A&ERs or JSP

Discussion in 'RLC' started by farmaggeddon, Nov 2, 2005.

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. Simple question but why are we still teaching EOD / CMD to A&ERs 3/21 when everybody else in the tri-service organisation is working to JSP 364?

    Surely with JF EOD, 0801 Courses, single service publications and teaching, we should be at the same level as everybody else. This is not to detract from demoliltion and burn procedures which are logisic disposal and as such should be covered by A&ERs (at the minute). It is appreciated that 364 is weakly written but if all backed it then it could be improved and A&ERs need updating anyway.

    Granted this is an AT thread but see if I care.
  2. Well, I'll wait to see the finished rewrite of JSP 364 before committing myself to the defence of A&ERs, but the current JSP 364 really is tonk and a lot of it doesn't apply to us as the current EOD remits stand.

    However, the CMD part in A&ERs is a bit of a leg iron, in that strictly speaking it applies only to MACP ops in GB which, although important, detracts somewhat from our claim to be able to do nearly all CMD, nearly anywhere. The title, Stray Ammunition, is also a something of an anachronistic misnomer that doesn't really do our EOD capability justice. UXO or something similar would be better. The principles contained therein are basically sound, if a little prescriptive. The alternative techniques section could be improved upon and dragged kicking and screaming onto the centre stage of our CMD capability.

    If the new JSP 364 adressed these points, I would have no problems in accepting it. If it doesn't, then A&ERs needs to kept, after a thorough rewrite. And yes, I would do it if asked.
  3. General Melchett

    General Melchett LE Moderator

    If you read the current JSP 364 it states that the RAOC! carry out EOD in accordnace with A&ERs. Or some other twonk like that. So that will be why we still teach to it. :)
  4. EinC are custodians of JSP now and as such will easily be able to put in tri-service form that our CMD qualifications won't be recognised. PANTO and 11 have no feedback into the production of this I'm told and as such we are in danger of missing the boat. :roll:

    Melcher's knows that even though it says RAOC, the RE refuse to accept our courses now when working in the JF EOD world.

  5. Thats a damn good point, farms. An AT I know was stopped doing a CMD task by the EOD Ops cell in Kosovo, as he "wasn't EOD trained" apparently. I didn't know that PATO had no input into the new JSP 364.

    Are you saying that tje JF EOD world won't accept our quals unless we teach to JSP 364, or even if we teach to JSP 364? If its the latter, then whats the point in trying?
  6. The end is nigh.......

    Insp & Accident inv to HSE, Ammo specialist suppliers for boxes and sealing, Engrs for EOD (all bits), RLC & RE happy as they remove a thorn in their sides and Fat redundancy cheque for me!

    You heard it here first :D
  7. What I want to know is..........

    Do the JSP's still have those fecking amendments that sapped your will to live?

    Has anyone else taken over a job and then (a week later) found 2 years worth of amendments behind the cabinet???


  8. I can assure you that PANTO did have input into the new JSP 364. Either that or the retired RLC ATO Lt Col sat next to me at one of the meetings was an aparition.

    The impression I got was that PANTO wanted to retain the teaching of AAERs and that JSP 364 will refer to them (which they do now). All is not as bad as first seem. ATs will be used on ops to conduct CMD when capacity of RE/RAF is maxed out or specialist skills can be brough to bear to assist RE assets on the ground. Went to a meeting on Wed when all this was discussed. HT IEDD definitely your bag as well. You don't need to be all gloom and doom.


  9. SF,

    I suspect that is where the problem lies! That half colonel ATO who sat next to you was probably just planning his next venture on the nearest golf course!

    All is indeed doom & gloom with the Jt EOD staff Branch (RE) established with the sole intention of removing EOD/IEDD from 'those crap loggies'.

    Dissallusioned maybe? I consider myself more of a realist. :?

  10. Why do we have to wait until the RE and RAF are maxed out. By that thime the RN would have been dragged into it and as such we sit there, but don't help.

    The Lt Col you mentioned seems to do little to aide our trade as such and should be fighting to ensure that we either get loaded on to the correct courses (SOTR currently nil) and deploy on ops as do the RAF. We are certainly more up to speed with FM and CMD techniques than some of the armourers (no disrespect but some are well out of it).
  11. A heads up on the JSP:

    1. Although a lot better than the old one (1993?) its still very far from perfect, as it was always going to be given the scale of the obsticals to an all encompassing EOD book.

    2. All qualifications are currently cut and pasted from the relevant source documents in use now, including A&ERs and the TAB on rank and responsibility (I forget the number...) as well as the Sapper, RN and RAF equivalents so things should not change.

    3. Most of the content was drafted by the schools within DEMSS (DEODS and ASofA), I can't comment on how much input various individuals had as I've no idea.

    4. The veteran member of our trade who represented PATO at the drafting committee did participate actively and even, on occasion, flagged issues up to his boss. There is apparently a good golf club near Minley...

    5. JSP 364 will not initially have much effect on how we do business as it simply tries to record the status quo with little convergence beyond minor trivia, so why bother? I view the JSP as a basis for change. There is a forum whereby all proposed amendments regarding everything from typos to fundamental doctrinal issues will be discussed and consensus must be reached on what is then included. This will in turn dictate what operators are trained to do in future and will lead, by the slow road, to a consistent set of EOD methods. You may of course view the JSP as you wish but I'd suggest the CD ROM version may not make for comfortable wiping...

    6. Admitedly the JSP 364 Working Group will be owned by the new Jt EOD Branch, which is, by all accounts on here, a cleverly cloaked RE Death Star. However the post chairing the JSP 364 Working Group will be SO2 Stds/Pers/Trg, a Sqn Ldr, so pretty neutral. Until this post is filled in the summer, I'll be managing the flow of irate objections to the JSP content and welcome them. What is needed then is strong, modern and articulate AT/ATO representation at the Working Group to ensure that what is important about the way the trade operates is preserved alongside the best points from other cap badges. I'm afraid this small and inexperienced but bolshie ATO cannot carry the can on my own! PATO Branch represents all things AT / ATO and they get to choose choose who to send, not the Jt Branch.

    7. Why the f*&@$£g h!!L am I writing about work in my own time?! I'm off to surf for porn.
  12. Stokholm,

    An excellent post mate. However, if the Jt Doctrine Branch is a cloaked RE death star what the f*&k is HQ DEMSS apart from a RLC ATO love in with token representation.

    I like you lot anyway (most of the time).


  13. Stockholm, again, nice post.

    SF - HQ DEMSS is not an RLC ATO love in as none but one Colonel want it. The RE don't want it either so as the RN don't seem that interested in JF EOD, I can only suspect it to be a ploy by the RAF to destroy us from the inside.

    Just to question Stockholms point though, how can it be a joint forum, when we still work to principles outside this. A&ERs is recognised by JSP but that is all. We still are not allowed to carry out op CMD etc. even by JSP's admission that we are qualified.
  14. I don't necessarily see the Jt EOD Staff branch as a cloaked death star, as long as it stays neutral and impartial. That includes maintaining our neutrality as well as every one else's.

    Must go and dig out that technical empowerment TAB again to see what it says about CMD in OP theatres.

    Hypotheyical question for SF: If ypu were the chief EOD cheese on a future Op, and there were enough RLC EOD assets to cover the IEDD threat with spare capacity (an unlikely scenario I know, but bear with me), would you routinely task them to CMD tasks along with the RE & RAF teams?
  15. Bearing mind that the routine tasks were nothing more than LSA you should add. Granted we don't get taught air dropped or land mines so that would be an accepted task for those trained.

    To add to SRB's question though - as we are all taught clearing our way out of mine fields during OPTAG, would you allow us to be used on the QRF support element? I only ask because you can't get enough of watching your team throw up in helicopters.