MATT 1 - A Gang F*** Waiting to Happen?

Discussion in 'Army Reserve' started by Carlos_Hathcock_II, Jun 4, 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. While reading through the stimulating publication called MATTs that I found in my in tray one day I have come arose this little mistake.

    I hope someone can either pass it up the chain to the required level or answer this for me.

    The publications required are..



    Training the Battle Shot (latest version, I think is 2005)


    MATT 1.

    Personal Weapon Test.

    In the chart called 'Timing and Instructor Qualification Requirements Summary' is says "Prior to WHT 10 mins of revision training may be required" and then goes onto list the relevant qualifications for 1. Giving the revision and 2. Taking the Test.

    And they are....

    "Qualifications Required/Presenter"
    "Section Commanders Battle Course or Other Arms NCO Skill At Arms Instructors Course" It does not mention the CMCQ qualification.

    Now this is the problem. The SCBC does NOT teach you how to a. Instruct or give revision periods in SAA, or b. Take the WHT!

    In the Pam ‘Training the Battle Shot’, under the heading WHT, it lays down the qualifications required, which includes the CMCQ BUT does NOT include the SCBC.

    In the regulars the SCBC is a very long course which includes the SAA course in its length, but the TA one does not.

    It seems that the person who made the requirements for the MATTs got the regular/TA courses and qualifications mixed up. And that they did not bother to cross check the references and publications that give guidance to instructors and training Officers.

    This does need to be corrected otherwise there could be problems, incorrect teaching, or worse incorrect skills being passed and classed as competent.
  2. So you’ve found problems with MATT 1, I’ve found problems with 4 & 6.
    Anyone else see a pattern here??
  3. Then use your common sense - get a skilly to do WHT's then an RMQ or skilly to run the range. Call me picky....
  4. Call me picky but it would have been better if MATT 1 had been proof read for mistakes before being published :roll:
  5. Exactly!

    Call me picky too, if you end up reling on 'common sence' with the manual saying something different then if it goes wrong, as it shirly will then you are well and truely screwed!

    Here we are, tring to be the 'One Army' and the writers of our new training outline cant get it correct.

    Cabbage_head, with a motto like yours and you say use a bit o common? This is basic preparation we are talking about here, which it kinda looks like they failed to do!
  6. Maybe if you could learn to spell correctly, you could gob off. In the mean time, get your coat.
  7. I presume the latest version of Training the Battle Shot allows CMCQ qualified people to conduct WHT, however from which point did the CMCQ course include training in conducting WHTs? Mine didn't.
  8. Mine did then again it was a while ago. However, as I recall CMCQ only allows you to conduct the WHT not the revision, Skilly only I thought..
  9. Mine did last year.

    As for SCBC, the regular SCBC includes a Skill at Arms phase. This phase includes the TA CMCQ qualification, hence one would assume that it is a simple oversight and current and CMCQ qualified pax can still conduct WHTs.

  10. Ahhh so as you have nothing of value to add you have to resort to slinging mud or spelling mistakes! Yawn!

    Your anorak is here too, would you kindly collect it on your way out as your taxi has arrived. Destination - Sadville, population 1 x pedantic spellorific saddo - You!

    As for the CMCQ taking the WHT's as far as I can remember it mentions that in the Training the Battle Shot. And only Skillys can teach or revise as per the pain of death instruction from those happy chappies in the SASC.