Arfurs views on TA officers

#1
Actually, having been TA and now in the regular Army, I think the biggest difference between the TA and the Regs is the officers. You could take any TA soldier I know and, with a bit of training, get him to fit in with a regular unit no problems. Trouble is, the gulf between regular officers and TA officers is vast and unbridgable - how could it not be? We get a year of 14 hour days training, TA officers get something like (off the top of my head) 12 weekends and two three-week courses. I'd say that was the TA's biggest weakness in terms of working with the regular Army.
 
#2
I'd agree with Arfur, but with the qualifier that a TA unit headed by a TA officer would probably achieve the same outcome if set the same task as a Regular unit headed by a Regular officer, though by different means and almost certainly not in accordance with the DS solution. (But as DS are almost invariably Regular, they are biased anyway ;) ). The problems come when you start mixing them as TA and Regular have different mind-sets - different, but not necessarily inferior.
 
#3
Arfur said:
Trouble is, the gulf between regular officers and TA officers is vast and unbridgable - how could it not be? We get a year of 14 hour days training, TA officers get something like (off the top of my head) 12 weekends and two three-week courses. I'd say that was the TA's biggest weakness in terms of working with the regular Army.
It's attitudes like this which cause problems, not solve them. It's not like TA officers are on the dole when they're not in green.

msr
 
#4
msr said:
Arfur said:
Trouble is, the gulf between regular officers and TA officers is vast and unbridgable - how could it not be? We get a year of 14 hour days training, TA officers get something like (off the top of my head) 12 weekends and two three-week courses. I'd say that was the TA's biggest weakness in terms of working with the regular Army.
It's attitudes like this which cause problems, not solve them. It's not like TA officers are on the dole when they're not in green.

msr
No, I think it's fair comment. I'm not having a go, per se, I'm merely pointing out that I've done both TA officer training and regular officer training, and there's a massive gulf between the two in terms of actual work done, practice, and standards expected. It was supposed to be constructive criticism!
 
#5
Arfur said:
Trouble is, the gulf between regular officers and TA officers is vast and unbridgable - how could it not be?
However, qualities like enthusiasm, lack of cynicism, positive upbeat attitudes and a host of other pleasant attributes have a value all their own.

Your posit would be correct if by extension all Regular Army officers were utterly professional, incapable of errors and never wrong - I don't think that is the case, somehow.

We're a broad church, and long may it remain so, and god forbid we should ever expect our TA chums to be fully swept up soldiers, anymore than you or I could run ICI or a classroom full of screaming kids.
 
#6
Arfur said:
there's a massive gulf between the two in terms of actual work done, practice, and standards expected.
Obviously you've never served with the TA on Ops. If you think we were expected to produce a lower standard of work, then you are clearly mistaken, and I may even venture to add you will find yourself measured by goon-bde's standards, not mine.

msr
 
#7
Darth_Doctrinus said:
Your posit would be correct if by extension all Regular Army officers were utterly professional, incapable of errors and never wrong - I don't think that is the case, somehow.
Sadly a year of 14 hour days, having it drilled into you that you are the best, makes the intellectually idle believe it...

msr
 
#8
msr said:
Darth_Doctrinus said:
Your posit would be correct if by extension all Regular Army officers were utterly professional, incapable of errors and never wrong - I don't think that is the case, somehow.
Sadly a year of 14 hour days, having it drilled into you that you are the best, makes the intellectually idle believe it...

msr
Sorry chaps, just speaking it as I've seen it. I'm not saying every Army officer is perfect, nor that I am, nor that all TA officers are bad. It's just that I don't think TA officer training, as I've experienced it, is as effective as Reg training, and from what I saw of the TA officers in my unit, there's a certain gap in skills there. It's obvious! The more training you get, the better you will be.

Might I suggest you've been slagged off too many times by arrogant regs and you're knee-jerking at valid criticism?
 
#9
Given that the topic originated as a query about joining the TA by an IKEA shop assistant, also wanting to know about animosity/banter between Regulars and TA, have we not digressed into a bun fight more suited to the Officers' Mess?

Stumann73: If you're still following your topic, what you see above is a prime example of the deities having a go at one another. The next extension of this is where one decides to prove his prowess and the other is unwilling to be outdone. As officers can only show their ability in terms of the degree of impossibility that they can get their troops to accomplish, it follows that the troops get run ragged. This urge to sacrifice the troops began in WW1, though at that time the officers in question were on opposite sides of No Man's Land. Because of politically correct sensitivites, it is incumbent on the officers of today to pitch their own troops against each other, in order not to offend other nations. A shame we cannot return to more honourable times when one of the antagonists would throw down a gauntlet at the other person's feet in prelude to settling the matter at dawn the following day. This would engender camaraderie between the Regular and TA ORs as they settle down in deck chairs with flagons of ale to watch the outcome of the duel.

Author's note: This thread started elsewhere with a different subject. Extracts have been moved to form what you see here. Confused the **** out of me.
 
#10
Good idea Puttees

May I suggest we start the ball rolling with the 7 Paras just acquitted vs, say, TCB?

Winners go through to the next rounds to face Gordon "miserable fat git" Brown, John "oh fcuk, not Health" Reid and Charlie "Fungus the Bogeyman" Clarke.
 
#11
Hooray, my own thread, I feel so validated. Seeing as it upsets you all so much, I'll say there's nothing wrong with the system and there's no possible way the Army could be improved in any way. It is utterly perfect.
 
#12
pmsl@Arfur - quality post

How about the thought that a cr4p Regular is treated as the exception that proves the rule whilst a cr4p Territorial is somehow taken as indicative of the entire TA.

Throw into the mix the fact that the two main interfaces between TA and Reg are:

a) Regs posted into TA Units - a minority (significant but a minority nonetheless) of very, very good guys (typically either on a career rebuild or on a career fast-track) but far, far too many final tour "NFI", anti-stab PSIs polluting the system - and a few bad-egg Officers infesting RHQs with anti-stab atmosphere.

b) TA Officers and a few Soldiers on FTRS appointments. A minority (significant but a minority nonetheless) of very, very good ones determined to "do their bit" but a disturbing number of not very good civilians who can't get a civvy job and who seem to just be doing it for some no risk, easy cash with plenty of time off, meanwhile letting their Regular colleagues see the TA at its worst.


OK, enough negativity, here's one I rather like - how about the thought that the above examples really are the exception and we consider that the VAST majority of Reg and TA alike are well above the quality line, can and do work together comfortably and effectively, both bring their own skill-set to the party and display the ATTITUDE that we need to keep the whole thing working despite everything that Govt, Society and our enemies around the World throw at us.

Arfur - you'll need to work harder to convince me that you're not one of the good guys ;)
 
#13
Actually, re. your first post, the PSI's I came across were mostly excellent, I thought they were one of the things about the TA that worked really well. Ditto the two regimental adjutants I worked a lot with in my last year as a TA OCdt.
 
#14
Many are - I hope I wasn't too "sweepingly general" I merely sought to highlight where the interface goes wrong. Anyway, it is still entirely possible that it is all just down to shouting. BAAAH! :D
 
#15
abacus said:
Many are - I hope I wasn't too "sweepingly general" I merely sought to highlight where the interface goes wrong. Anyway, it is still entirely possible that it is all just down to shouting. BAAAH! :D
Rubbish, the interface is perfect, and you know it.
 
#16
Arfur said:
Actually, re. your first post, the PSI's I came across were mostly excellent, I thought they were one of the things about the TA that worked really well. Ditto the two regimental adjutants I worked a lot with in my last year as a TA OCdt.
Clearly you never had the misfortune to come across 33 Sig Regt's last Adjt.

Pants
 
#17
I can not comment on the difference in trg between TA or Regular but all I can say is that in early 1996 I was a Sig on Op Resolute 1 working out of Split Comcen and our OC and the Custodian Officer turned out to be TA (we didn't know that until he came to the end of his tour). He was the best OC I have ever had, he knew how to get the best out of us, took a real interest in our welfare (he made my 21st a most rememberable time), looked after us and fought and defended our corner every time. We were shot at on a crypto run to GV on Route Emerald and the lead Landrover which he was in imobilised - for a TA officer he knew all the fire control orders, caught shrapnel going back to the vehicle to radio for help and rallied us under fire. He was no push over but we could not have asked for better. It was the fact that he cared that gave away that really he was TA, in every other aspect I and the people I was with would never have known differently!

It all goes to show there are good and bad officers and I thought it was all down to leadership. I think the point has already been made. There are good and bad in both organisations, yet in the main and I accept (dependant on the job they do) and somewhat reluctantly, that my own exprience as a lowly Sig and more recently as a SNCO is that many of the TA offrs I have seen are up to the standard. Contrastly that also implies that many are not! But teh same can also be said of the Reg offrs I have worked with and seen particularly the arogant career minded one who have no interest in their soldiers other than how to use and abuse them to get on!
 
#18
Sorry chaps, just speaking it as I've seen it. I'm not saying every Army officer is perfect, nor that I am, nor that all TA officers are bad. It's just that I don't think TA officer training, as I've experienced it, is as effective as Reg training, and from what I saw of the TA officers in my unit, there's a certain gap in skills there. It's obvious! The more training you get, the better you will be.

Well, is that not stating the bleeding obvious!!

More time = better training


Obviously someone who was full time trained and then gets experience full time, often with many ops tours, is going to be better than someone who gives up his spare time to do the same job.

But....if you think that a regular officer works 365 days a year, and a TA officer works perhaps 40 (works, not claims MTDs for :wink: ), with all things being equal (ie in a regular home service job or on Ops) the regular officer in the same environment will not be 8 times better at his job than the TA bloke.
 
#19
holli_g999 said:
I can not comment on the difference in trg between TA or Regular but all I can say is that in early 1996 I was a Sig on Op Resolute 1 working out of Split Comcen and our OC and the Custodian Officer turned out to be TA (we didn't know that until he came to the end of his tour). He was the best OC I have ever had, he knew how to get the best out of us, took a real interest in our welfare (he made my 21st a most rememberable time), looked after us and fought and defended our corner every time. We were shot at on a crypto run to GV on Route Emerald and the lead Landrover which he was in imobilised - for a TA officer he knew all the fire control orders, caught shrapnel going back to the vehicle to radio for help and rallied us under fire. He was no push over but we could not have asked for better. It was the fact that he cared that gave away that really he was TA, in every other aspect I and the people I was with would never have known differently!
This is beginning to sound like officers are born, not made.

Or is that just ballacks?
 
#20
HVM_Boy said:
But....if you think that a regular officer works 365 days a year,
Will that be apart from weekends, Mon morning late start, Wed afternoon sport, Friday early knock off and 1/2 hr NAAFI breaks morning and afternoon?

msr
 

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads