2 MI Bn Ex GREEN WARRIOR

Green Warrior - your opinion please...

  • Fantastic - should be a month long!

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • As good as it can be realistically

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Noy bad overall

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • A waste of time - why bother?

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    1
ALREADYJACKEDGENIUS said:
PartyLineGang said:
. .....
PLG said:
Can anyone else deliver CI/Sy trg for 2 MI Bn?

I know of at least 1 contractor, active in ICAREC, based in the 2 Bde area who would be more than happy to give you a capability-rich proposal for exercise VIGILANT MARSH.
As the training sponsor you would simply need to outline the objectives, conditions, performance and standards.


AJG - How many times have I told you the most important condition is `budget` :lol: :lol:

By the way would you be up for 10 days in the Canaries ? A moderately easy script to learn and only active for 4 days. Normal rates apply !
 
ALREADYJACKEDGENIUS said:
PartyLineGang said:
So where does your theatre specific and role specific training fit in? How can we offer commanders counter-intelligence advice unless we have a detailed understanding of the sy threats in theatre? On the last Ex GW, those about to deploy prepared a 'real time' theatre SIPE brief, used the current Theatre Sy Directive/report formats and were exercised using downgraded/re-worked CI casework from HERRICK as well as being introduced to HERRICK TTPs/R2 on the 'Green Skills' side.

Is there not a clear advantage to this? How can we bind disparate CI/Sy operators into a cohesive Sect without exercising them? How can we be confident that they can deliver what is required of them as individuals and as a CI/Sy Sect?

But it was so much more fun muddling through and making it up as you go along.

Seriously as a relative outsider now, this seems like good news. Far better than b0110cking people for poor pistol drills, when they have not touched one for 6 years, and misguided Warrant Officers getting injured, trying to keep up with their soldiers, doing things like house assaults, that none of their Infantry counterparts would do :wink:

I agree, for what it's worth! Some more of this prior to Granby would have helped a great deal. Better still if we could have trained alongside our TA comrades before they joined us. We spent 6 weeks looking at each other as if we were in a zoo, except no-one knew what side of the wire they were on. Pleasing to see that this at least appears to be a thing of the past!
 
Bound_Apprentice said:
[quote="ALREADYJACKEDGENIUS

I agree, for what it's worth! Some more of this prior to Granby would have helped a great deal. Better still if we could have trained alongside our TA comrades before they joined us. We spent 6 weeks looking at each other as if we were in a zoo, except no-one knew what side of the wire they were on. Pleasing to see that this at least appears to be a thing of the past!

Ex GREEN WARRIOR is fairly unique within 1 MI Bde as it ties in both the trade and green skills at CT3 level and is very clearly focussed on Afghanistan. We're clearly making an investment in our soldiers in order to ensure that they are able to deliver what is required on operations as well as preparing them for future roles and responsibilities across the Corps.

1 and 4 MI Bns have similiar events but are largely focussed on the integration of trade skills. Is there room to develop Ex GREEN WARRIOR as a 1 MI Bde Ex? Well, there are plenty that say yes - let's have a Force MI Coy PDT package. However, an equal number cry No! Whilst the CS, GS and CI/Sy elements contribute towards a common goal, they are very clearly separate entities in theatre and must be trained as such. Why add an unecessary layer of bureaucracy in training which isn't replicated in theatre they ask. As for our TA cousins, well they inevitably loose out at present unless they are warned off for an Op tour 6 months out.
 

CRmeansCeilingReached

ADC
Moderator
PartyLineGang said:
What form of PDT should 2 MI Bn adopt? What do you think MUST be included and what's a 'nice to have'. Do we need to balance trade skills with broader military skills or intelligence management with command and leadership? Is there a need for physical stamina? Do we need a live range package or an FTX phase?

Should we abandon it in favour of bolting on to an Inf BG or Bde going through an OPTAG delivered package, CAST or MRX? Can anyone else deliver CI/Sy trg for 2 MI Bn?

no longer in the battalion, obviously. but for what it's worth... (and based on the last GW i attended in mar / apr 07)

1. first week - the package was excellent. graduated range package culminating in fire team live F&M; extensive training in contact drills (foot & mobile) from someone who really knows his stuff; trauma / enhanced first aid (excellent instructor back then, don't know if he's still in the Bn). variety of other interest lessons / background activity. (as we were briefed on the new BCCT concept on the OP MI managers a month later... and the army introduced the first BCCT instructor course about 4 months later... it was apparent that 2MI Bn were way ahead of the curve in making sure our soldiers were adequately prepared for the unexpected.)

i would have binned the BFT as unnecessary; we weren't there to complete ITDs, and it took something away from a very professionally run week 1. contact drills and endless F&M are quite knackering enough, thank you! it's almost as if people think you can't have training without some sort of minor fuckabout. :)

2. second week - the CI part of the exercise back then was unrealistic. it sounds like that has been sorted, with the use of scenarios based on real cases etc.

3. i thought the contacts etc added value and focussed the mind. it engendered the attitude that you were going to get hit every time you went out of the gate - which meant admin, drills, battle prep, briefings etc were taken seriously, and not just an aside. because we knew something was going to happen on every job - people had the correct attitude. there was very little "thumbs up bums" when we departed the patrol base.

4. being out on an area was useful - taking people out of their comfort zone. even if the PB etc was slightly unrealistic, that's not the point. it got soldiers used to working in small teams in unusual surroundings, minor discomfort etc. (the small number of JNCOs who STILL bitched about "being on exercise" - well, it doesn't get much cushier on exercise than a solid roof over your head, centralised cooking for the boilies, portaloos, hot water for washing...)

5. absolutely key in my opinion was the fact that we trained (and lived) in the sections with which we would deploy. it was extremely useful to see the guys over a prolonged period, and learning who was good at what etc. being able to get to know the team - drawn from all over the battalion - in a safe environment was very, very useful.


overall, the lasting impression of GW1/07 was - excellent in most respects, but the CI serials were almost an afterthought, and the exercise scenario was totally unrealistic. everybody knew where / when they were deploying. as was pointed out back then - we would rather have realistic cases and a scenario based on herrick (clearly the future even back then), than a "fantasia" style gimmick.

but as it sounds like that lesson has been fully taken on board - i'll bet the feedback from the most current attendees will be largely positive...? (touch wood)

and for those jumping down the throat of OI&S - i read it as him playing devil's advocate, rather than seriously suggesting we don't train the troops.
 
Didn't attend, so quite appropriately cannot comment on the exercise content. However, any opportunity to get disparate Sections to begin to bind and work together, be introduced to 'real' Theatre specific issues/TTPs should not be missed.

I take it that this was in effect an MRX as opposed to PDT?

The true value can only be judged by those who participated. Give them a couple of months and then canvas while in theatre. Test and adjust accordingly. I know that the Ex was warmly received by a sister Bn...
 
Didn't attend, so quite appropriately cannot comment on the exercise content. However, any opportunity to get disparate Sections to begin to bind and work together, be introduced to 'real' Theatre specific issues/TTPs should not be missed.

I take it that this was in effect an MRX as opposed to PDT?

The true value can only be judged by those who participated. Give them a couple of months and then canvas while in theatre. Test and adjust accordingly. I know that the Ex was warmly received by a sister Bn...
 

252_me

Old-Salt
People are getting really upset over this one. I suggest you all read the Mounting Instruction. You need a worryingly little amount of Trg to deploy as an IR to HERRICK. Unless I've read it wrong* OPTAG and MATTs does actually cover you!

I know of a JNCO in my last unit that did 6 months on HERRICK with just his MATTs and OPTAG, admittedly he wasn't closing with and killing the enemy.....................

* always a possibility
 

Dontdreamit

War Hero
:D
 

pointyhead

Clanker
252_me said:
You need a worryingly little amount of Trg to deploy as an IR to HERRICK. Unless I've read it wrong* OPTAG and MATTs does actually cover you!

I think you are quite correct as to what is actually mandated for an IR to complete prior to deploying. However prior to my last tour, OPTAG and MATTs were the only trg that I completed and it was woefully inadequete. Rather than just completing the bare minimum, shouldn't we prepare the troops that are deploying as best we can?
 
pointyhead said:
252_me said:
You need a worryingly little amount of Trg to deploy as an IR to HERRICK. Unless I've read it wrong* OPTAG and MATTs does actually cover you!

I think you are quite correct as to what is actually mandated for an IR to complete prior to deploying. However prior to my last tour, OPTAG and MATTs were the only trg that I completed and it was woefully inadequete. Rather than just completing the bare minimum, shouldn't we prepare the troops that are deploying as best we can?

Perhaps not suprisingly, I see a clear requirement for role and theatre specific pre-deployment training in addition to MATTs and OPTAG and the odd visit to PJHQ. The Corps has a terrible habit of picking up a soldier employed in one role and dropping them into theatre at short notice and expecting them to simply get on with a job he's not familiar with.

The demands on all capbadges have changed significantly over recent years with INT CORPS soldiers regularly stagging on in FOB Sangars, moving by road and heli and being required to communicate clearly using the appropriate report formats, administer life saving battlefield first aid and shoot straight! They also need to be robust enough to endure the tempo of Ops and the operational environment.

We're not talking about fighting through a Taliban position with a bayonet between our teeth or calling in air strikes but we must be prepared to make a broader contribution on Ops. We're seeking to balance fundamental green skills with trade knowledge. I also feel that we should not shy away from developing command and leadership in our soldiers - we spend far too much time managing personnel and procesess in bks.

In essence, we need to be credible in our rank, role and responsibilities and the CI/Sy Sect must also be able to inform the Comd as to how the Sy threats may impact on his current/future ops and we must contribute to maintaining the Comd's freedom of action.

Sadly, our recent operational deaths and injuries reflect how much the Corps has been 'pushed forward' in theatre. Ex GW is essential in my view but it's clear that not all agree.
 

252_me

Old-Salt
pointyhead said:
252_me said:
You need a worryingly little amount of Trg to deploy as an IR to HERRICK. Unless I've read it wrong* OPTAG and MATTs does actually cover you!

I think you are quite correct as to what is actually mandated for an IR to complete prior to deploying. However prior to my last tour, OPTAG and MATTs were the only trg that I completed and it was woefully inadequete. Rather than just completing the bare minimum, shouldn't we prepare the troops that are deploying as best we can?

At no point did I state that the above is acceptable, I merely mentioned current policy.
 

Alfie_Boy

Old-Salt
CRmeansCeilingReached said:
i would have binned the BFT as unnecessary; we weren't there to complete ITDs, and it took something away from a very professionally run week 1. contact drills and endless F&M are quite knackering enough, thank you! it's almost as if people think you can't have training without some sort of minor fuckabout.

Imagine that, CR campaigning to have a bit of PT binned - nah, no way, I ain't having that lol :roll:
 

CRmeansCeilingReached

ADC
Moderator
Alfie_Boy said:
CRmeansCeilingReached said:
i would have binned the BFT as unnecessary; we weren't there to complete ITDs, and it took something away from a very professionally run week 1. contact drills and endless F&M are quite knackering enough, thank you! it's almost as if people think you can't have training without some sort of minor fuckabout.

Imagine that, CR campaigning to have a bit of PT binned - nah, no way, I ain't having that lol :roll:

funny fucker, i never saw THAT one coming when i posted it :)

read the op mi managers review and you'll see i was asking for more PT on that. have no objection to PT, but think that sometimes organisers will stick a PFT into just about anything - because they think they ought to. but then, this was almost 2 years ago and it might have been binned in the interim.

Dontdreamit said:
I seem to remember another recent thread where a jnr re-iterated something similar, albeit less diplomatic, and raised some heckles amonst the older members of the Corps past and present..... :roll:

DDI - if you are really trying to ride pointyhead's coat-tails... perhaps you would like me to clarify matters with excerpts from your humble PM apology after that particular thread? :roll: you were incredibly disrespectful in a number of ways, and knowing pointyhead, i very much doubt he would want to be associated with your comments.

believe it or not, you do not have to educate your seniors / elders about life in the army. they are well aware of current ops, and many have another 10 or 20 years of experience in the army on top of that.

when you post your arrogant, ill-informed drivel, perhaps you ought to take the deafening silence from your JNCO peers as a combat indicator. you're not the first "annoying know it all" JNCO in the corps and you won't be the last. but at the moment, i would say that you are quite possibly the most high-profile one. :roll:
 
Dontdreamit said:
I never claimed to be know it all, far from it. The majority of my posts on the previous thread significantly appreciated the experience they had. I merely said that the role of the Jnr OPMI in modern day is different from what it was pre 2001.

:? I'm all ears...
 
johnny_english said:
Bound_Apprentice said:
[quote="ALREADYJACKEDGENIUS

I agree, for what it's worth! Some more of this prior to Granby would have helped a great deal. Better still if we could have trained alongside our TA comrades before they joined us. We spent 6 weeks looking at each other as if we were in a zoo, except no-one knew what side of the wire they were on. Pleasing to see that this at least appears to be a thing of the past!

Ex GREEN WARRIOR is fairly unique within 1 MI Bde as it ties in both the trade and green skills at CT3 level and is very clearly focussed on Afghanistan. We're clearly making an investment in our soldiers in order to ensure that they are able to deliver what is required on operations as well as preparing them for future roles and responsibilities across the Corps.

1 and 4 MI Bns have similiar events but are largely focussed on the integration of trade skills. Is there room to develop Ex GREEN WARRIOR as a 1 MI Bde Ex? Well, there are plenty that say yes - let's have a Force MI Coy PDT package. However, an equal number cry No! Whilst the CS, GS and CI/Sy elements contribute towards a common goal, they are very clearly separate entities in theatre and must be trained as such. Why add an unecessary layer of bureaucracy in training which isn't replicated in theatre they ask. As for our TA cousins, well they inevitably loose out at present unless they are warned off for an Op tour 6 months out.

Because GW doesn't integrate across the full FMI spectrum, it's probably safe to say the exercise is CT2.5, although it could equally be sold as the CI&Sy MRX :wink: . Your point about the 1 MI Bde Ex is interesting, for if it included all the FMI capabilities, it would be a true CT3 exercise. It would also allow the Comd to 'sign off' FMI Coy as 'fit for purpose' - much as a GM Bde Comd would do for his BGs. Is there an alternative mechanism?
 
PartyLineGang said:
Another 2 MI Bn GREEN WARRIOR has drawn to a close with a misty eyed 'ENDEX' so, let's here it.

A well resourced, well structured and focussed PDT package or a waste of time? Balanced and progressive or an unjustified thrashing? Enjoyable or, frankly, dull? A good Sect building event or a chance for the DS to enhance their OJARs/SJARs?

Relevant, realistic, rewarding or reprehensible?

I think we need to break off from the " MI Bn Concentration Camp thread. Ex GREEN WARRIOR is a long way from the Ex GREEN METTLE and the 'jamboree' that we've had in the past. So, have your say.

As an aside, no bad thing I would say. 3 x 2 MI Bn SSgts, heavily involved in the exercise over the years (as training staff and exercising troops) all come off the SSgt to WO2 board. Go figure!
 

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top