CAST or CATT

Discussion in 'Staff College and Staff Officers' started by liverman, Oct 29, 2006.

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. In a fight to the death and only one will suvive, which would be more useful to the field force. CAST tarted up to add a bit of CATT or spend on CATT to reproduce a version of CAST.

    Maybe they do such different jobs it would be impossible to amalgimate.

    Has anybody any thoughts on the subject.
     
  2. CATT great bit of jiggery pokery and it always makes me chuckle to think that Warminster sent the National Grid into overload when that puppy was switched on for the first time. Joking aside spent my fair share of days in both - as a consumer and as an instructor. In short CATT is much better for the field force. The long answer is not so easy. CATT was heavily under subscribed the last time I was down there (04) CAST in comparison was chocker and units would wait months to get a slot. There are issues with CATT that manifest mainly in the lack of knowledge of what the system can do, CAST being old and sweaty is well established. The HFT way of doing things IMHO is archaic and though Ratheon portend to work their t*ts off trying to make things more unique and a better training tool i am not convinced. CATT can be the best of both worlds - from low level command to the higher stuff - and it takes into account some human factors (soldiers). There would be mileage in almalgamating the two but I don't think the whole defence budget would support that let alone LWCs. So for now I think we are stuck with what we have got!
     
  3. Having been a customer at both CATTs and CAST (G) and CAST (N) I have quite a bit of experience of watching pixels for a week at a time. Certainly I am a proponent of the Comd team going to CAST early, receiving orders and preparing and issuing their own to the sub-units who will then fight the mission in CATT. All it takes is some planning and everyone at all levels is tested.

    CATT (G) which I have used extensively is excellent and the team there superb. They actively shop for users, even Tps at a time if there is space in the calender. With today's limits aon track mileage, lack of spares etc this is where our young commanders will learn to cut their teeth.
     
  4. CATT is a fantastic tool for training (both staff and hardware are excellent) and although can not replace time in the field, it is a very useful extra. It also has time allocated for the TA to use.

    But it doesn't open at the weekend!
     
  5. I believe CATT to be an excellent tool having seen it through the intial trials at LWC and subsequent exercises as a Pl Comd, Recon and BHQ officer....Initially there were all sorts of errors in the programme from Infantry outrunning the CR2's, to Warriors going airborne when attempting Evel Kneivel style bridge crossings, but that has been solved for some time now.

    For my money the LWC based Armd Recce Div make the best use of the system. They introduce tactical scenarios on an old fashioned model room for a week, then TEWT the same ex's on the ground for a week, THEN exericise the scenarios in CATT and ...then run them again in CVR(T) on SPTA on THE SAME GROUND...this continuity and building of drills is excellent for all the students involved and allows bone VP drills and R2's to be sorted without wasting (what unfortunately are now very precious) track miles on SPTA. The ability to programme ANY piece of ground into the system for exercising has awesome potential if expolited well......anyone thought of practising Basra convoy drills battened down, or familiarising with road layouts before deploying somewhere hot and sticky?

    As for CAST - have been to (S), (N) and (G) and they are all good for bashing the HQ's around a bit and learning positive lessons - though often too focussed on producing decent "products" rather than decent "plans"!
     
  6. Where do we think the BC2T will fit into this.

    BG (Mini) CAST style trg which can be assesed by Formation.

    Is this the precursor to the death of CAST ?
     
  7. Hi Guys
    I listen to this post with total concentration.
    My view is that an alternative approach should be taken. With hardware and software development having reached its present position, ie we do not need massive servers to provide real time, in depth simulation with good graphics, it is time to look at programs that can achieve multi tasks. If you could run a sim that could not only provide a real time enviroment to the likes of a CATT facility but also give an icon based playing platform with the G4 resolution that ABACUS provides for CAST, it could also be used in order to provide a company/squadron level trainer which BC2T fails to deliver.
    Look at the SIM Steelbeasts it has been linked to "infantry first person shootem ups" and made to work.

    your comments are invited.
    :twisted:
     
  8. MS_Rep

    MS_Rep RIP

    Well they have distinctly differing functions of course - both invaluable and irreplaceable.

    Are you being paid by a Civil Servant to post this up (are you a Civil Servant? :eek:) or do you genuinley believe that combining them would be a force multiplier?

    If you cut the Army to 55,000 you could probably combine them but on current manning levels both are fully booked for the foreseeable future?

    ...and are you talking just Warminster here or Sennelager as well? :confused:

    And don't forget the income generation activities of our CATTs :wink:
     
  9. MS_Rep

    MS_Rep RIP

    But BC2T serves a different function and it's utility is limited, surely?

    That's exactly why the CATTs were developed in the first place (original staff work was conducted in the 90's :wink:)

    You can't train BG against BG or Bde against Bde with BC2T?

    Or did we waste another £0.5k on another SW upgrade recently :haha: