3rd class Training for TA

Discussion in 'Army Reserve' started by polar, Mar 5, 2008.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Well, expect another whinge thread from RSigs next week (alright today).

    I can't believe that we've had 10+ years of complaints about a certain course, and still nothing has been sorted. I know a site member has done a lot to sort this but I feel they've been badly let down by the regulars and civvies they work with.

    The courses are normally two weeks long, wasting TA soldiers time on drivel or nice to have subjects, instead of essential topics is disgusting.

    Although I detest our works lack of QA dept, someone independent should validate TA courses. If School of Infantry Warminster can get it right for all the courses I attended, then Blandford should be able to - or did Warminster give me higher standards.
  2. msr

    msr LE

    Transfer to a unit which listens / cares.

  3. I need to sort this problem before I do that, I can't let it lie.
  4. Write to your MP, or MOD.

    I don't suppose it is any better in some regular units and i have heard there are some real issues in training units, with ALL those civvies!!
  5. ...what are you drivelling on about?

    Get a grip man.

    Did you pass?
  6. Having done CATAC as an Inf Coy Comd and then RSigs TA Sqn Comd at Blandford I can only say I agree. The content of the latter would not have taxed a 4 year old.
  7. Since the mid 90's nearly every class 1 operator course has had a complaints lodged against it (the current 2 Sig bde comd is aware of this as he dealt with my complaint several years ago).

    The only thing good about these courses has consistently been EW

    Have had a basic insight to officer training@Blandford and it was a far better than soldier training
  8. Transfer to a unit which listens / cares.


    Does your unit need an Arty Int bloke ? :idea:
  9. scaryspice

    scaryspice LE Moderator

    [Specific comment from me on Class 1 course deleted as it appears that Polar isn't necessarily referring to the same thing that I am]

    However you are wrong that "we've had 10+ years of complaints about a certain course, and still nothing has been sorted". you know as well as I do that the first two combined Class 1 op courses ran smoothly, had good feed-back and were seen as a significant improvement.

    Trossachs - Don't disagree with you about the TA Sqn Comd course, however yet again we are talking history here not current practice. The Sqn Comd course is now a joint TA/Regular course and I think you will find opinions have changed.

    Polar - as for your comment that "someone independent should validate TA courses" - they do. Not heard of EXVAL? This is how I heard about the problem this time.

    By all means pass this up the CoC - I would welcome Comd 2 Sig Bde adding his weight to the official complaint that will result from this specific incident.

    However, please recognise it for a specific incident and do not tar the whole Blandford course staructure with a single brush.

    Polar - if you can PM me what you have heard I would be pleased to include the comments in my statement about this to a higher level of the CoC.

    Edited to add: well I would have, but I can't act on unsubstantiated rumour and things that people have heard happened but can't give details of.... Polar may well have a point but then again this might just be the usual thing where one person's opinion (not you Polar - the person who told you) of what the course should contain isn't the same as his CoC's opinion.

    I've said it before but I'll say it again. This course is designed according to the latest systems approach principles. It is based on an operational performance statement of the capability required, which is approved by 2 Sig Bde, 12 Sig Gp and HQSOinC(A). The formal training statement is then built around the OPS and details what training needs to be provided to achieve that capability. DCCIS then design the course around that required training. Not all R Signals TA courses meet this standard yet and we accept that as work needing to be done. The Class 1 tech course will be the next in April.

    If the training is not delivered correctly or to the stated standard then I agree there is room for comment and the students have the chance to do so. However if someone on the course doesn't like the actual subject matter or content - too bad. It's there because we require a common standard for everyone and obviously some will have a better start state than others and so will find some aspects easier. We can't keep tweaking course content to suit every individual complaint - it's a systems approach and that means systematic evaluation and improvement as well.

    Opinions are like bumholes - we all have them. Now if anyone has any facts - I'd love to know. (this is not a pop at you Polar!)
  10. But thats still internal (isn't it?). I'd been on three courses at the School of Infantry and all tried to give the TA soldiers the instruction critical to their jobs. None of this nice to haves, maybe this comparison is flawed, this training was from a different era.

    Our corps is organised in a very different way to many other corps, it puts a lot of responsibility in planing in the hands of its SNCO's. You shouldn't expect any less from a young corps.

    So in the terms of ICS capability I'm a key stakeholder in the delivery of ICS training, the regular person above me less so (and admits it) and the regular above them even less so (quite a lot less). Guess I mean they will not necessarily see the benefits from improved TA capability at their next unit.

    Check your PM's I might have some ammo soon :D

  11. whinge, whinge, zzzzzzzzzz
  12. msr

    msr LE

    If he was a customer, he would be called 'sophisticated', no, wait - he is.

  13. Its atitudes like that, that have so many heading towards the the door.
  14. scaryspice

    scaryspice LE Moderator

    True. However as you know there are some of us who might listen. Thanks for the PM.