Army "removes" risk from Ten Tors

#1
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-24495843


BLUF: Route changes will minimise reliance on helicopters during bad weather


Subtext: We might not be able to afford to provide Helis ( or possibly soldiers....) in the near future to an event where 2400 kids voluntarily thrash themselves over a variety of distances on quite arduous terrain and are then very susceptible to career advice about doing the same sort of thing in the future.
 
#4
It can also mean BLUF................ ;o)
 
#7
Businessballs said:
ottom Line Up Front. Simply this means (and warns the reader) that the key point is summarised at the start or top of the communication. BLUF is a wonderfully potent acronym, useful in many situations. BLUF (thanks M Callaham) originated in the US military in written communications, where it serves as as an immediate emphasis and prefix of the central point of the message or report. It equates to the expressions 'cutting to the chase' and 'without beating around the bush'. In structural terms, the BLUF technique equates to an 'executive summary', which is a very brief summary of the strategically essential point(s) positioned at the start of the communication. This itself is normally a very concisely reduced version of a larger summary at the end of the document, based on the greater detail within the main part of the document or communication. A major learning and usage aspect of BLUF is the communicator's responsibility to present information to the reader or listener or audience efficiently, especially for senior and very busy people, who often have neither time nor need to read and absorb lots of detail. Senior people especially want the main point(s) - the' bottom line' - first - 'up front'. In management, and in the military, senior people rely on junior people to take care of the detail and to provide the strategic interpretation by which big decisions can be made. Incidentally the term 'bottom line' is a figurative reference to the bottom line in corporate financial accounts, which contains the profit or loss figure, crucial to most organized ventures and organizations. While BLUF remains popular in US military communications, its usefulness has spread and its adoption can be helpful into very many situations where effective speedy communication is valued. This includes notably: business and management communications (especially involving strategic decision-making); quick report-writing and conveying updates and status; emergency response and reactions (reporting up and informing down the management structure); presentations and speeches and talks; writing of press releases, PR materials, and also advertising and consumer or 'general-public audience' communications (in which the actual inclusion of the term BLUF is generally not appropriate - here BLUF serves more of a structural reminder to the writer).
From: acronyms finder dictionary and abreviations finder dictionary - acronyms and abreviations list, definitions and funny acronyms from medical, military, army, training, business, internet, and emails.
 
#8
BBC News - Dartmoor Ten Tors: Routes changed 'to improve safety'

BLUF: Route changes will minimise reliance on helicopters during bad weather

Subtext: We might not be able to afford to provide Helis ( or possibly soldiers....) in the near future to an event where 2400 kids voluntarily thrash themselves over a variety of distances on quite arduous terrain and are then very susceptible to career advice about doing the same sort of thing in the future.
Or perhaps it reduces the chances of future litigation...?
 
#9
Bottom Line Up Front.

Personally I prefer TL;DR.

My missus was part of the (surprisingly large) Sea King support team for Ten Tors this year, and apparently the kids are all *********, the parents are there for a piss up the UOTC types are also all *********, and it was generally observed by the Sea King types to be an absolute waste of everyone's time and the governments money.
 
#10
My missus was part of the (surprisingly large) Sea King support team for Ten Tors this year, and apparently the kids are all *********, the parents are there for a piss up the UOTC types are also all *********, and it was generally observed by the Sea King types to be an absolute waste of everyone's time and the governments money.
You are, of course, entitled to your own opinion (or the opinion of your missus) but I would challenge you to repeat that, face-to-face, with the youngsters who trained hard for Ten Tors, their school staffs, a number of the Exeter UOTC members who I know helped out and, particularly, to the UOTC cadets who accompanied those doing the Jubilee Challenge! I don't know about the parents' side of things: it's a long time since I did Ten Tors.
 
#11
Personally I prefer TL;DR.

My missus was part of the (surprisingly large) Sea King support team for Ten Tors this year, and apparently the kids are all *********, the parents are there for a piss up the UOTC types are also all *********, and it was generally observed by the Sea King types to be an absolute waste of everyone's time and the governments money.
Maybe. But equally possible that your missus never went near a Tor, never left the camp and had little or no interaction with the kids. To my mind, a 14 y.o. who is willing to hike 35+ miles across the moor in all weathers is pretty special and should be encouraged.
 
#12
I did the TT a few years ago as a cadet and my impresson then was that it was very manpower intensive however with an emphasis on safety that is hardly surprising, especially given the 2007 tradegy. Events such as this will always carry an element of inherent risk and in an increasingly risk averse society perhaps more changes can be expected in the future. The TT is an excellent event and those who complete it really do acheive somethnig special at a young developing age so one can only hope that whatever changes may be bought in, the basic tenet of the challenge remains the same. I did the 35 and at 15 years old, that felt pretty bloody amazing.
 

Joker62

ADC
Book Reviewer
#13
All's right with the world, Bwyan has spoken ;)

Posted from the ARRSE Mobile app (iOS or Android)
 
#14
When I first read that The Army had removed risk on The Ten Tors I thought maybe the RE's had levelled them;-)
 
#15
COS Ten Tors visited us on Tor this year, to sound us out regarding various changes proposed for Ten Tors 2014. I forget the fellow's name (it wasn't CO 43Wx).

As I recall, he was determined about the need to reduce reliance on Heli support, which, considering the awful conditions that weekend, seemed sensible.

Next, IIRC, he mentioned that Tor teams might need to bring Civ tentage next year, which raised concerns re: eats/sleeps/morale, and to which we responded that it might dissuade volunteers from pitching in, in foul weather.

Personally, I think Ten Tors is a fantastic event and I am proud to play a part in it. The kids put in and get out a huge amount - long may it continue.

Shame the ground crew felt inclined to whinge, both the ladies I met seemed pretty cheerful to me.

BB


Posted from the ARRSE Mobile app (iOS or Android)
 
#16
Not surprising really - the SK4 fleet is drawing down over the next 2 years, while the Merlin fleet will be smaller and hard worked. Ten tors is superb, but a huge drain on scarce military assets. No one is saying not doing it is an option, but it seems sensible that if we're not going to have the helo support we once had, to instead focus on holding an event that is still challenging, rather than increase risk of people getting into problems. There is nothing 'manly' in my book about holding an event for youth which needlessly exposes them to serious risk just because we've always done it that way.
 
#17
Not surprising really - the SK4 fleet is drawing down over the next 2 years, while the Merlin fleet will be smaller and hard worked. Ten tors is superb, but a huge drain on scarce military assets. No one is saying not doing it is an option, but it seems sensible that if we're not going to have the helo support we once had, to instead focus on holding an event that is still challenging, rather than increase risk of people getting into problems. There is nothing 'manly' in my book about holding an event for youth which needlessly exposes them to serious risk just because we've always done it that way.
Whilst logical, a flaw with this thinking is that it does feed into the hands of those advocating the Civilianisation of Ten Tors and Dartmoor.

Compared to the participants, team leaders, parents and locals, the Army (certainly the Regular component) is often seen as a "johnny come lately", mucking up and interfering with long held procedures and practices.

There are however big benefits - look at Comd 43X's comments in a recent ARQ/TAQ:

http://www.army.mod.uk/documents/general/ARQ_Autumn_2013.pdf largest annual Multi agency training opportunity, etc. With most of the Army being home based, exercises like this might be in sudden need, though quite how it is going to work with the loss of Regional Brigades and their command structure is a good guess


Once out of the frame, it would be difficult to get back in, as without Helis and big tents (deployed by underslung load), there are lots of other cheaper alternatives ( "TT - sponsored by Vango" etc)

Looking at the risk reduction argument, the event itself is very well risk managed. Note the 2007 fatality occurred during a school supervised training event
 
#18
I'm afraid I'm unclear as to why civilianisation of the TT is a bad thing. Fundamentally I doubt any teenager with the desire to tab 35 miles across Dartmoor and the associated training is less likely to join up just because it is sponsored by a private company instead. Who runs the J4 for the event has little impact on the actual experience itself - beyond seeing someone in uniform or goretex at certain points.
Instead the event seems to be a little bit of a self licking lollipop in some ways - the Army needs the ability to run TT because it has to run TT. Standfast the now changed airlift requirement, I'm afraid I see nothing unique or specific about it that requires the allocation of a lot of military personnel, at presumably a not insignificant cost and draw on resources. That the Army has the resources to do this suggests the Army either has too much manpower or it isn't prioritising for military operations - particularly if the best reason for doing this is the notion of using it as an example of practising establishing a camp.
My genuine question is this - notwithstanding the benefits to the participants, what is it that the Army brings to the TT that cannot be done by civilians instead?
 
#19
It seems sensible to me, If Rotary wing cannot be relied on because of weather conditions and or a diminishing number of airframes, then reroute the course to reduce the possibility of aircraft being needed.
 

Similar threads


Latest Threads

Top