Bring back the VE

Should the VE trade be brought back?

  • Yes

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • No

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
#21
Civvy garages may not have VEs, but they have access to sub-contractors who are auto electricians. They don't need to employ them full time, they call them when they need them, try doing that in Iraq / Afghanistan. Don't say 'call an FRT from the local Bn' because we tried that and found that the VE had been sent back to Germany a week earlier.. :frustrated:
We needed one because the one VE left in our unit after 'rebalancing' was on R&R.
 
#22
civillian garages call in auto electricians for the complex stuff like ecu modules ect but the bread and butter stuff is dealt with by mechanics.
by bread and butter i mean charging faults, battery drain issues, lighting ect ect infact a good 90% of general electricals.
i work as a railway locomotive fitter since leaving the corps and todays diesel trains are way way more electrically biased than most reme maintained vehicles, no doubt there are exceptions but not many.
yet we have no VEs!! why? the answer is that the mechanics did dual training and belive me when i say that the standard of faultfinding is as deep as anything a specialised VE would do.
i still say that a good VM with a wiring diagram and some common sense is upto 90%+ of A VEs trade. and thats the reason its dissolved
 
#23
for me bring back the VE, bless him. Met some good uns that not only could fix stuff but also allowed the vm class 1 to trouble shoot on shop floor at 1st line in the shops that was b.
 
#27
New Support Vehicle comes with CAN Bus and controllers, so you may want to brush up on your skills.
As part of STTE you will recieve a Computer Diagnostics Kit called MANCATS, but you all need an understanding of basic electrics.
 
#28
after being on my bucher duro course last year as a vm and having first hand experience of this vehicles ecu system and the gear in the back what i was expected to no was far advanced than your average vms competency, but this is the way things are going like the man from man says so as ive said before there is a gaping hole in where the ve used to be.
 
#29
sleeper said:
after being on my bucher duro course last year as a vm and having first hand experience of this vehicles ecu system and the gear in the back what i was expected to no was far advanced than your average vms competency, but this is the way things are going like the man from man says so as ive said before there is a gaping hole in where the ve used to be.
VM s can fill these gaps its just confidence and training . like it or not the world both military and civillian in this field is becoming more and more integrated and to be honest we are now getting to the stage with electrics that most of the deeper faults are diagnosed using a laptop or dedicated diagnostic tool .
 
#30
Class 3 techs should have the theory knowledge to deal with vehicle electrics, the problem is that they dont even see anything they will work on until they get to thier units. Perhaps some practical electrical work could be included in tech phase 2 training.
 
#31
smeagle said:
Class 3 techs should have the theory knowledge to deal with vehicle electrics, the problem is that they dont even see anything they will work on until they get to thier units. Perhaps some practical electrical work could be included in tech phase 2 training.
techs need to save their time for piss ups and sport as is custom and practice throughout the years :headbang:
 
#32
When I went through Bordon , what seems a century ago, we spent some 16 weeks training in Vehicle Electrics followed by around the same length of time in Vehicle Mechanics. The end result was a VMB(E) qualification.E being Electrician. Except for some of the systems on a 432 all of the electrical work on vehicles were carried out by VMB(E)'s. We also for some reasons had CET's (Control Equipment Technicians) on strength . Commanders of Infantry Unit Fitter Sections prefered the VMB(E) over the CET OR VE for obvious reasons.
 
#33
centurion-mech said:
smeagle said:
Class 3 techs should have the theory knowledge to deal with vehicle electrics, the problem is that they dont even see anything they will work on until they get to thier units. Perhaps some practical electrical work could be included in tech phase 2 training.
techs need to save their time for urine ups and sport as is custom and practice throughout the years :headbang:
Techs going through SEE used to be trained on LR series III electrics using scaled down versions. I take it that this has stopped?

Cent Mech you know that a fit urined up tech is a happy tech!! :strong: :puker:
 
#34
Im a tech and i think VMB's should do the electrics on B vehicles, and techs and a mechs should both be able to do A vehicle faults so a time/ workload decision can be made on who should do a particular fault.

With the VE going yes VM's were supposed to do the job but a lot ive seen are more unwilling to learn than unable because they joined up to do mechanics.

Not completly off topic but when is the VE option gonna be taken off FEMIS for jobcards?
 
#36
The VE should be brought back - not forcing VM's to do what they obviously detest - I don't touch anything electrical on cars or in House - call for a leccy always.

Pal has a modern car with a plug-in for laptop fault finding - what a joke - had to get a REME (VE) retired from around the corner to sort it - VE's have a nose and patience for all that electrickery shite - I don't.

Additionally - I looked at the modern cars - EVERYTHING is damn near electrical !!! Wont get me buying one of that type of car - much prefer the old classics,and they go UP in price (some of 'em)...
 
#37
There is no need to bring back the VE trade, but at the same time much more training should have been given to VM's before the decision was made to bin them. This should apply to SEME Trade Training mostly and practical refresher training within units as necessary.

Whilst every VM 'should' know basic electrics, this is of no real benefit with the new kit coming into service, ie Oshkosh, MFAGE, FEPS and MAN etc. With the Oshkosh having 4 ECU's for different functions, a charging or starting fault is no longer just a case of checking whether the batteries are connected!

VM's need to receive the relevant VE/Equipment training now, Unit based if needs be, rather than wait a few years to do it on their Class 1.

Rant over
 
#38
I manage a fleet comprising many Electronically Controlled engines, and experience has shown that todays engines are more reliable mechanically, and in most cases when there is s breakdown ,its an electrical fault.The VM needs to be fully trained on vehicle electrics.
I've just returned from a Truck Show in Indiana, USA and with the widespread introduction of hybrid vehicles,a VM can no longer sit on the side line awaiting to just carry out mechanical repairs.
 
#39
Where on earth was it written down that a class 1 VM was classed as a class 2 VE?????????????? If being class two means that you can carry out work as long as it is checked by a class 1 tradesman...................that makes me a class 2 metalsmith............and so is my cat! No seriously, where ever was it written that a class 1 VM is a class 2 VE? REME urban myth???????????? I think so......... By the way i am an ex-VE
 
#40
In my section, I am the class 1 tech. I do the tech work.
I have a class 3 just posted in in my section (just the two of us then...). His job is VE work, A & B vehicles. Not my policy, as I think the new lad just be working with me gaining experience.

I deployed to Hohne on exercise in Jan / Feb for 3 weeks, where I was third man on the 434. Just VE work, mainly on 430s. In Canada, Medman 3, I was on the fitter truck (as should be in my view), where I got to ply my trade :) My poor class 3 was stuck on the 434 this time, playing with broken 430s.

This isn't what techs are for, or trained to do. Whose job is vehicle electrics officially? Techs or mechs?
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top