Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by dingerr, May 22, 2010.
The heart of the site is the forum area, including:
Is the Army failing in it's duty of care for IEDD High Threat Operators.
The Army is not,
The EOD and particualr the IEDD community is. The reason that they are so overworked is the complete lack of operators caused directly by the protection of the trade by the RLC. Those that allowed this to happen, (luckily i have their names) have blood on their hands.
As for this narrow band of hero's, get over your self. You have others who get you there alive (sometimes at their cost) give you the target (sometimes at their cost), protect you from what you can't see/detect (sometimes at their cost), protect you whilst you do it (sometimes at their cost) and hand you it on a plate.
Just look back over the last few years and look at the rewards offered to these "hero's" compared to that of "their" searchers, No2's and ECM ops.
Rapid unjustified promotion, EOD pay and soon to be 50k retention bonus, GM/QGM and everything else up the ying yang for doing your job...the bubble surrounding the RLC ATO should have been burst a long time ago.
Of course you all bleat on about how you are the worlds best trained/selected you are, how we shouldn't drop standards, how the rest of world just don't "understand" whilst you jockey for the next big slot.
I've had enough of the lot of you, carry on feeling sorry for yourself your time is up
That was a useful reply O_b.
Who pinched your scone? Not bitter or twisted?
Bitter and twisted, yep.
Just visit the REST members from recent tours, deaths, limbs missing, eyesight gone, hearing gone, supporting these hero's. Not a mention, in fact when some members turned up for the filming of this programme they were asked why they were there, "this isn't about you lot, its about ATO's" well no surprise from me, its always about the ATO's.
Is that the ATO's fault?
Just a point, mate was on the All Arms CIED* selection other week. Now i know the whole idea of this is an emotive issue (RE-RLC thing) but he did mention that a lot of sour grapes was being mentioned in respect of the RLC element.
*Apologies if its not its correct name.
The fact is that they are highly-trained individuals and consequently rare beasts. That the Army can't suddenly magic more out of thin air to match a rapid increase in threat shouldn't be a surprise because the selection and training is still demanding and rigorous.
In a smaller Army, there will always be fewer people who'll cut it. Would it have been possible to organise something like the PQO scheme for direct entrants to the trade for explosives experts from civvy street? I dunno, but specialist trades tend to attract the specialist-minded.
In the meantime, the choice is ATO gets used hard or we lose more troops to IEDs.
No and i never said it was, this is a trade run by old ATO's for ATO's unfortunatly the ATO's that run the show are so in-grained in a old fight that no one at ground level cares about anymore.
The fight has moved on to such a degree, read the last few POR's from HERRICK and its obvious that things must change.
I have no issue with the operator on the ground (well apart from a couple!...) but am still shocked by the attitude of those that look after them.
Anyway lets watch the programme, i'm sure it will be a very balanced view......from Kineton.
Wrong, I'm afraid its the lack of Detect (ie finding) that kills troops, the ATO only gets involved ONCE the device is found.
That is my point, would you rather:
1. Face an enemy when you have no idea where he is
2. Go to face an Enemy when his exact location has been marked out with markers?
Everyone outside of the wire faces point 1.
ATO's face point 2.
Old banger - do not know what your level of IEDD qual is. If you would care to prove your point, kindly come to Kineton and pass the Adv course. It is open to all IEDD operators, so if you fit the bill, come and prove it is no big deal. If not yet qualified, come and do the Def EOD course first and then get yourself through the adv course. As you know RE EOD get EOD pay too.
You should have no dramas, as you say, the bombs are handed to ATO 'on a plate'. If you really think the RLC is saying 'no one but us can do this course' then you are either completely out of touch, or have swallowed a load of cack from someone with an axe to grind. The reality is all IEDD operators can do the course. If the standard is too hard for people to reach, train harder and maybe stop pretending you can do Cbt Engr, search and EOD and be good at all of them. ATOs focus on IEDD and get good at it (and still suffer casualties). Adding a whole load of half trained operators will not be the answer for very long - to use a Rumsfeldism, if you are not properly trained you have to deal with known unknowns and unknown unknowns.
As for your last point, let's be honest ATO faces 1 followed by 2. But you won't ack that because you are too bitter. Ask yourself not what the RLC does for ATO, rather what does your lot do for searchers?
Is it the RLC's fault that these people have caught the public's imagination? In a war with few positives, ATOs represent something easy to understand and identify with. Everyone knows there is more to it than an operator (and all the recent ATO receipients of awards said as much) but the public wants to know about the bloke disposing the device - harsh but true and in the eyes of the BBC the rest are 'supporting actors'. I am sure when the RE built a bridge in the past they never thanked the loggies for delivering it to you!
Seems to me you are jealous of the attention and feel undervalued - do the adv course and you get some of the glory too - if you want it that bad.
To be fair to Old Bangor, his criticisms were focused on the chain of command and not the individual operator. Which is think he has a point about; the ATO's I know aresometimes critical about it as well. And he never mentioned anything about the course being easy. Stop being so defensive!!!
Old banger, hope you know who Dingerr is and what he lost and sacrificed for his country. Get off your high horse and volunteer for it yourself. I volunteered for it myself many moons ago, and was unsuccessful. Some of the dead were friends and instructors on course (gaz). Before I volunteered I was on Op Harvest in Bosnia. I know what it means to come close to death. I was the one that found the crate of grenades outside a school, looking down the lid found that it was set to go off when the lid was opened. The box was placed outside the school deliberately so that the inquisitive kids would open it. That find was simple and quick but scared the living shite out of me. A lift of two inches and I would not be writing this.
When I see operators in Helmand going out on jobs all the hairs on the back of my neck go up, they deserve the best kit, recruitment and support than ever. Also remember that if one of their number is killed, another operator has to go back into the same area and reconvene the search. That takes bollocks.
Everyone is grateful and understanding of bottlewashers to operators working in the field, your fractious comments are not welcome.
The HT (as it was then) being opened up has come to late for me, or so I'm told. Although i do hear of other JS (mostly failed HT) of all ranks being encouraged onto the course but they all seem to be RLC....
The original question was to debate is the Army is not supporting its IEDD operators, the Army is, the RLC heirachry ins not.
This was a obvious to see 6-7years ago, repeated tours of Iraq for Operators, deploying Maj selected for Lt Col as an operator and everyone thought this was ok.....
The old system of training our EOD is rubbish, we all see that and although the new DEOD Op course is nowhere near ideal the model is the correct one. It will just take about 2 years before we see the results on the mainstream.
I'm close to the beating heart on this malarky now, i see it daily with my own eyes, there are still those that hold the protection of the RLC ahead of protection of their Operators. Until that changes we will continue to thrash our HT blokes.
The future? Well seeing as "we" have not been able to generate the number of IED Op's required there are some very scary prospects about to go through. To coin a phrase, "we've waited 4 years for you cock monkeys to sort yourslelves out, you haven't so we are going to do it instead."
Well done us.
Separate names with a comma.