Already serving as an Electronic Warfare Sys Op?

Discussion in 'Royal Signals' started by Shenda, Jul 3, 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. I am interested in speaking to someone already serving in this role as I have just gained my place in the British Army within this position.
    I would like to find out in more detail about the job and its prospects, if I learn any new languages? What specifics they will train me for? and so on.... any new information would be much appreciated.
    Im off to Pirbright on the 25th Aug and then to Blandford, I believe I will need to complete a 5 week aptitude test at the end of this before continuing on to Chicksands, can you advise on what this test includes?
  2. EW Sys Ops do not do language training. The Royal Corps of Signals banished all of the old EWOps/Tele Op Lings several years ago. If you want to be a linguist, ask to re-trade to Int Corps. You can apply to be re-badged before you complete Phase 1 Training.

    The EW Sys Op trade is suffering from an identity crisis. They don't know whether they want to be EW operators, EOD operators or SI analysts. It is widely acknowledged within the EW/SI community that EW Sys Ops lack a trade focus.
  3. Yes but remember that other trades have a number of strings to their respective bows; CS Ops work on stuff as different as trunk comms, CNR, special comms, satcom and so on, IS guys often straddle network engineering and applications, techs work on engineering projects or in 2nd-3rd line workshops and so on. Do you consider the EW Sys Op trade simply too small to span a wide skillset?
  4. Problem with Int Corps is you may want to specialise in language but you cannot do it straight from training. You will be streamed into an MI Bn first putting you a few years away from any language training or work.
  5. Hi I am currently serving as an EW Sys Op, and i disagree with the statement that we are having an identity crisis, we serve as both EW operators EOD operators and to a degree SI operators/Analysis it depends on were you are posted to as to which area you will work.

    in answer to your question about the 5 week filter course, you will be tested on maths, basic electronics, communications principles and you will have an EW week which you will have to wait till you get there to find out about, as to what work we do apart from what has already been said you will have to wait till you get the relavant clearences before you will find out any more.
  6. That's that all squared away then. Absolutely no crisis vis a vis identity there at all. :roll: Not to mention grammatical schizophrenia...
  7. Funny - I can never remember anyone throwing back a TTO red penned for spelling or grammar. Maybe such things (IMHO) don't really matter in real life / the grand scheme of things.

    Also funny how almost any thread about EW Sys Ops / Spec Ops get jumped all over by lings - some of them ex Signals. I'm not even going to go into the possible reasons as to why this happens but I'm sure one of the usual suspects will pop up with an informative and witty answer - please don't disappoint.
  8. Biped

    Biped LE Book Reviewer

    What unit is this role in?
  9. Surely good spelling and grammar are the basis of effective written communication; it is a little ironic that it should be disregarded and considered to be unimportant in the Royal Signals Forum. :wink:
  10. Ah Fraser, first of all I must thank you from the bottom of my heart with your predictability by responding to this one and winning me a couple of pints in the process.

    I don't think I went so far as to completely disregard good spelling and grammar as a basis of effective written communication but meant that there is a time and a place for such things to occur. Obviously my own particular form of communication failed and I must therefore hang my head in shame, or maybe you just like to latch onto the slightest little thing and rag it for all it's worth?

    I'm sure that your own vast and recent operational experience will have made you aware that the lads/lassies (Int Corps / R.Signals) don't have time to get their dictionaries out when all they are interested in is conveying a rather important message to those who require the information in a timely manner. My original statement remains extant; they do this successfully without fannying about with the niceties of language, after all there are far more important things to worry about at that time.
  11. Indeed, like who stole my fcuking grot dvds. I have a sackful and require to get rid.

    Oh bollox, how should that sentence be structured...... 8O
  12. It could be that my response was predictable because you were talking bollocks and it was only a matter of time before someone commented.

    I think it is safe to say you did disregard the importance of good spelling and grammar, because your opinion was that "such things don't really matter". You then confirmed your viewpoint by suggesting that I "like to latch onto the slightest little thing", which leads me to believe you do not consider the accuracy of a form of words to be significant when communicating intelligence facts.

    Firstly, they should not need to get their dictionary out. Secondly, having the intelligence and being able to disseminate it in a timely manner is important, but if that intelligence is not accurately conveyed, then it is virtually useless.

    If you are in a position to comment on my experience then you will understand why I consider accuracy to be of equal importance to timeliness. Getting the intelligence to the decision maker as fast as possible is great, but if s/he then has to question the content, because something does not make sense, due a word being misspelt or grammatical errors, then it questions the credibility of the source, which could make the efforts to get the intelligence reported in a timely manner nugatory.
  13. Fraser, you really are a tosser aren't you.
  14. Ha Ha.

    The catty girls of the Int Corps are still boring us here, because they have no testicles.
  15. any chance this thread can get back on track?