Short Range management

#1
:roll: :x :evil:
~The short range course……. although it did help me realise that my county don’t run ranges correctly (not that they are unsafe) it just seems like all they want to achieve is live to brass conversion and as many Cadets as possible to fire a few rounds.

The Course is the worse course I have EVER attended in the ACF and on Civi St!

The course was split over 2 weekends. Weekend one was mainly death by power point, and then we got handouts that you couldn’t read as they were poorly print and not designed to be printed out as they were only power point slides. On the first weekend we had an instructor from the SAS.C (Skill at Arms School Corp). This was good as he was a fountain of knowledge but he couldn’t make it on weekend two so one of his peers came in his place that was also a fountain of knowledge, but a different fountain. From what we had learnt from the first weekend we were then told some of it was incorrect, on top of this the Cadet Training Team was also instating a few of the lessons who also put a different slant on things.

I do under stand that rules for ranges are in black and white but they can easily be interpreted in different ways but you would think that members of the SAS.C and CTTs should be singing from the same song sheet.

I hated every second of it – through-out the course we (the students) were continually threatened with failing which obviously doesn’t help when you are learning something new.

The course was designed by regular/ TA instructors and seemed like it had no ACF input; the instructional techniques+ sometimes came across like bullying. Most of the useful stuff was a things we learnt off each other or reading up from Manuals and pams. The rest of the course was merely designed to destroy your confidence and humiliate you mentally.

They even had the cheek to make someone feel they were unable to pass and leave the course so they didn’t have to fill in the paperwork with someone failing.


Has anyone had the same problem????
 

The_Duke

LE
Moderator
#5
Abbreviated to read:

I attended a course about how to run ranges safely. My instructors were rather mean, and insisted that we did it properly, without resorting to "the ACF way".

We were told that if we were not good enough we would not pass the course, which I thought was a bit horrid.

Someone was actually not up to the task, and had to leave the course rather than being given a permit to run ranges despite being totally incapable.


Dry your eyes, princess.
 
#6
I understand what you’re saying, and how you’ve read it. That’s not what I’m getting at…

The post wasn’t intend for anyone that just like to argue with every other person they come across on here, it was indented for instructors that have previously attended the course and if they had the same experiences as we did or was it different.
 
#7
Did my course in May at Strensall. Similar mixture of instructors but found it perfectly ok. The only ones who came across as throbbers were the cadet instructors, SASC were fine, strict but no probs at all...
 
#8
It sounds like you've just had the pleasure of some nobbish instructors, some of them have a real bug up their arrse when it comes to the ACF, though obviously when it comes to ranges or anything to do with weapons we all have to be spot on.

The_Duke - and what would be the ACF way?
 

The_Duke

LE
Moderator
#10
RustyBayonet said:
It sounds like you've just had the pleasure of some nobbish instructors, some of them have a real bug up their arrse when it comes to the ACF, though obviously when it comes to ranges or anything to do with weapons we all have to be spot on.

The_Duke - and what would be the ACF way?
I was refering to his comment about them not seeking ACF input. Why should they? The Small Arms School Corps train to the standards laid down, nothing more, nothing less.
 
#11
Did my course in May at Strensall. Similar mixture of instructors but found it perfectly ok. The only ones who came across as throbbers were the cadet instructors, SASC were fine, strict but no probs at all..
I think we did the same course, SASC instructor older than Jesus?
 
#12
I was refering to his comment about them not seeking ACF input. Why should they? The Small Arms School Corps train to the standards laid down, nothing more, nothing less.[/quote]

A course like this should have ACF input as it is a totally diffrent Pamphlet 21 which was written by a knowlege team made up of member of the armed forces, sasc and the cadet forces.

Also you may disagree but 99% of decent ACF instrutor will tell you that there sould be a 'Cadet way' as cadets are not soldiers they are children.
 

The_Duke

LE
Moderator
#14
agreement said:
I was refering to his comment about them not seeking ACF input. Why should they? The Small Arms School Corps train to the standards laid down, nothing more, nothing less.
A course like this should have ACF input as it is a totally diffrent Pamphlet 21 which was written by a knowlege team made up of member of the armed forces, sasc and the cadet forces.

Also you may disagree but 99% of decent ACF instrutor will tell you that there sould be a 'Cadet way' as cadets are not soldiers they are children.[/quote]

Not may, do disagree when it comes to range work.

There are safe range management practices, and unsafe ones. These do not differ whether the firer is cadet, recruit or trained soldier. Weapon systems, practices, etc may all change but the key aspects of running a safe LFMT range do not. The lead instructors for this across the whole of the Army are the SASC, not the ACF. They are not teaching cadets, they are teaching cadet instructors.

Sorry if the nasty men scared you, but it is not about you finding the course all pink and fluffy and "cadet instructor friendly" - it is about teaching you to run a range safely.
 
#15
Zool said:
Did my course in May at Strensall. Similar mixture of instructors but found it perfectly ok. The only ones who came across as throbbers were the cadet instructors, SASC were fine, strict but no probs at all..
I think we did the same course, SASC instructor older than Jesus?
He was indeed and if it was the same course, you may recall the way the cheeky fecker pointed to me and said that I was a cold war relic! Bashtard! Mind you, I was having a smoke out back when a young female instructor said that my smock looked a little worn and a bit of mental maths told me that I'd had the smock longer than she'd been alive... Ooooer! :oops:

Cold war relic? He was easily older than me....
 
#16
Bravo_Zulu said:
Why should the cadet forces be permitted to fall below or outside accepted range safety regulations? Are the regs not there for a reason?
Surely the regs must be stricter. Kids being kids are inclined to dangerous things unless strictly controlled. Thats why we don't allow them to drive solo or fly aeroplanes. They have no 'death perception'

Since we are looking after other peoples kids we dont want to send them home with additional holes in them. If adults wander onto ranges and get a lead injecction despite being given all the warnings, that's largely their stupid fault, and as long as the RCO has done everything reasonably possible to prevent that, he's in the clear.

Not so easy when it happens to other peoples kids.
 
#17
walt_of_the_walts said:
Bravo_Zulu said:
Why should the cadet forces be permitted to fall below or outside accepted range safety regulations? Are the regs not there for a reason?
Surely the regs must be stricter. Kids being kids are inclined to dangerous things unless strictly controlled. Thats why we don't allow them to drive solo or fly aeroplanes. They have no 'death perception'

Since we are looking after other peoples kids we dont want to send them home with additional holes in them. If adults wander onto ranges and get a lead injecction despite being given all the warnings, that's largely their stupid faultl, and as long as the RCO has done everything reasonably possible to prevent that, he's in the clear.

Not so easy when it happens to other peoples kids.
Which is why I think the Duke has it spot on when he says that the course needs to be strict. A slack course produces a slack RCO who runs a slack range. If Agreement doesn't like being shouted at, he should consider joining the Scout Association; if he wants the responsibility of people's kids' safety then a rigorous qualifying course is well in order.

Agreement; range safety courses are about running ranges safely. Teaching cadets to shoot properly and improve rather than just blat away is a different subject altogether and is part of the cadet syllabus; look up the marksmanship principles in the cadet pam.

Edited for clarity
 
#18
Bravo_Zulu said:
Teaching cadets to shoot properly and improve rather than just blat away is a different subject altogether and is part of the cadet syllabus; look up the marksmanship principles in the cadet pam.

Edited for clarity
Definitely another subject. Brass conversion is all too common in the cadet forces. Myself and another SMI are the only people I know who have any formal training or qualification in coaching, or understand the principles. I know I'm doing it right, because several times now cadets are asking for me to coach them, because they quickly improve when I fault check and note declarations. Typically 40-80 rounds later I have halved the group sizes and massively improved consistency. Last Regiment shoot, I managed to get passes for all of those I coached, whatever the star level, and a few 2nd and 1st class marksman badges too.

I see so many 'coach' by staring down spotting scopes all the time, when they should be watching the cadet taking the shot and offering correcting advice one fault at a time.
 
#19
walt_of_the_walts said:
Bravo_Zulu said:
Teaching cadets to shoot properly and improve rather than just blat away is a different subject altogether and is part of the cadet syllabus; look up the marksmanship principles in the cadet pam.

Edited for clarity
Definitely another subject. Brass conversion is all too common in the cadet forces. Myself and another SMI are the only people I know who have any formal training or qualification in coaching, or understand the principles. I know I'm doing it right, because several times now cadets are asking for me to coach them, because they quickly improve when I fault check and note declarations. Typically 40-80 rounds later I have halved the group sizes and massively improved consistency. Last Regiment shoot, I managed to get passes for all of those I coached, whatever the star level, and a few 2nd and 1st class marksman badges too.

I see so many 'coach' by staring down spotting scopes all the time, when they should be watching the cadet taking the shot and offering correcting advice one fault at a time.

I now feel i am able to coach, but im sure i will find out how well next time i am on a range cadets. The Short range course along with the normal aspects of running a range safely, also looked into coaching and it was a very big part of the course. SASC did explain that if someone wanted to learn more about coaching they do run coaching course.

Has anyone got an electronic copy of ‘Coaching Aid Memoir’?? As I have only got it on hard copy.
 
#20
walt_of_the_walts said:
Bravo_Zulu said:
Teaching cadets to shoot properly and improve rather than just blat away is a different subject altogether and is part of the cadet syllabus; look up the marksmanship principles in the cadet pam.

Edited for clarity
Definitely another subject. Brass conversion is all too common in the cadet forces. Myself and another SMI are the only people I know who have any formal training or qualification in coaching, or understand the principles. I know I'm doing it right, because several times now cadets are asking for me to coach them, because they quickly improve when I fault check and note declarations. Typically 40-80 rounds later I have halved the group sizes and massively improved consistency. Last Regiment shoot, I managed to get passes for all of those I coached, whatever the star level, and a few 2nd and 1st class marksman badges too.

I see so many 'coach' by staring down spotting scopes all the time, when they should be watching the cadet taking the shot and offering correcting advice one fault at a time.
I seem to remember a Range Supervisor course which enabled AIs to act as a Safety Supervisor or Butts Officer on a Gallery range or was this a 'Local' Course? As most of the time the ratio of Supervisors to Cadets was 1:1 (although we did relax the more senior the Cadets) our Supervisors would often give advice whilst 1:1.

Although its been a few years I completed the old 'authorized' courses (just before they decided that been authorized was not good enough!) and then completed the more extensive Cadet range management qualification small bore and full bore. On the CRMQ courses we covered quite a bit of coaching(having a good laugh at the old coaching film!) is this not the case now? or was that once again local to my area?
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top