MK2 - again!

Discussion in 'Officers' started by big-timer, Jun 15, 2007.

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. I know this topic as a whole has been done to death, but I've a specific concern that I'm planning on addressing in the feedback once I've finished the accursed thing.

    In wading through the modules, I have come across many subjects that were entirely new to me, as well as many in which I was already pretty knowledgeable. Sadly, this is the root of my concern. There are so many horrible inaccuracies in these sections that I wonder about the accuracy of the material that’s new to me!

    While I can excuse some of these inaccuracies due to changes that the course writers can’t be expected to keep up with (although it’s still bloody frustrating to have to learn something that you know to be out of date), there are still some startling examples.

    This brings me to the point of my post. While I can happily comment on my areas of knowledge in the feedback, I would be well out of my depth commenting on the employment of OAS and the DAG in IBE. Anyone got any good examples to bolster my case?

    Please remember OPSEC though chaps. PM me anything that oughtn’t to be in a public forum.

    B-T
     
  2. Take it you frequent bash.org too then? xD
     
  3. Nah, left over from my Uni days! I'll have a look now though.

    B-T
     
  4. The Manpower Issues module refers to AF C7005s with WFE and UE components. They've been superseded by the new AF C8005s with DC, CC and DE components since at least 2004.

    Reading the above makes me realise how pointless the entire MK2 process is.
     
  5. Pedant, thanks for the example. This is the sort of thing that's frustrating me. The MK team's easy excuse for this sort of error is that it's a change that they're unable to keep up with on anything less than an annual basis. Another example is that MK2 still refers to the DPA and DLO, and Customer 1 and Customer 2 when these names and terms are now out of date.

    I was more after examples that are plain wrong, and always have been. For example, the planning ranges and capabilities of ODETTE (EW kit for the uninitiated) stated in MK2 are not just wrong, but actively misleading!

    B-T
     
  6. It's been a while since I did it but certainly details on vehicles in types of Engr Sqn were way out. It also still had Field Park Squadrons for the Sappers when we've called them Field Support Sqns for the last few years. Late last year there was an ETS Capt that was taking lessons learned from anyone that had recently completed MK2 for an overhaul - haven't heard much since.
    What peed me off was spelling Tacisys or wording 17 (UK) AD Bde wrong and the computer not recognising the fact that you know exactly what you're talking about (sometimes)!
     
  7. I'm led to believe that the new iteration of the assessments is more 'forgiving' than the first. It identifies when things are correct so long as you answer within the range to agreeable answers in the database.

    Apparently...
     
  8. big-timer,

    When we were doing to the Defence Acquisition stage on ICSC(L) they insisted on using this terminology even though three days after the stage finished it was over to DE&S. We still get lecturers referring to DLO and DPA!
     
  9. I quote MK2 helpline - "Don't use the MK2 CD, it is out of date and only supposed to be for use on Ops etc, where there is no access to a computer. Use the eMK package."

    1) Most Officers do not have access to a computer unless they buy there or own, or do too much work so get given one, hence haven't got time to do MK2 at it any way.

    2) I am just wading through module C and as I know a bit about the content, am staggered to see that kit is mentioned as "coming into service from 2004" or "should be in after 2006". Also the topic of FR Regts as a Div asset, when they have been a Bde asset under FAS for over a year...

    So we learn out of date stuff online, then are apparently supposed to know this out of date and factually incorrect information verbatum for ICSC(L). Great!!
     
  10. Great! Just waded through the CSS part. I then called Mrs Big-Timer who's in the RLC (I know, I know) and asked her which sort of Regt she was in, CS or GS. Only to be told that they'd binned that ages ago and now had Supply Regts and Log Sp Regts.

    I promised myself that I could forgive MK for just being out of date, but this is getting silly...

    B-T
     
  11. It gets better, you don't need any of it for ICSC(L) either because you have access to it all online there!!

    Stick with it fellas...
     
  12. Not on MK2 yet just finished MK1 and so enjoyed that trip down Boredom lane now while I can't comment on MK2 I found MK1 at times to be alittle sparse on info, and I had to find it in other areas, some of the assessment questions ambiguous and not clearly stated as to what they wanted.

    I start JOTAC next week, and I am meant to bring my MK1 info with me... how when you cant..... or I couldnt download off the site, and getting hold of the disk requires justifcation by the Adj. A disk would have been helpful to use as a study when away from my desk and also for presentations at a later date.
     
  13. I have read that MK2 is being re-organised again. Does any-one know if you can start it under the current system and then continue in the new?
     
  14. MK 2 is about to under go a 'split'. It will involve MK 2a - this will be necessary to take up an SO3/Adjt/Ops Offr, senior Capt job; and MK 2b - which will be the must have for attending ICSC(L)

    Not sure whether it can be 'swapped'. I imagine that it will be a modularised or transitional thing, so if you start the 'old' one then you finish it and it dies a natural death over time. Just a guess though, don't quote me...
     
  15. At the moment ICSC(L) is "between" MK2 and the previous system. ICSC(L) do not ask if you have completed MK2 because it is up to APC(G) to ensure that those people loaded on the course are appropriately trained. Large portions of the course are revision of MK2 as a result of ICSC(L) 2 and 3 both having people who have completed neither AJD nor MK2 therefore trying to ensure that a base level is met. In my opinion ICSC(L) 4 will be different as everyone should have completed MK2 prior to selection for promotion, thertefore the base level can be assumed. I am sure that the inval for 4a's first term will highlight this if the course isn't changed.