• ARRSE have partnered with Armadillo Merino to bring you an ARRSE exclusive, generous discount offer on their full price range.
    To keep you warm with the best of Merino gear, visit www.armadillomerino.co.uk and use the code: NEWARRSE40 at the checkout to get 40% off!
    This superb deal has been generously offered to us by Armadillo Merino and is valid until midnight on the the 28th of February.

MATTs are c**p

Are MATTs crap


  • Total voters
    1
#1
New MATTs are no better than the ITDs that preceeded them and have only generated an enourmous paperchase! Where is an infantry company supposed to store the last FIVE years of MATT results, especially when each person that passes their MATTs produces about fifteen sheets of paper. Anybody else want to generate some more worthless rubbish that is going to get in the way of useful training!
Hang on I haven't finished yet. The Mapreading package is terrible and must be re-written to make lessons, (at present I have sacked it and teach from MAPRIC lesson plans instead!) MATT 6 should be one lesson.
Please can somebody track down the punter responsible for this, make him apologise for wasting mine and my soldiers time and write the whole thing again to be easy to do.
 
G

Goku

Guest
#4
I know for a fact that the team who dreamed up MATTs watch this site very closely.
It’ll be interesting to see if they respond.

I dread to think how much tax money was wasted on this.

From the soldiers perspective there is very little difference between MATTs and the previous system.
Yes I know we now have to pass everything instead of attempt to get our bounty but did that really justify replacing ITDs? Why not just amend the old system to make it a mandatory pass instead of reinventing the wheel and still ending up with a circle?

And why was vehicle recognition replaced with values and standards?
With more and more of us deploying on ops what’s more important? Being able to recognise friend or foe or knowing not to lie and cheat?

And while we’re on the subject of values and standards, how is a 30-60min test/lesson going to teach someone the errors of their ways if they’re already a bit shifty?
 
#6
Goku said:
I know for a fact that the team who dreamed up MATTs watch this site very closely.
It’ll be interesting to see if they respond.

I dread to think how much tax money was wasted on this.

From the soldiers perspective there is very little difference between MATTs and the previous system.
Yes I know we now have to pass everything instead of attempt to get our bounty but did that really justify replacing ITDs? Why not just amend the old system to make it a mandatory pass instead of reinventing the wheel and still ending up with a circle?

And why was vehicle recognition replaced with values and standards?
With more and more of us deploying on ops what’s more important? Being able to recognise friend or foe or knowing not to lie and cheat?

And while we’re on the subject of values and standards, how is a 30-60min test/lesson going to teach someone the errors of their ways if they’re already a bit shifty?
Vechicle rec is still done. But is only done if going on deployment
 
G

Goku

Guest
#8
Yorkshire_Warrior said:
Goku said:
I know for a fact that the team who dreamed up MATTs watch this site very closely.
It’ll be interesting to see if they respond.

I dread to think how much tax money was wasted on this.

From the soldiers perspective there is very little difference between MATTs and the previous system.
Yes I know we now have to pass everything instead of attempt to get our bounty but did that really justify replacing ITDs? Why not just amend the old system to make it a mandatory pass instead of reinventing the wheel and still ending up with a circle?

And why was vehicle recognition replaced with values and standards?
With more and more of us deploying on ops what’s more important? Being able to recognise friend or foe or knowing not to lie and cheat?

And while we’re on the subject of values and standards, how is a 30-60min test/lesson going to teach someone the errors of their ways if they’re already a bit shifty?
Vechicle rec is still done. But is only done if going on deployment
So vehicle recognition (a skill that can be taught) isn’t impotent enough to be taught and tested every year but honesty and integrity (something that can’t really be taught) is?
Pink and fluffy army here we come!
Next we’ll be swapping the CFT for a basket weaving lesson and only testing the CFT before ops.

Surely it would have been better to test values and standards every 3+ years?
 
#9
In fact, we are just getting JPA, why can't we just enter the details on there somehow and then I can forget completly about keeping the question papers for five years!
 
#10
Goku said:
So vehicle recognition (a skill that can be taught) isn’t impotent enough to be taught and tested every year but honesty and integrity (something that can’t really be taught) is?
Pink and fluffy army here we come!
Next we’ll be swapping the CFT for a basket weaving lesson and only testing the CFT before ops.

Surely it would have been better to test values and standards every 3+ years?
Vehicle recognition doesn't need Viagra, that's good to hear!

Are values and standards a bit on the limp side then Goku?

I do see your point though.......I always found vehicle recognition quite hard too!
 
#11
Map reading and navigation are fundimental qualities that are severely lacking in TA soldiers. It replaced vehicle recognition and rightly so I believe.
Considering a great majority of TA are based in the UK, I don't see much point in being able to tell the difference between a T62 and a Charlie2.

The MATTS system is based on levels of readyness, that is why there are 3 levels. And as for values and standards, the "SOLID C" is what the British Army is, it seperates us from the rest of the shiites out there, so of course it is important and I think you will find that it is a whole package with LOAC included, something that is important in this day and age.

Selfless commitment-respect for Others-Loyalty-Integrity-Disipline-Courage.

If you ditch these then we just become another mob with guns.
 
G

Goku

Guest
#12
Tartan_Terrier said:
Goku said:
So vehicle recognition (a skill that can be taught) isn’t impotent enough to be taught and tested every year but honesty and integrity (something that can’t really be taught) is?
Pink and fluffy army here we come!
Next we’ll be swapping the CFT for a basket weaving lesson and only testing the CFT before ops.

Surely it would have been better to test values and standards every 3+ years?
Vehicle recognition doesn't need Viagra, that's good to hear!

Are values and standards a bit on the limp side then Goku?

I do see your point though.......I always found vehicle recognition quite hard too!
Ooops typo, blame the lunch time beers :D

My point is that if you’re the type who is going to cheat, thieve, take drugs, shagg your mates wife… a lesson/test once a year isn’t going to change that.
However if you can’t tell a landrover from a challenger 2 then a yearly test/lesson might just be what you need.

I’m not saying that values and standards isn’t important, but I do think that if you haven’t learned right from wrong by adulthood there really isn’t much hope for you.
 
#13
Fair comment about TA based in UK what happens when they go on Ops?
sudden panic to learn a years worth of AFV rec, it is a fundamental skill that everyone in the Army needs to know to prevent Blue on Blue for starters!
 
#14
^That is why there are 3 levels, level those on ops or iminent for ops, level 2, those not iminent for ops an level 3, Cadets, Salvation Army and Government ministers;-) in other words those who have no chance of doing ops.

I'm a firm believer in soldiers and units aspiring to the level above the one they are required to achieve, but I don't hold out much hope for it to happen.
 
#15
You should always be prepared to be deployed as world affairs change daily. Would the enemy give you all time to read up on your AFV rec and NBC ets? Will they feck!
Soldiers are paid to train until they are required to put that training into practise. Not whine about how are they going to fit it all in when there's so much work to be done as well. There are 24 hours in the day if your admin is up your arse. Get it together and be men, not moaners.

As for it changing every couple of years that's just people trying to justify their existance or another change of hierachy which seems to always to require a change for the better (read worse)
 
#16
Is this just the TA whinging again or are some of the above contributors regular serving? :x

Goku wrote
"My point is that if you’re the type who is going to cheat, thieve, take drugs, shagg your mates wife… a lesson/test once a year isn’t going to change that.
However if you can’t tell a landrover from a challenger 2 then a yearly test/lesson might just be what you need. "

Obviously hasn't passed his MATT 6 because if he had he would of known that it's all about doing "the right thing" and not ending up with your arse in court because someone has sent a video to the 'SCUM' newspaper of you lining a local up against the wall etc etc etc

As was said by Devilish

"The MATTS system is based on levels of readyness, that is why there are 3 levels. And as for values and standards, the "SOLID C" is what the British Army is, it seperates us from the rest of the shiites out there, so of course it is important and I think you will find that it is a whole package with LOAC included, something that is important in this day and age."

Well Done Goku go to the top of the class again !
 
#17
As a fully qualified ex-milan AFV spotter, I agree that vehicle rec can be important, but it is very theatre / deployment specific. How relevant is it for current or possible ops in say, Iraq, Afghanistan, Sierra Leone, Darfur? Blue on blues are often more related to problems with situational awareness than vehicle misidentification (ie -"if there is a tank there it must be an enemy tank therefore I will engage it").

I have not come across the record keeping aspect of MATTS - how bad is it? Are we still keeping paper records?
 
#19
badger-sporran said:
Is this just the TA whinging again or are some of the above contributors regular serving? :x

Goku wrote
"My point is that if you’re the type who is going to cheat, thieve, take drugs, shagg your mates wife… a lesson/test once a year isn’t going to change that.
However if you can’t tell a landrover from a challenger 2 then a yearly test/lesson might just be what you need. "

Obviously hasn't passed his MATT 6 because if he had he would of known that it's all about doing "the right thing" and not ending up with your arse in court because someone has sent a video to the 'SCUM' newspaper of you lining a local up against the wall etc etc etc

As was said by Devilish

"The MATTS system is based on levels of readyness, that is why there are 3 levels. And as for values and standards, the "SOLID C" is what the British Army is, it seperates us from the rest of the shiites out there, so of course it is important and I think you will find that it is a whole package with LOAC included, something that is important in this day and age."

Well Done Goku go to the top of the class again !
Smells of TA whinging again.........
 
#20
I once heard this type of pointless activity described as "Pig Wrestling" - everybody gets covered in sh*t and it annoys the pig...

There are a few skills and drills that need an annual polish, these however should be part of any unit annual training, and not a highly proscribed "bolt on". MATTS is becoming a bureaucratic monster, and a gross imposition on the ability of units to train effectively..

If a unit cannot maintain individuals to the required standard, then this should be refelected in the assessment of the local chain of command. It should be left to a CO to manage this type of training to meet local needs and conditions.

As to having to sit in SLB and listen to this rubbish as 107s came whistling in - I despair..
 

Latest Threads