Driving Courses

Discussion in 'RLC' started by brave-coward, Feb 14, 2010.

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. I was hoping to get a question answered and generally canvas more general opinions on the state of military driver training, from those more informed than myself.

    The question I have is: how long is the course to qualify someone to drive a B vehicle (which he is already qualified to drive during the day) at night with LUCIE?

    In terms of opinions, the view (certainly outside the RLC) is that courses to convert drivers to a new type of vehicle are too long. I understand that this recently lead a commanding officer to comment that his BG was fighting the war in Afghanistan through driver training. This is a real concern given the number of UOR vehicles now and the number and length of other types of courses and training required to deploy a sub-unit.

    The other observation, is that the MOD require a higher level of driver license/qualification than would be required on civvie street. For example where the army requires a driver to hold a C license to drive a vehicle that he could drive on a B license if he were a civvie.

    I also understand that there are several of these courses which can only be conducted at DST Leconfield rather than at unit locations. A further accusation that I have heard levelled (albeit a few years ago) is that there was a tendancy to try to RTU as may students as possible at the start of the course in order to knock as many instructors off for the duration of the course as possible.

    The inevitable conclusion that this leads me to is that at least some elements of DST Leconfield may be entirely self serving, in that inflicting some of these requirements on the field army justifies the size and strength of the place. In particular, I am also told that a number of retired military instructors do very well by coming back as civilian instructors.

    Clearly all this is outside my area of expertise. I have felt first hand the frustrations of the driver training course requirements and I have heard annocdotally about the rest. Can anyone with a little more experience in this field dispell or confirm any of this?

    Incidentally, my view that many army courses could be condensed is not restricted to those run by the RLC. My view is that by removing smoke breaks and working to the end of the working day (or later if required) every day of the week, most military courses could be reduced in overal length.
     
    • Show again braincell Show again braincell x 1

  2. The NVD phase takes 2 days which consists of 3 classroom lessons and 2 nights driving. The first night is an introduction to driving with the goggles on road and X country and the 2nd night a progressive drive.



    Don’t understand where you are coming from on this one. You can drive a vehicle on the appropriate license. Some misunderstandings come from needing a Cat C1 license to drive both the RWMIK landrover and the Snatch Landrover due to both vehicles been over 3500kg



    We teach Driver Operators and Instructors on UOR vehicles. The Instructors then deliver distributed training at unit/BG level. Generally the only courses that have to be taught at Leconfield are instructor courses and vehicles where it is more cost effective to move students to vehicles rather than vehicles to students or vehicles numbers in the UK do not allow distributed training to take place. Believe me if you are loaded onto a course and turn up at Leconfield and meet the start state for the course you are on the course. If I RTU anybody it’s because they don’t meet the start state and I still don’t get to go home. I’d rather teach than sit around doing nothing.



    You’re getting this all wrong it’s not DST who inflicts start states on the Field Army. It’s the Field Army who imposes start states on us. Working as a civil servant is not the bed of roses, with mega wages and big fat bonuses the tabloids would have you believe.



    Remember courses are programmed and agreed with the customer (Army, RAF RM etc) much of what we teach is mandated by them. Although students go on smoke breaks it is often to allow the next lesson to be set up/give students chance to stretch legs, get fresh air etc. We could easily cram 7 hours teaching a day into you by changing the instructor after every period (especially in the classroom) but at the end of the day you would have learnt nothing.


    P.S I do not intend to get into a willy waving contest, I’m only trying to answer the questions the best I can.
     
  3. Smells a bit Journo to me.....
     
  4. Firstly, thank you for such a detailed response.

    To explain the line of questioning, I am not trying to point the finger in any way, I am just frustrated at the number of hoops we have to jump through to train for operations and the risk adverse culture that drives the requirement for so many driving courses. While there is clearly a requirement to train deploying troops to use their vehicles safely to minimise risk of injury or death, we are also duty bound to see that those troops get the training they need on the UOR weapon systems, the live fire tactical training, the leave, the cultural training, the language training, etc. etc. At the moment it just seems that driver training takes up more than it's fair share of the limited time available in the period before an operational tour.

    As with all things there is a great deal of heresay involved here and I thank you for addressing some of these issues.

    Can this be delivered as distributed training at a unit and if so, who could deliver it? Also I take it that it can be delivered on any platform (Land Rover for instance) and then automatically qualify the driver to drive (at night with LUCIE) any other vehicle he is qualified to drive? Therefore if you were qualified to drive Land Rover and MAN SV, did the night driving course on Land Rover, would you automatically be qualified to drive MAN SV at night?

    We had this issue a couple of years ago when we provided some drivers to BATUS to drive the civvie US style pick up trucks that they follow the exercising troops in. In essence these things just came over the 3500kg mark and therefore required drivers with C or C1 licenses, however you could go to a car rental agency in the US or Canada and hire a pick up truck of exactly the same weight and drive it off quite legally on a UK cat B driving license.

    The second example is VIKING. I understand that you need either a C+E (i.e. truck and trailer) or an H (tracks) license, because it couldn't be decided whether it should be claissified as a tracked vehicle or a vehicle towing a trailer. I suppose in hindsight I should be grateful that they did not direct drivers to have both C+E and H (possibly H+E!?)
     
  5. Having re-read my original post, I see what you mean. I assure you it/I is/am not. Just me venting some of my frustration!

    Please do not respond to my original questions at all if you are considering writing anything politically contentious/meeja worthy.
     
  6. The red top pick ups are classed as British vehicles as per JSP800 etc but to hire one down town would be under civilian Canadian laws, very different.

    Viking is an odd one as it is driven by it's tracks but not steered by them. By rights it should be on Cat C+E due to weight, no requirement for Cat H when driving BV206 which is the same drive principle.
     
  7. I am not necessarily disagreeing with your frustrations, however, a couple of points you may wish to consider:

    The armed forces are allowed to train drivers of heavy vehicles at a younger age than civilians and therefore by definition these people will generally not have the driving experience (on road hours) when they are being converted to the different vehicles.

    Lots of these vehicles are unlike anything in shape dimensions or road handling that they would be able to obtain commercially. Some also have several integrated systems that are unique to military vehicle

    There would be considerable fallout on several levels if a driver killed multiple people and it was subsequently discovered that he had not had ‘proper’ training
     

  8. It can be delivered as distributed training by an instructor qualified as an NVD trained instructor on that vehicle.

    Although it would be possible for any NVD qualified instructor to deliver the classroom based lessons, as they are all the same. The driving phase must be taught by an instructor qualified on the specific vehicle been driven.



    No, thinking logically it wouldn’t make much sense to let an instructor qualified to teach NVD on a RWMIK teach on something like the MAN SV (TES). As the vehicles have vastly differing levels of vision and completely different blind spots, all of which require to be taught and practiced under the supervision of a qualified instructor.


    You also require a minimum of two qualified instructors to run a course and the instructor qualifications will be checked by the instructor register at DST when you apply for permission to conduct a distributed training course.
     

  9. And this is the crux of the matter. It’s that big corporate umbrella time again.
     
  10. Crux of the matter is military drivers just don't have the experience and time behind the wheel, as a GSDCI I regularly teach MOD 1 & 2 courses and conversion training courses to GS platforms. I'm quite happy to spend a week or more with someone on any GS vehicle conversion, especially MAN SV, I am happy to fail and retrain lads ie give them more time behind the wheel before I'm happy to sign them off, I have to remember that my wife and daughter are on the road with these drivers and so are yours and some of he driving is shocking. If I sign off some one on a vehicle then they crash and kill someone I could be held responsible as the instructor who taught them. So yes I will take all the time that I feel is necessary to train someone.
    If they don't come up to scratch before an op then I don't sign them off. If someone else does an in theatre sign off on an FMT then that's up to them but on the public highway I will not sign off someone who I deem is not safe on the public highway.
    As for LUCIE training I feel that training should be given in GS platforms as the current rules and regulations state that the night drives in both the MOD1 & 2 courses are done without the aid of night vision.
    I have in the past had two roll overs on these courses ( MOD 2) on night drives, both of these could of been avoided if drivers were trained ( allowed) to have night vision aid.
    Now I know that instructors at DST will be raising eyebrows at that last statement but at DST the off road course is very clinical, and rightly so, it's for novice drivers and therefore man made.
    The off road courses that I use are natural and are completely different and real world.
     
  11. Show again brain cell.

    Lecce teaches people to drive, then a bit more. So you have people who can drive, haven't just passed the test.

    There is no politics.

    The course is adequate for its aims.

    Pis s off.
     
  12. The irony of replying to a 4 year old post instructing someone to "show again brain cell"......
     
    • Like Like x 2
  13. Curses.

    Well spotted.
     
  14. Thanks for the slightly cockish response to my very old post. Given that I was merely reiterating some widely held opinion (at the time), perhaps you could address the issues and questions I raise. If you don't know, then say so, but simply accusing someone of stupidity in the form of a one line response to a series of questions based on experience and anecdotal evidence smacks of stupidity itself.

    Would you like to answer my four year old questions or would you rather keep chewing your crayons.

    Incidentally, most of the complaints seemed to have gone away as soon as the training (SOTR or otherwise, but conducted at other locations) was introduced for the UOR/formerly UOR vehicles. Mysterious...


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
     
  15. It could be that folks discovered that the complaints were based on rumour and unfounded. The trouble with anecdotal evidence is that it isn't evidence....

    Furthermore when last I looked the training requirements (and therefore the courses that follow) are set (mostly in a tri-service context these days) by G/J3 Trg not a particular capbadge.