How are they going to change??

Discussion in 'Army Reserve' started by Copperhead, Jul 24, 2013.

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. Now that the White Paper has outlined the Government and Senior Military Leadership plans to raise standards within the Reserve, align the Reserve to Regular Units and standards, in order to close the capability gap – I have 3 questions:
    1. Is Senior Military Leadership (CGS) going to lead by example, and adopt a working week similar to that of the Reserves? If not, then why should Brigades, Training Establishments and Regular Units alter their working tempo to integrate Reserves?

    2. Is the Higher Command and Staff College Course going to review their Reserve module to reflect Reserve capabilities (in uniform and in civi street), together with an appreciation of a Reserve working week (12 days) – which reflects Monday to Friday (with a drill night), a two day weekend training package, then straight back to another week of work (a second drill night), and in back ground, physical training, preparation/admin/J7 for military training, and limited access to JPA/DII.? Knowing the capabilities of your resources, and how to integrate them to best effect – is key!

    3. Are the Trade Schools going to breakdown the regular courses into weekend and 16 day modules, to arrive at a single qualification for both Regular and Reserves?
    • Like Like x 1
  2. 1. Why should they? Brigades etc. will amend their working tempo to reflect the fact that its harder for Reservists to do green stuff during the week. TOIL.

    2. Re-show.

    3. Why should they?
  3. 3. Because they should.
    • Like Like x 1
  4. The naivety...
    • Like Like x 2
  5. For trade qualifications that's actually not a bad idea. There's plenty of part time courses in civilian qualifications and nobody in civi street suggests that they are of a lower standard than the full time equivalent course. An OU degree is frequently seen as harder to complete than a full time degree. There's bound to be to be some stuff that just can't be done in one 16 days chunk but unless someone has a good hard look at it, how do we know that ?

    Infantry courses could benefit from perhaps a few weekends doing stuff that is just freshing skills the attendee should have already before attending the 16 day course.

    The first few days of Junior Brecon could have been done at ITC Catterick over 2 weekends before hand say, adding 4 days to training time at Brecon and allowing a chance to weed out those not fit enough to attend.

    And it's an interesting challange from our "leadership" to the regular leadership......
    • Like Like x 1
  6. Re-vamping training courses will require a bit of imagination and flair and the determination to fight ‘course creep’ and the lamentably slow tempo of some regular courses.

    As has been stated above distance learning, e-learning etc are standard ways of doing business in civvy street. I would say the military are about 10-15 years behind in this regard and speak from direct experience. While not all trades/services will be able to make it work, a lot of the more technical and administrative trades could do a lot more of their learning and consolidation outside of the classroom with course time allocated to a quick consolidate and test. A lot of reservists are already used to this modus operandi from their ‘real’ jobs.

    As a result for many of the CS and CSS arms the same TOs could be achieved with a lot less classroom time, and not necessarily requiring the regulars to work weekends.

    Unfortunately I currently see the trend going the other way. If anything regular courses are becoming longer with H&S and other legislation requiring additional modules to be added to mitigate risk. I have moaned on here before about instructor courses and ‘creeping excellence’ requiring reservist phase 1 instructors to attend multiple residential courses before even crossing the start line.
    • Like Like x 1
  7. It's not always the course the TA course is wrong. Several regular (RSig) courses have been dropped down to the same length/content as the TA i.e. Sigs SCLM (TA do BITS separately), Crypto, etc [but the courses are still classed as different]

    TA Infantry Sigs courses used to contain the same content, regular course being longer because of .... (extra practice periods).
  8. From the original posting:
    1. Integration and training of the Reserve needs to be lead from the top. Justified out of the need to save money and rebalance resources, the publicised decision for an increased reliance and investment in the Reserves requires more than just words in a White Paper. CGS’s team need to set the leadership and standards which promote cultural change across the Regular Force and generate seamless integration. If CGS is behind this intention to use the Reserves, there needs to be a campaign plan to define and realise this integration – or like SDR – it will be nothing more than words all over again!

    2. The school of senior leadership (Shrivenham) believe in the excellence of their teaching – yet their Reserve Forces module – is completely unrealistic and does not even get close to describing the Reserve Capability. Neither does it tackle the importance of integration, training – providing a model of how to achieve this with minimal overheads. In short – Shrivenham should identify resource who can advise them appropriate, and stop employing Reservists who’s only interest is stepping up their career ladder.

    3. If the intention is to Train and use the Reserves – then the whole training systems needs an overhaul. Each Trade or Course should be accessible over distance learning, modular weekend packages, or consolidated training periods. Obviously for the slower ones, these courses can be 6 or 8 weeks in duration. For the Reserves the limitations are WEEKENDS, access to distance learning, and 16 DAY CONTINIOUS Training period.. Do not water down the Reserve Course and create a double standard!
    • Like Like x 1
  9. "The only thing harder than getting a new idea into the military mind is to get an old one out."
    - Sir Basil H. Liddell-Hart

    • Like Like x 1
  10. Considering the military has been in an almost constant state of change (confusion and cuts) for the last 20 or so years I reckon Sir Basil's little pearl of wisdom has had its day.
  11. mso

    mso LE

  12. Why?

    I didn't suggest it will happen, which would be naive. I said it should (which it should), incidentally in response to your rather curt and unjustified question.

    Does a few weekends and a couple of weeks beasting at Catterick an infantryman make? I can tell you for damn sure the appropriate equivalent does not make an OPMI worth the name.
  13. There is no requirement for the Regular Army to change....

    The vocabulary and tenor of the proposed changes are to align the Army Reserve with the Regular Army, not to align both the Regular Army and the Army Reserve with an integrated Total Force model. The underlying takeaway is that the Regulars are fine and it is the Reserve Component that needs to up its game....


    Twenty two years in and around MI and still learning...
  14. How do I answer that...?

    I suspect that HM Government will view a failure by the Regular army to even think of making changes to the delivery of training courses to the Reserve as evidence of a Fail on the part of the Regular Army. And a few posters on here are pretty convinced that a Fail by the regular army will not go done well on the part of HM Government.
  15. KM

    Sorry - my weak attempt at irony failed.

    There is a huge need to change but the Regular Army 'Change Journey' has not yet begun. For example, 6 Regt is finally attempting to spin up the modularised Aviation Communications Specialist (V) course that it was tasked with under FAS in 2004. Real effort has been put into the proposal this past few months, apparently, only for it to be dissed by Middle Wallop.

    Res ipsa loquitur