CF training School system

[Darth_Hamel]

Just wanted to start a general discussion on how the CF school system could be improved [as in courses beiung run through training centres like the Infantry School, CFSCE, CFSEME, St. Jean ect.]

I joined as a sig op and did one summer at CFSCE before crossing over to the dark side and spending this summer at the infantry school doing CAP. Having also talked with people who did their EME and LOG training in Borden I realised that all three schools had the same defects, namely:

1. C**k for no legitimate reason, while letting deserved faults go unnoticed.
2. Little serviceable equipment.
3. Teaching a "standard" that is only used at the _____ school, making you have to re-learn everything when you are posted to a unit.
4. Total lack of communication between individual instructors, and with higher ups.
5. Teaching us how to beat them damn'd commies should they try to invade West Berlin.
6. Lack of motivation from force posted instructors.

I understand that a lot of these problems are just a part of the way the army has always been and always will be, and that running a relevant course is extremely difficult. That being said does anyone have any ideas for improving the system? Here's one.

Prior to unification training was run by units in the combat arms. SO your BMQ, SQ and Basic Infantry were all run through your regimental training centre. This at least reduced the problems of the battalion not giving you enough equipment and learning a standard different from your unit's. I also suspect that the instructors were of higher quality, because as a general rule the best instructors are the ones temporarily posted from a battalion. The obvious problems are that this system still does not cover the reserves or support trades.

However I think that if the regular force was given a tasking to training as part of their off tour duties then you would always have at least one coy of each trade that could run courses under a training platoon supplemented with reservist instructors. There are a lot of problems with this system, but does anyone think it would work better than the present system.

 

[TangoTwoBravo]

There are advantages to regimental "battle schools" run by the regiments in their home locations.  The staff get a break from the normal routine of regimental life without having to leave.  The unit has a vested interest in the standard of the candidates.  In theory, you should have battalions and sub-units available post-deployment to teach courses.

The disadvantages are potential shortfalls of specialized equipment, training aids and classroom facilities.  The regiment may often interfere into courses (parades, sports days, duties etc).  As an army you may end up for varying standards across the army (even more than today).  It would be hard for the army to implement change with that much diffusion. You might not get the undivided attention of the unit.

You can do it, but don't think that you will slay all the dragons you listed in your preamble (you'll still get lots of your problem 1 and 2). 

I would say it would be fine for DP1 infantry.  Armour and artillery may face issues with training aids such as vehicles and specialized instructional tools, but they could pull it off.  It would have to be the main effort for the regiment, which may be hard to do with composite task forces.

I would not recommend it for officer training.  It could work for recruit training, and you could potentially take guys off the street and send them to the RCR "Depot" in Petawawa or Gagetown (it would move around between battalions) and train them up to standard. 

 

[Mark M]

What about taking people from CSOR and having them train new recruits when they are not on standby for a mission?

The reason that I am suggesting this is two fold: It will benefit the recruits and it will benefit CSOR as I will attempt to explain.

The soldier of today needs to know how to handle the tactics of guerrilla warfare as is demonstrated in the Middle-East as well as the potential for a full scale war.  By being trained by a CSOR operative, soldiers will learn from a person who has combat experience in fighting such tactics.  The recruits will therefore learn from firsthand experience on some of the things to expect and be better perpared mentally for their tour.

The way that it would benefit CSOR is that by training the new recruits, they will develop their leadership skills that will help them perform the task of working with conventional forces.  This will help the recruit as well in potential future missions because they will be familiar with some of the operatives in CSOR and help build bonds with them.  It will also give CSOR a chance to know what the unite capabilities are from first hand knowledge from the CSOR operatives that trained them.

 

[big bad john]

What about taking people from CSOR and having them train new recruits when they are not on standby for a mission?

The reason that I am suggesting this is two fold: It will benefit the recruits and it will benefit CSOR as I will attempt to explain.

The soldier of today needs to know how to handle the tactics of guerrilla warfare as is demonstrated in the Middle-East as well as the potential for a full scale war.  By being trained by a CSOR operative, soldiers will learn from a person who has combat experience in fighting such tactics.  The recruits will therefore learn from firsthand experience on some of the things to expect and be better perpared mentally for their tour.

The way that it would benefit CSOR is that by training the new recruits, they will develop their leadership skills that will help them perform the task of working with conventional forces.  This will help the recruit as well in potential future missions because they will be familiar with some of the operatives in CSOR and help build bonds with them.  It will also give CSOR a chance to know what the unite capabilities are from first hand knowledge from the CSOR operatives that trained them.

CSOR has enough on its' plate.  It has to train constantly to maintain it's edge.  This is a non starter.