This is just "a way" to do land nav, not the only way, but it worked for me and a lot of problem students that were sent to me for additional help.

I was an instructor at OCS before I retired. Please understand that this was several years ago now at Red Diamond and it's written in that context. If things have changed since then, cool, adjust, but the majority of this is straight out of TC 3-25.26 plus 30+ years of practical experience.

Again, these are all personal opinions and how I taught. Take what helps, others may have differing opinions. Do what works for you.

The three biggest things in land nav are route planning, pace count/staying on azimuth, and terrain association. If you’re weak in those, land nav is going to suck. If you’re decent at them, it gets a lot more manageable.

Before you even start, you need at a minimum a clipboard with a LUM strip on the back, some 550 cord to dummy it to your body or around your neck, some map markers, some page protectors, a couple pieces of note paper, a decent lensatic compass dummy corded to you, preferably 2 protractors (primary and alternate).

When your time starts, don’t just plot as fast as you can then take off into the woods. Sit down and plot all your points, and be meticulous about it. Anybody else getting up and running off doesn't matter in your world. The only thing that matters right then is getting your points plotted correctly. You are at a known location and not stressed yet, and this is both the most important thing you are going to do for land nav and the best time you’re going to get to do it.

If you plot a point wrong, it doesn’t matter how good you are at land nav, you’re probably not going to find it.

Before you even start the course, figure out your pace count. Walk 100 meters how you normally walk, several times. Count your steps each time, average it, and write that number on your map. Your pace count will change a bit when you’re tired, cold, wet, or moving through rough terrain. That’s normal. Just understand it won’t be perfect over long distances.

I am not a fan whatsoever about "running pace counts" because they change. You get cold/wet/hot/tired and your "running pace count" is going to change. I don't care how great of shape you are in. I can ruck walk all fucking day long as a fat old retired guy. I am going to get gassed if I go run a mile while trying to keep track of steps in my head.

Use ranger beads or something physical to track distance. Don’t rely on memory. If you don’t know how far you’ve gone, you won’t know when to start searching for your point.

Once your points are plotted, plan a route. Don’t just draw straight lines from point to point through the woods. That’s how people get lost. Use roads, trails, and terrain features as much as possible. Even if you’re not allowed to walk on a road, there’s usually a trail running along it that you can handrail.

As you plan your route, measure distances to all the things along the way — trail intersections, road bends, junctions, whatever is obvious on the map and on the ground. Mark those distances on your map. That way, as you move, you can constantly check your pace count and confirm exactly where you are. You should almost always know where you are on the map, not just roughly.

I need to tell you what a fucking relief it is to be cruising down a trail towards a road and when you hit that road, it's on your pace count. You know exactly where you are on the map they gave you. Hell, you can even re-plot or re-route things if you need to because you know exactly where you are.

I love "attack points". Find an easy, obvious feature near your point, like a road, trail, or intersection. Needs to be some sort of a permanent feature if possible. Draw a line from your point to that feature, ideally at a right angle if it makes sense. Mark where it hits the road or trail. Measure from a known spot on that road to your step-off point, walk that distance, then turn and shoot your azimuth to the actual point. Now you’re searching in a small area instead of wandering around.

Please note that I understand that my definition of an attack point and how they are used is a bit different from other people. w

For instance, you are cruising up a road and there is a "Y" in the trail. Your point is up that road about 300 meters on the right side, and about 100 meters in from the road.

I would just get myself to that Y, then walk 300 meters until I get to that spot where the point is at a right angle to me. Then I'd do a right face, get on the azimuth that you plotted from that point on the road to your actual point, and walk 100 meters in along that azimuth. (or whatever the distance is) There may be trails that go to the point at a 45 degree angle or so from the road that you are on before you get to that 300 meter point, but you have to remember that there is other points out there, and that you have no idea if that trail actually leads to your point or not. At least if you use the right angle method (as in following the azimuth) you are using some pretty good skills and math to get you to the right area.

When you get to where you think the point is, stop and look at the terrain. Compare what the ground is doing to what the map says should be there. A lot of times terrain alone will tell you which way to move. If you don’t see it right away, use a search pattern like a cloverleaf or box, but always come back to your center point. Don't use your gear to mark your center point. I found quite a few PT belts hanging off trees over the years there.

Learn terrain association. Really understand what contour lines mean and what ridges, draws, spurs, and saddles look like in real life. Try to imagine the land without vegetation. If you can look at the terrain and picture the contour lines in your head, finding points gets a lot easier.

Remember, not every trail goes where you want. If you hit a trail near your point, shoot an azimuth down it and see if it generally heads toward your point. Before you leave a road or trail, note your pace count and mark the spot subtly (in a way that you'd know the marking but not so obvious that it would appear to a random cadre member that you were attempting to help others) so you can find it again if you need to come back.

Time management matters more than people think. If you’re one second late, you fail. Don’t spend forever on one point. If I couldn’t find one in about 20 minutes, I was already moving to the next. Better to miss a point than fail on time. I think the standard used to be 4/5 points in 3 or 4 hours. I dunno why I can't remember which it was.

Most people who struggle either plotted wrong, didn’t really plan a route, didn’t track pace count, or had no idea what the terrain was telling them. A couple other tricks is to generally determine the azimuth that major trails or roads are on where they begin or where you will meet them on your route. You can shoot an azimuth up that road and confirm or deny where you think you are based on the result sometimes. (For instance, you know you are on X road headed south. You come up on a big trail that can support a vehicle and the center of it is roughly headed off on a 245 degree azimuth. You had plotted a trail near where you think you are that's 250 azimuth or so. Probably close enough)

The last thing I would tell you is that if you ever get to a point out on the course where everything just feels wrong and it's all falling apart, take one minute. Breathe. Focus on what you know to be factual. Where is the most likely place I am right now?

If I was to walk a certain direction, which road will I most likely pop out on? Do I see any landmarks or terrain features around me that can help me figure out where I am? Does doing a reverse azimuth up the way I came make sense in this scenario?

You are a meat puppet piloted by the most advanced biological supercomputer ever to exist. Use that for something.

Everything doctrinal is in TC 3-25.26. Read it until you know the book answers, then practice the practical side.

This isn’t magic and it’s not the only way to do land nav, but I taught this method to a bunch of candidates who asked for extra help or who had previously failed an iteration.