Int Corps Phase 2 training - Is it up to date?

Discussion in 'Int Corps' started by g2_loony_bin, Jan 24, 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. This is very simple.

    What does everyone think of the standard of training for Phase 2 recruits?

    - Is it commensurate (ooh love that word) to the job once the chaps get out of training?

    - Is there enough of a link between Templer TDW and the "real world" to keep training up to date?

    I'm sure many more issues will crop up as this is discussed. With the increasing size of the Corps and the large number of sup num's floating and many aspects of our job changing is it right that Units should train up recruits "in job"?
  2. Ahhhh the age old question rears its head again!

    This is a question asked by just about every long in the tooth Cpl and above.

    In my opinion/experience;

    1. Trg Wing reacts to changes in the field and changes in doctrine. Therefore trying to plug perceived trg gaps as reported by various commands around the world. It does not dictate doctrine. There is always a time lag between changes in the field and changes in training. Look how long it took to make the changes to OpMI.

    2. To what level do you need a recruit trained in order to meet the minimum requirement? This is always a balancing act between how well we train recruits and how long they spend in Phase 2.

    well that's my tuppence worth. excuse speeling.
  3. That's all good and well for Op Int. The study of GENFARCE as it sweeps across the Midlands into southern England is fine. You can apply any old army to any scenario and fight 'em. An instructor during my time there said we could use Orcs and Elves if we wanted to (we didn't).

    Do we need to learn about Counter Insurgency whilst there and OOTW? In a word no. I learnt that on the job and had a storming time in TELIC. It might need to be touched upon but that's all. The senior Cpls and above in any section should have an idea through follow up training.

    What about Sy then? The SRE that is implemented across nearly every Sy Section now is not in training. Is that right?
  4. The majority of my experience is with Sy and SD's. My only experience of Op Int was in Belize and Hong Kong long before the implementation of GENFARCE. It was Sovs wherever you went (sounds like the Septics!).

    However, you are probably right. There may well be elements that could be omitted from Phase 2. The only draw back is that these subjects must then be taught "on the Job". Who does this "on the job" teaching? and to what standard is it conducted? if it is ever conducted at all. What I mean by that is what if you drop GENFARCE and then spend the next 4 years doing Security Section tours. By the time you get to an Op Int section, as a senior Cpl looking for his Sgt, with no knowledge or experience to draw upon at all, where does that leave the individual?

    These are just my own views of course. I am not saying you are right or wrong. This could be an interesting discussion if others joined in.
  5. The "on the job" (70's bbc sitcom anyone?) aspect is central to this thread. If Phase 2 is neglecting CI and SI to such an extent that when a trade trained intelligencer joins a section and doesn't know the layout of a PSI report how long will it take to train the Phase 2 out of them, how much more pressure will that put on an under manned or over worked sy section?
  6. If you believe that there is a training deficeincy, you need to flag it up to Int Corps TDT. They should (in consultation with the training sponsors) carry out some sort of extended external validation. If indeed is found that there is a training deficiency, then a Job Analysis should be done. The bottom line is, unless someone makes a point of staffing it up the CoC - nothing will change, training will be conducted 'the way it's allways been done'.
  7. During the OPMI 2 is the OPMI forum. This is a number of presentations given by students on the course answering questions the DS pose on "How to improve training". It was the case during my OPMI 2 that the RSM Corps and a number of other Senior Officers of the Corps took a great interest in what we had to say on four topics on different aspects of training. It was, as they put it, a chance for us to voice our opinions on the training, to take it forward and develop a greater programme.

    This however is not about taking this to the TDT. This is meant to be an overall discussion, all input welcome covering all bases and seeing how fellow members of the Corps have found the transition from Phase 2 to real life in recent years.
  8. This raises a very good point. Again it must be a balance of what is requird by Unit commanders and how much content Phase 2 training can cover in a limited period. As the number and diversity(?) of our deployments increase/change then so our training should be altered to reflect this.

    As pointed out, this is the task of the TDT.
  9. a senior WO1(No names please), comes around the bazaars and interviews LCPLS after a year or so and asks them quite a few questions. How to improve training..what did training prepare you for? Do you use the training day to day? etc

    This is then put through statistical analysis, and lo and behold, the course is by and large achieving the aims it was meant to do( produce competent-ish operator who needs to gain job experience).

    The valid points that are raised(not the "that DS is a dick" ones) are looked at seriously and will be brought into training, to avoid Units having to do certain things like Landie training, resources permitting.

    On the other hand, I heard a whisper that out of 70 LCPLS asked to describe the Intelligence cycle, only 6 started of with DIRECTION ! Is THAT because the new LCPLs are sh1t, the DS were/are sh1t, or the current managers in the sections are sh1t(at direction, obviously!)

  10. All valid points about the TDT, but given their embryonic stage they can only do so much. Other Corps have had TDTs established for far longer than we have. You can't have training that covers every eventuality, such Rolls Royce type solutions can only ever be the initial aspiration, what you end up with is usually a series of compromises with ATRA - who will always press for shorter trade training courses as time is money. There will always be an element of on the job training, Chicksands can only ever teach the basic principles, the application of these skills falls to the SNCOs and WOs within a Sect.
  11. as long as the operator him/herself is up to a certain standard, i think you can work through almost any training deficiency. most of our juniors are enthusiastic, and can pick up required skills swiftly and with little difficulty.

    when i have a problem is this: when a substandard / borderline operator "passes" phase 2 and is shoved out to a section, the instructors thinking they will "catch up" in the section. having had such a junior under me, i can say that this is a f*cking nightmare. one junior can take up a hugely disproportionate amount of your time, when they lack basic skills e.g. written english.

    there is, in my mind, a significant difference between turning out a capable operator who lacks certain trade skills due, to limited training time on phase 2 (acceptable and can be fixed).... and turning out a soldier who is unsuitable for what the int corps do, but has not been identified and weeded out - due to the mentality of "they will fix it at his new section". this is unacceptable and a f*cking nause.

    rant over. sorry, it's been a long week. and it's only tuesday........ :)
  12. is it not true, or at least, perceived, that weaker individuals get postings to JHQ, to sections co-located at places where CSMs/OCs can cast a damning look over the new LCPL, and not to places where you have to produce from day1?
  13. Now SO2 Trg and 2IC TTC will probably put me right here, but....

    The " Int Corps" TDT used to be located in the office block next to the hangar containing Int Corps flying pig flight. (FPF) ( Just past the DI18 staffs' huge operational requirements and capability group portacabin on the left of the Directorate.

    There have been, and will contunue to be some good (and bad) eggs in the TDT, but let's be clear that they are probably directed more by the DISC than they ever are by D Int.

    Until the Corps has a TDT that starts to measure up to some of those in other arms and services, the "modified , seat-of-the-pants, Mellor loop" will prevail. :wink:
  14. Just a small point, but do you actually ever need to describe or recite the Intelligence cycle as a first tour LCpl? Or even as D Int? All you need to be able to do is what your told - which I suppose is where direction comes in. It reminds me of my Sy A3, where exams consisted of reciting (word for word) the definitions of terrorism, sabotage, subversion and espionage (it rocks!!). All completely f*cking pointless and no use in helping you write a PS report. The training, I believe, is getting better but as the cliche goes "Rome wasn't built in a day"!
  15. Mirror - Signal-Manouver, Safetycatch-Magazine- Pouch, Clear Loud Accurate and with Pauses, Security Accuracy and Brevity.

    If you can not grasp the basic principles as you leave Templer, you are going to be completely lost if you have to work on your own on your first tour.

    On my first tour, I was the night shift in a Mech Bde HQ. On my second tour in 2 IST, I frequently had to do the night shift on my own in a front-line Criminal Intelligence Unit. For the majority of my first six years, there was seldom a supervisor to turn to. I was not, and will not, be the only one who has to cope alone.

    An understanding of the principles means that Feild Security can produce CI product that allows successful Reactive operations to be mounted against our adversaries. ( without a hint of a steer or supervision from the G2 Staff or PJHQ)

    The army is designed to survive attrition, the culture of the Corps had evolved to a stage where we could routinely cope with this. Unless we have suddenly become flush with manpower, lets not throw that baby out with the bathwater.

    If the D Int can not recite the Int Cycle, then we can only hope that the football improves :wink:

    Post ScriptWell I stand sorely corrected! there is a 3 person TDT and a tripple hatted OC. Nearly as many TD analysts as there are doing Warrior Gunnery :!:

    Still, glad to see that the elephant is still being nibbled away at. Well done to those in the recent past and present who made this happen
    ( includes at least 2 who are now civvies)