Ammunition Technical people

#1
After a recent deployment to a very hot place it seemed to me that ATs rule the 11 Regt roost, why is this and why do ATOs not do anything about it?
 
#2
Are you looking for a bite?

We are sill part of the general scum that greases the wheels of the train set that Officers play with.
 
#4
Could it be because (most) ATs are TECHNICIANS - and know what they are on about, whilst ATOs are TECHNICAL OFFICERS who (Mostly) have limited experience and/or practical knowledge of ammunition? Hence wise and sensible Officers defer to their Senior Ranks/Warrent Officers who have normally seen it/ done it/ read the book and eaten the pies :roll:
 
#5
The answer you seek is written in RAOC Stats.
 
#6
GrumpyOG said:
Could it be because (most) ATs are TECHNICIANS - and know what they are on about, whilst ATOs are TECHNICAL OFFICERS who (Mostly) have limited experience and/or practical knowledge of ammunition? Hence wise and sensible Officers defer to their Senior Ranks/Warrent Officers who have normally seen it/ done it/ read the book and eaten the pies :roll:
GOOD GOD!!!!!

Please make an effort to find out the training process and level of qualification for an ATO or else do not make public comment that is ill-founded - and wrong! ATOs are highly trained; In most cases more than ATs. However, there is a mutual respect among ATs/ATOs as both officers and ORs put their lives at risk bravely and frequently, and in all manner of operations.

I trust you (Grumpy OG) will make a visit to the AT/ATO memorial, at DM Kineton, to pay your respects to those ATOs who have given their lives to protect and save others.
 
#7
Is that a bite?

The last ATO I saw that was of any use signed a leave pass for me.
 
#8
In fact thinking about it.

All the ATO's fresh from training are given the same responsibilty, if not more so, than the SNCO's/WO's. Most of the ones I have met are complete f**tards, lucky to pass the course, let alone do an ATO job for just 2 years before tripping off back to RLC land leaving a trail of destruction behind them for the SNCO's to clear up.

Yes, I've seen the memorial before you start.
 
#9
Sangreal said:
ATOs are highly trained; In most cases more than ATs.

I trust you (Grumpy OG) will make a visit to the AT/ATO memorial, at DM Kineton, to pay your respects to those ATOs who have given their lives to protect and save others.

Hahahahahahaha Nice bite. :lol:

Funny, because I know at least three ex T1 ATs who are now DE ATOs, having attended RCB, RMAS and the ATO course (again). The only difference between AT & ATO training - apart from the fact that the officers do it all in one lump - less RLC IEDD course - is the RMCS phase, where the officers spend 5 or 6 months and the ORs 5 or 6 weeks.

The ex T1 AT ATOs say that subject matter was exactly the same. Admittedly, they spent a bit more time on it and did a project as well, but that's it. The reason they spend more time on the principles is that they move in & out of ammunition/EOD posts, whereas the ORs stay in it their whole career.

However, this may not be the case today, as the RMCS phase for ORs seems to have been 'dumbed down' a bit. Try asking a sprog AT about the Kistiakowsky-Wilson rules for calculating the oxygen balance of explosives from their chemical formulae.


PS. Take a closer look at that memorial. You'll see that over half of the names are of NCOs & WOs. The rest of the army tends to refer to all RAOC/RLC EOD operators as 'ATO', whether they are blessed/cursed with Her Majesty's Commission or not. :wink:
 
#10
Sangeal, I take great offence at your comments especially as you give me the honour of a quote and then don't use it! I quote "........limited experience and/or practical knowledge of ammunition" when I went to school (Latterly at Kineton) that meant exactly what it says i.e. EXPERIENCE (or been there, done that) PRACTICAL KNOWLEDGE (ditto), ATOs normally don't have the time to accquire either, with a few exceptions. As to your personal insult vis-a-vis the memorial, I was there on the openning day and have visited it many times, unfortunately not on the last unveilling (for C M ) due to the fact I was unavailable due to operational commitments, doubly upsetting as we missed the repatriation from theatre due to ops. Just wish I was a fisherman who got as good bites! 8)
 
#11
Well said GOG.
 
#12
Sir Rowley Birkin QC said:
Sangreal said:
ATOs are highly trained; In most cases more than ATs.

I trust you (Grumpy OG) will make a visit to the AT/ATO memorial, at DM Kineton, to pay your respects to those ATOs who have given their lives to protect and save others.

Hahahahahahaha Nice bite. :lol:

Funny, because I know at least three ex T1 ATs who are now DE ATOs, having attended RCB, RMAS and the ATO course (again). The only difference between AT & ATO training - apart from the fact that the officers do it all in one lump - less RLC IEDD course - is the RMCS phase, where the officers spend 5 or 6 months and the ORs 5 or 6 weeks.

The ex T1 AT ATOs say that subject matter was exactly the same. Admittedly, they spent a bit more time on it and did a project as well, but that's it. The reason they spend more time on the principles is that they move in & out of ammunition/EOD posts, whereas the ORs stay in it their whole career.

However, this may not be the case today, as the RMCS phase for ORs seems to have been 'dumbed down' a bit. Try asking a sprog AT about the Kistiakowsky-Wilson rules for calculating the oxygen balance of explosives from their chemical formulae.


PS. Take a closer look at that memorial. You'll see that over half of the names are of NCOs & WOs. The rest of the army tends to refer to all RAOC/RLC EOD operators as 'ATO', whether they are blessed/cursed with Her Majesty's Commission or not. :wink:
Visit the Palace Barracks Felix Memorial Garden on-line:

http://www.palacebarracksmemorialgarden.org/Felix Memorial Garden.htm

Lest we forget.
 
#15
I'm somewhat uncomfortable with the eagerness here to point at death tolls and memorials as a measure of success or even to be the basis to formulate an arguement upon.

I appreciate that you chaps will know some of those names but with all due respect to those who gave the ultimate sacrifice, lets avoid dragging them and memorials to them, into petty tittle tattle.
 
#17
It is not only a matter of remembering the fallen. It is also about respecting the many hundreds of AT/ATO's who did the walk and lived to tell the tale.
 
#18
[Sensible trousers on]
Much as we all like having a dig at the officers, it has to be said that we need them. Not necessarily because of their soaring intellects, prodigious technical insight and admirable self deprecation - although its nice when that rare combination pops up.

Who, other than ATOs, would we want to command our EOD units? Can you imagine what it would be like having non-ATOs doing it? Yes it might be nice to have all the bombs, bullets and egos to ourselves, but if we had officers who were not technically qualified there would be a massive gulf between 'them' and 'us'. Where, perhaps, there occasionally may be insufficient mutual respect now, there would be none at all and never could be.

And consider this. If the officers didn't get to do EOD and command EOD units, who among the corps' officers would be interested in EOD or bothered about saving us when other arms or services kindly offer to save us the bother of doing it? What would be in it for them?

Don't get me wrong. Officer baiting is one of my favourite hobbies, after curry, lager and hard core porn, but the fact is fellas, we need them.
[Sensible trousers off]
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top