No one stated STG was the be all of military knife combatives. In fact, my second post to you in this forum stated so. Do something productive and offer your "expertise".

Let's get back to the hawks.:thumbup:
 
Dwight McLemore said:
Raphael: I sure would like to see that DVD too. It finally dawned on me what the shape of that hawk heard reminded me of. The Kujong blade! Some years back I trained with Guru Bryant Smith on that weapon and learned the first 6 Jiros. Do the techniques have any carry over from that? This really looks like very interesting stuff. Keep going man.

Best
Dwight
Click to expand...

Hello Dwight,

Much thanks, coming from a well respected instructor as yourself.

I am not familiar with the Guro or weapon you stated but I surmise he is from a Silat background. There might be carryover to some of those lines.

The added front spike is closer to the head axe of the highland headhunting tribes of the Philippines called the Kalinga. Their fighting is documented to be closeup with lots of grabs and binds, which is perfectly suited for the lack of space in some modern scenarios.

The curve on the bit is designed for karambit type close up work. The medium range utilizes the hook or beak on the hawk, since it is designed less to chop or sever a limb (which a normal hatchet would be perfectly suited for), but for enabling the hawk user to get inside the enemy's Boyd loop.

The RnD hawk user's goal is to close fast and keep attacking or breaking down the structure of the enemy without retracting the hawk back for power shot. Rather than trying to cut thru and perhaps miss or not obtain a killshot - The hook could dig in instead. At this stage one can get that killshot or miss the vital target but have the added advantage of embedding the hawk as a natural "handle".

The hawk is designed if you do not want the enemy to get any space between you.

It is designed to cause damage if you are seated or on your back trying to get back up to your feet. You can climb up and use the hawk as a tool to do so or bring the enemy down as you regain your footing. It does not require wide arcs or power shots. We've dug that hook in from about an inch away on various surfaces without any power added. With some pressure (not hard swing) and targeting muscles or flesh, the hawk will easily drive in.

Hooking and impaling movements also assists a user who is without a firearm, but may have another weapon to load his hand, like a knife.

The knife is a quicker draw than a hawk. If the user is trained efficiently in both, he could buy himself enough time to get back on a gun. In a situation where you may only have a knife and hawk, you can deploy the knife - to buy you the half second to draw the hawk.

With the close-quarter attributes of the RnD Hawk, it works really well as a trapping or impaling weapon that complements any sized knife. You can attack the lowlines with the hawk, bring the enemy in, limit his mobility and finish with the knife.

It works vice versa as well, you can use the knife to do damage, and if the enemy decides to create space - the hawk can be used to limit his mobility.

regards,
--Rafael--
 
Rafael: Ah ha ! That is what I thought. Kujong works very similar with both close and medium range engagements. Thanks so much for the explanition. I really hope this thing gets to be very successful. Again very interesting. BTW about two years ago I went sort Silat crazy, can't seem to get enough of it.

All My Best Dwight
 
Dwight McLemore said:
Again very interesting. BTW about two years ago I went sort Silat crazy, can't seem to get enough of it.

All My Best Dwight
Click to expand...

Silat has some wicked knifework. In that pic of the STG group there's a couple of silat guys on there. The guy on the right in the back with his arm draped over another was one of BJ Penn's mentors in the islands. His name is Bahati and has traveled extensively throughout Indonesia researching various silat arts. The guy on the left front row is also a Silat instructor, as well as Tom Kier in the back row.

Just realized you probably meant "KujAng"?
I can see some similarities on the tip if it were reversed.

If you have a background in Silat then the RnD Hawk will be an easy transition. The weapon dictates the movement, so I can see how you'd pick up on that right away.

We'll have to meet up someday when I'm back down in VA Beach, Dwight.

Regards,

--Rafael--
 
Last edited:
Anyone else tired of this Bubbatroll? Sounds like he would rather make senseless arguments than actually try to learn anything. I'm willing to bet that anything that you put out will not be acceptable to him until he gets a free sample, or gets to see some of the classified contracts. I for one say put him on ignore since he won't listen to reason when several people have told him that the information is NOT available to the public for security reasons. Don't feed the trolls.
 
Read the FAQ's... my question was not answered...
I do believe in multiple weapons, but I like having a reach advantage, too...
Therefore, I am not really into knives that much, more for utilitarian uses...
I prefer firearms, canes, walking sticks, pepper gel, etc.
 
i think you are missing the point Glock17JHP, it is a training rig for training purposes. the sayoc guys like to say "all knives, all the time" or something like that but it isn't meant to be taken literally.;)
 
The FAQ's mention both a 'training rig' and a 'full rig', so I would assume the latter is for real-life carry...

So what's the difference?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top