Does the FMT 600 mean anything?

#1
Does the FMT 600 actually do anything? What the Army is saying is that you can hold a valad UK licence for a vehicle and still not be allowed to drive it in the Army until you have been 'famed up'.
What would happen if u had an accident without that vehicle being on the 'FMT600'?
Is it a decient idea or just more umbrellas being put up by senior officers?
 
#2
The FMT600 is a way of ensuring that drivers are only able to drive vehicles that they have had the appropriate training on. Not all that important if you're talking your average 'white fleet' vehicles, but consider that if you have a tracks licence and obtained that licence on the plant park driving a dozer that doesn't go over walking pace.... you are by law allowed to hop into a Chally 2 or a CVR(T) and go out on the public roads. Madness I think you'll agree.

There are many other examples where holding a specific licence does not make somebody competent on all vehicles that need that licence. The army says that if you're not fammed on a vehicle and it's not entered on your 600 you can't drive it.

Easy.
 
#3
The idea of the FMT 600 (Form, Motor Transport No.600) is that you have a record of which vehicles you are familiar with. Obviously you can drive if you have a drivers licence, but if you do your (for example) wolf conversion, then you should be taught where to put all the fluids on first parade, where to put the jack when changing a tire and where to attach the tow rope on recovery. Sounds pretty obvious, but actually quite a good idea really.
 
#4
So what happened in the days without the FMT600.
One of the lads in the unit went through his test in a landrover and passed it. Now because he has not got it on his FMT600 he still cannot drive that type of vehicle. It will tie another driver up for 9 hours (if it is done correctly) to enter it on his FMT 600. I think this is madness.

Also there is a space for a name, but not a signature on the new ones (rev 3/99) so anyone can enter any (fake) name and vehicle without a signature.
 
#5
Hood

Not sure on how long you have been in, but the FMT600 has been around for quite some time. It is also there for deployed reasons, so those managing MT in theatre know you have all the right ticks, ie trained for local conditions, not just able to drive a car!

Think of it more as an operators license and not a driving license. You are operating the equipment in the prevailing conditions and (often) not on the flat & level.

Also, the MOD is a self-insuring body. Hence it can do what the hell it wants. I have, in the past, refused the issue of an FMT600, thus preventing someone with a valid license from driving mil vehicles. Standard practice when confronted by a 21 yr old scrote with 9 points!
 
#6
Go back to PPs answer - The FMT600 the Army's umbrella as an employer of persons operating dangerous equipment.

They are responsible for training you on the type of equipment you are operating (be it a Land Rover to a Chally). They can prove this by issuing a record of this training.

When you drive a Chally through Mrs Browns house and claim that you have never been correctly instructed in the correct operation of a Challenger - the Army can say 'Oh yes you have'. :D :D
 
#7
RobinHood said:
So what happened in the days without the FMT600.
One of the lads in the unit went through his test in a landrover and passed it. Now because he has not got it on his FMT600 he still cannot drive that type of vehicle. It will tie another driver up for 9 hours (if it is done correctly) to enter it on his FMT 600. I think this is madness.

Also there is a space for a name, but not a signature on the new ones (rev 3/99) so anyone can enter any (fake) name and vehicle without a signature.
I got my FMT 600 mid 70's :D and they wern't new then either.
and BH is right FMT 600 is not a licence, it is a form mechanical transport :D hence the FMT bit
 
#8
Ex - You were in when they swapped FHT600 (Form Horse Transport) for a new fangled FMT600 (Steam and Internal Combustion Vehicles)
 
#11
can someone make this smiple for me, if your working in a army camp, but not in the army, do you need to have a F/MT 600 to drive the pool car? which is for all personnel to use to travel to different locations for work purpose. :roll:

Thanks!
 
#12
caz

1: Are you employed by the MoD? Therefore, are you an MoD Civil Servant?

2: What is the vehicle in question?

3: Do you have it on your civvy license?

4: Are you driving it anyway?

Suggest you find the MTO for the unit & chat to them. It is their vehicle after all. Make them earn their pay!
 
#14
caz_ace said:
can someone make this smiple for me, if your working in a army camp, but not in the army, do you need to have a F/MT 600 to drive the pool car? which is for all personnel to use to travel to different locations for work purpose. :roll:

Thanks!
The answer is yes, you do need an FMT600 to drive a military vehicle (of any type, even a car) even if it's a hire car arranged for you by movments. That goes if you are military, civil servant or just employed by the MoD on a long or a short contract. Full stop.
Simple enough for you? :D
 
#15
RobinHood said:
Also there is a space for a name, but not a signature on the new ones (rev 3/99) so anyone can enter any (fake) name and vehicle without a signature.
Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't there paperwork at the MTO's end duplicating the information entered on a particular drivers FMT600 hence avoiding RH's fraud tactic ?
 
#16
RobinHood said:
Also there is a space for a name, but not a signature on the new ones (rev 3/99) so anyone can enter any (fake) name and vehicle without a signature.
MoD 90 covers this.
 
#17
But if there was paperwork at the MTOs office covering this, why then do we need another document duplicating the same information.
I would say (and i havent tried it) if someone needed to drive a vehicle and no time was available for the conversion, they could enter the details on the FMT 600 and in theory be legal to drive.

Then there is the arguement thet he should say he/she cant drive the said vehicle. But that means mucking someone else about and probibly the MT sgt too.

The Army could Group Vehicles together. If U pass the conversion in a Landrover then 'All light B Vehs' should be entered on the FMT. Likewise if a DAF is driven on conversion the Bedfords could also be driven.

I think it is too much of the Army looking after itself and the lads on the ground having to work with it.
 
#18
Capt Cheeky said:
RobinHood said:
Also there is a space for a name, but not a signature on the new ones (rev 3/99) so anyone can enter any (fake) name and vehicle without a signature.
Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't there paperwork at the MTO's end duplicating the information entered on a particular drivers FMT600 hence avoiding RH's fraud tactic ?
Correct Cheeky, the actual records are held somewhere in the Unit whether at Regt, Sqn or Troop level. I know ours are held in the BFG office which is a sensible central point to hold records of the whole unit's civvy and military licence details, but not all units have that facility if they are not overseas.
 
#19
RobinHood said:
But if there was paperwork at the MTOs office covering this, why then do we need another document duplicating the same information.
I would say (and i havent tried it) if someone needed to drive a vehicle and no time was available for the conversion, they could enter the details on the FMT 600 and in theory be legal to drive.

Then there is the arguement thet he should say he/she cant drive the said vehicle. But that means mucking someone else about and probibly the MT sgt too.

The Army could Group Vehicles together. If U pass the conversion in a Landrover then 'All light B Vehs' should be entered on the FMT. Likewise if a DAF is driven on conversion the Bedfords could also be driven.

I think it is too much of the Army looking after itself and the lads on the ground having to work with it.
If you try your 'short cut' and it has been done often enough it will be found out the next time your FMT600 is renewed and compared with the details on record. Falsifying documents and fraud are chargable offences. The bigger hassle comes when you have an accident and it doesn't matter if you were at fault or not. Officially you are then not authorised to drive that vehicle an the MoD can make you pay for all the damage caused. It's just the same as driving a civvy vehicle with no insurance.

Grouping vehicles together can work to an extent, but does cause confusion. It's okay to say something like 'all white fleet cars' or '4 tonne DAF all variants' but on others things are not so clear. Your example of 'all light B Vehs' That would include all landrover types and you should know that you MUST have a conversion onto the Wolf variant (91 RTAs in the first year of service including fatalities is proof enough), and even then you have to have a special conversion on to the Ambulance version.

Just one example of many. Far easier in the long run to have each vehicle type (within reason!) entered separately and then you're covered.

You're argument about having to go out on a 9 or 14 hour drive to convert to a vehicle isn't actually true. That's only required if the person being converted is totally new to mil vehicles or certain types of vehicle. A couple of minutes going over the first, halt and last parade for the vehicle, covering any special points and then a 20 minute drive to prove that the person is confident with the controls, size and handling of the vehicle normally sufices. If the instructor isn't happy by then, they probably do need a good few hours to get comfortable and that's usually the gobby overconfident "This is a waste of my time" types.

One final point, you've probably now spent more time trying to get round the system than you would normally have spent per year working with the system :wink:
 
#20
Plant-Pilot said:
One final point, you've probably now spent more time trying to get round the system than you would normally have spent per year working with the system :wink:
Its not that i have been trying to get round the system, however, I am always looking for the easiest and most cost effective way of doing my job. (at the moment). If there is a way round a system then i am always looking for it.
With todays manpower shortages i think sometimes it is necessary
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top