ARmy Rumour SErvice

Originally Posted by Smartarrse

I get the need for extra fitness re P company but why does 4 PARA get away with the extra training (ranges etc) over and above what the rest of the Infantry are allowed to do? whilst the ATU are over regulated to just deliver the bare minimum?

Also, the rumour I heard was that ITG wants the infantry to do TSC(B) to Phase 1 qualify and then for CIC to be 100% Phase 2 course - any thoughts out there?

Yes. It's a good idea and long overdue.

Regular CIC amounts to 14wks "all-arms" Ph1 followed by 10wks Inf-specific stuff. Other TA trades do 2 weeks plus trade training, so why shouldn't the infantry?

Speaking as one who's done both, I learned next to nothing on CIC. Possibly the platoon attack was new to me, but not much else. I fail to see how an opportunity for more time in the field, more exposure to section weapons and more range work could result in a poorer infantry soldier.

Of course, getting someone to stump up for the extra MTDs will be fun, likewise finding extra capacity at Pirbright/Grantham/Catterick/other. I forsee people complaining about having to take four weeks annual leave to qualify as a trained soldier as well, but the corps seem to manage it.

Originally Posted by The_Duke

Good stuff.

How is the range package to get them to be a competent, confident shot on whatever weapons you would carry looking? The package to allow them practical experience of map reading? etc, etc.

It is not just about settling them in to your unit and preventing them dropping themselves in the shit - it is improving their skills as a soldier at the most basic level.

Yep, the skills are poor but workable. Mine get SAA max during training as a priority but shooting takes practice.

I hear what you are saying and quality is something of a standard for your unit. In mine, shit skills are seen as a challenge for the jncos to get sorted.

The crow is a CD. The RTC burns on the programme. My job is to populate it & fill in the blanks. There are priorities. SAA is my no 1 I won't have cunts on the range. 2 is very gently pushing them onto CMT 3 tout suite. Fitness is a Sqn activity and we don't seem to have issues, they get ironed out at RTC. Other MATTs are also done at Sqn level. I don't expect a crow to know survive to skive cover to cover for example. IA drill yes. Nav? Takes practice. Mentored. BCD? Mentored. CIED. Mentored in with a nice trusted Tom to quietly answer bone questions and instil confidence.


Vehicle famming is a big priority as is tentage. These are our bread & butter. There are others, chain of evacuation, all things medical/CEG. That is why people join us. As we are live & always do med covers I suppose that the driving and First aid is priority after passing out.

The crow is a blank CD. RTC formats it, I/we populate it!

The Duke's cunning rewrite of standard TA recruit training:

ATUs remain the controlling body with the final authority to sign recruits off as trained.

Large parts of the syllabus currently covered onTSC (A) get handed straight back to units to be taught in house. It will become a unit responsibility to teach drill and all MATTs except SAA, CBRN and fitness. This will be done by way of recruit training/holding platoons at unit or sub unit level as appropriate. OCs/COs will have to sign to certify that the training has been conducted, just as they do for their trained soldiers. Any who say that they don't have the quals to teach it will have to explain how they have been justifying their certs of efficiency for years.

By removing all of these elements from the TSC A training programme, there will be more time left for the important bits of basic soldiering - skill at arms, living in the field and fitness. Soldiers will not be deemed "trained" until they can pass the basic MATT1 level of these elements.

End result is a soldier who has reached MATT 1 level fitness (PFT to time appropriate for age/sex and ACFT) and SAA (ACMT to TS or CI as appropriate). In other words, they have demonstrated the ability to pass the most basic of annual test that aour regular colleagues are expected to be able to pass every year.

Also having a proper posting to an ATU part of a set career path with no promotion above approx Cpl/ Sgt without one. The actual instructor training may be part of this so units get back fully trained instructors when the posting is up.

And the shit canning of the bloody stupid idea of defered passes of CMS(R)/TSC Alaphabet (what ever a recruits course is called this week) Grantham are particularly fond of giving people deffered passes have the minerals to tell people they have failed and they need to come back or get rid if they are not sutable

Or, of course, we could all just read the FR20 executive order, await the imminent full A2020 announcement, and then integrate. Once the NEM is in place and the TA (Army Reserve) is under new TACOS with an overarching element of compulsion to attend, we will be part time regulars and everyone will be happy.....

Originally Posted by quiller

Also having a proper posting to an ATU part of a set career path with no promotion above approx Cpl/ Sgt without one.

How would that work? That would be an unnecessary posting for those on high pay band SNCO path (e.g. some Sigs trades, I'd guess Int). Why should the TA be different to the regulars?

Originally Posted by The_Duke

Large parts of the syllabus currently covered onTSC (A) get handed straight back to units to be taught in house.

NO! Recruits appear to be better trained, I put this down to having instructors who know the subject. Any unit can do matts, yes but other skills - general army skills, seem to be imparted to a higher level than before. Good instructor skills from one cap badge flow over into other corps.

You might get a mixed bag of instructors but the mix must allow better selection of instructors, surely??

p.s. they are some of the reasons I'd have liked to see Para's at ATU, maybe on separate courses for the most part but the odd joining in where necessary

p.p.s. Having groups of recruits together should also allow them to see the bigger picture, better to have a recruit decide to change capbadge than leave as would be the case in a regimental system.