Just one in 20 TA soldiers trained to serve on front line

#3
Mmm - That article seems to amount to a few words put around a politicised press release from MOD/Army seniors. For example the 1500 deployable figure would seem to be the average number mobilised for any given Herrick tour rather than the full deployable figure?
 
F

fozzy

Guest
#4
:) I wondered how long it would take before the fight-back started. It seems that someone has decided to break cover......

Quite. And poorly briefed it would seem - surely this level of readiness is through design? Have the authors heard of the Graduated Commitment Model and the Tiered MATTS system? Initiatives that were thought up and deployed by a cash strapped LAND command?

Oh, and didn't the in-year savings of 2009, put paid to a lot of planned training too, leaving a training/skills gap that we are still struggling to put right?

The majority of the TA is on MATTS 2, and the GCM means that once warned for ops, you up the level of training, feeding into the PDT/OPTAG of your recieving unit. This was sold as a cost effective way of managing readiness, resourse and cash.

I notice that one of the authors is from the spectaularly ineffective NDA.
 
B

bokkatankie

Guest
#5
Quite. And poorly briefed it would seem - surely this is level of readiness is through design? Have the authors heard of the Graduated Commitment Model and the Tiered MATTS system? Initiatives that were thought up and deployed by a cash strapped LAND command.

Oh, and didnt the in-year savings of 2009 put piad to a lot of planned training too, leaving a training/skills gap that we are still struggling to put right?

The majority of the TA is on MATTS 2 and the GCM means that once warned for ops, you up the level of training, feeding into the PDT/OPTAG of your recieving unit. This was sold as a cost effective way of managing readiness, resourse and cash.

I notice that one of the authors is from the spectaularly ineffective NDA.
I read the article and agree with your conclusions, it appears to give the lie that there would not be time to initiate upgraded training prior to operations. This is patent nonsense, only one or two regular units could really deploy without intensive pre-op training, all cannot be kept a a constant state of high readiness any more than the TA.
 
#8
So does that mean only 1 in 20 qualified for their bounty?
No.

In brief, as mentioned above, the GCM means that some people will have to do more in order to earn the bounty, some will do less.

Edited to add-
The article does add some balance by suggesting that senior officers have diverted TA money into the regular army.... as if that would happen.

It is a weak article because it does not say how they are defining 'ready to serve on the front line', and by the same measure I would be interested to know how many regular soldiers are trained to serve on the front line, at this moment in time.....
 
#9
It is not the content of the article that is interesting so much as the fact that it is being written now. Who benefits ? Why is this being said ? I think you may find that this is part of a wider effort......
 
#10
I read the article and agree with your conclusions, it appears to give the lie that there would not be time to initiate upgraded training prior to operations. This is patent nonsense, only one or two regular units could really deploy without intensive pre-op training, all cannot be kept a a constant state of high readiness any more than the TA.
Does anybody know what proportion of the regular army would qualify as adequately trained to serve on the front line, using the same criteria as got 5% of the TA?
 
#11
This is old hash – using statistics in the normal miss quoted, miss analysed and therefore presenting a case that is just plain misleading. I expected better of some of those who put their names to this letter.

The TA are not resourced (time and money) to train to MATT level 1 and conduct Special To Arm training and CT 5. This lower level of readiness is laid down by Land (Regular). Only those warned off for Ops get the resource uplift to get to MATT Level 1 and take part in the relevant Operational Training, hence the magical 1 in 20 figure.

Coincidentally, only a certain small number of regular troops were trained to deployable levels. Possibly somewhere in the region of 9.5k in 102k at any one time, or 1 in 10. Now the TA figure doesn’t look so bad.

Lies, damned lies and of course, statistics. Unfortunately even a GCSE level mathematician could have seen through this one.

Colonels, sorry, but C-, must do better.

Already discussed here.

http://www.arrse.co.uk/just-ta/1653...ed-forces-reservists-boost-4.html#post3820251
 
#12
Does this have any relationship to Workplace Training Statements too? Very few people tick all the boxes for that. I noticed on Remembrance Day that over half of those present had operational experience. OK, doesn't mean they are ready to go as of today but quite significant I thought. Of course that is just the ones who turn up......
 
#13
Maths has never been my strong point but i thought that Fr20 said that the TA was down to 15000 bodies. Meaning that the figure would be 1 in 10. However this article seems to suggest that it is already up to 30000. All i can say is that the recruiting drive seems to have worked, doubling in size in 6 months, the RTCs must be swamped.
 
#14
as many of us know, many TA units are holding on to p7s and perm down grade's. unit commanders do this due to NUMBERS on books.
as the TA is a smaller number compared to the regular army, statistics, and percentages will look higher. we all know MATT'S are not a true bench mark of deploy ability, however, would we need a TA R.A.M.C, plastic surgeon, or annethatist to complete a 8 mile cft ? many of the top tier specialists cannot be found in the regular army, with the experience that is needed. yes, a lot of money is simply thrown away, ie,
p7's and perm down grades not doing a lot to qualify for bounty, this is why p7's and the like should lose 50 percent of their bounty until they become ''up to scratch''. strong questions should be asked to those that have never been on a op tour and i dont class op TOSCA as such. the powers that be, shouldn't ask us to volunteer, compulsory mobilisation should be the order of the day !, however we all know the problems this would cause with employers, and employability of said TA personnel..

here endeth the sermon,
i will climb down from said soap box.
 
#17
Just my 2ps worth.
P7s.
I was P7 last year, now on P3 and trying to make it back. Was I ready to go to war, no did I make a very valid contribution to my Sqn. Yes I think I did and the Sqn would have been less effective without me, trying not to sound like an out and out K**b.

Volunteer to go?
Send me the brown envelope and I'll turn up and see what happens. Two young kids, career and all that, so I'm not going to at the moment going to sign on for a Boys Own Adventure. Two years time yes I should be able to. But until then give me the envelope and I'll go.
 
#18
Just my 2ps worth.
P7s.
I was P7 last year, now on P3 and trying to make it back. Was I ready to go to war, no did I make a very valid contribution to my Sqn. Yes I think I did and the Sqn would have been less effective without me, trying not to sound like an out and out K**b.

Volunteer to go?
Send me the brown envelope and I'll turn up and see what happens. Two young kids, career and all that, so I'm not going to at the moment going to sign on for a Boys Own Adventure. Two years time yes I should be able to. But until then give me the envelope and I'll go.
I think that applies to a lot of people who are actually in work at the moment. Even with such safeguards as there are, it's a big career hole and for those who are self employed or freelance it's a question of whether they will ever be able to pick things up when they come back.

I only know about Inf but if TA Inf Bns were put on a rotation cycle as Regular ones are and HAD to be deployable by a given date it would certainly change things for the good. The TA has got like it is because of the way it has been misused to provide a drip feed of IRs... (amongst other things)
 
#19
Well, as many have spotted already the real headline should be "1 in 20 trained as that's all the Army will pay for".

There's a reason the Reserves review rejected the policies that have lead us to this point; there's a reason the current government is pushing through a reserve strategy the Army would reject if it could; there's a reason I keep going on about the Army being in denial about what they have to do to make things work in the future. If you want to know what I think the current goverment believes about all this, I'd point you to another quote in the article:

"The source said: “The regular Army doesn’t want the reserves to succeed, and there are generals who are trying to make sure this fails.” "

From the point of view of our political masters though, the reserves must succeed and indeed are increasingly going to be the only thing between us and the bad guys, whoever they turn out to be. By opposing this the current senior management in the Army are starting to render themselves irrelevant, and probably redundant too.

The letter writers mentioned in the article are desperately trying to cling on to the past; they reek of desperation, cling to an outdated notion of "proper soldiering" that was out of date by the Boer War and ignore the future. Better to slide them aside to prop up the bar and tell "when I" stories of the the two wars the country has lost this century, no doubt blaming those damned politicians for everything.

The saddest thing for me is that those feeding this article think the public will support their drive for a larger regular force; all it will do is lead them to conclude that the Army are at present ******* incompetent. This complete lack of understanding and connection to "civvy shitcunts" will cost the Regs dear.
 
#20
My usual piss taking aside, the last time I deployed as a reservist through the RTMC it was a circus of **** ups and some jaw dropping sloping of shoulders.

Firstly, the phys. At mine there were a sizable number of RMR ranks and a good spread of other arms that set off on a CFT, bar the rubber daggers all others including line inf broke off at the 4 or 6 mile point, (cant remember) jobs a good un? The general standard of personal phys was in short, disgusting. Fat and thin spewing and staggering round the PFT and the ******* state of some of the sad sacks doing the stand up exercises in the gym was stupefying. Who signed these people off to move to Chilwell? Wasn't everyone at least slighty at risk of having to grab their kit and put the miles in on operations? What suprised me even more were the amount of reservists (in an ex regs only sense) saying that they had stuck their hands up to deploy weeks before and had done simply that, just turn up with a new bone haircut, some of which had been out of the loop since pre Granby/Grapple, who the **** dealt with the paperwork for those blokes ?! :)

And the lessons? Half hearted 'chats' about the subject matter administrated and delivered by bored looking chaps clock watching for the mad dash up the hill to the galley. SAA lessons were admittedly the only ones with a bit of spark but the rest? You may as well have given the blokes a copy of the relevant PAMS and let them lay out on the sun baked grass whilst reading them.

That aside some quality guys and good blokes, but for me, 2 weeks at Chilwell and for some a fortnight at Castle Martin/Catterick/insert trg area on top does not maketh a deployable body, but as I'm rightly informed its all changed now.

Anyway Pat Butcher is dying on 'Enders and I'm having a well deserved cry after checking the Visa bill on-line....
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top