UOTC training

#1
Bit of info required please.

We are attracting ex-UOTC as TA recruits. can anyone PM me with the courses undertaken at UOTC and their TA equivalent e.g. what is the equivalent of the 2 week CMS camp for example.

This would help sort out where we need to start recruits etc.

Cheers.
 
#2
There's a DIN somewhere which deals with this.

OTCs (should) be doing all bounty requirements with the exception of CBRN. Not sure what Level they're done at though.

AFAIK

MTQ1 qual = CMS/MOD1 (generally people who have been with an OTC for one academic year.)
MTQ2 qual = MOD2
MTQ3 qual = MOD3

^ ^ The above applied to me when I transferred, if its still the case now/for your area, I can't say.
 
#3
When my lot used to get OTC students that had not passed Sandhurst we made them do recruits again, mainly as thier drill and skills were *ank!

If they did have a commission we made them resign it and do recruits again, because they were still *ank.
 
#4
Carlos_Hathcock_II said:
When my lot used to get OTC students that had not passed Sandhurst we made them do recruits again, mainly as thier drill and skills were *ank!

If they did have a commission we made them resign it and do recruits again, because they were still *ank.
However did all your ex-OTC recruits come from the same OTC? Or a variety? Not all OTCs produce *ank recruits.
 
#5
No, they came from all over, and were all *ank.

They had a much higher opinion of themselves than they were able to match. After a few 'mistakes' where they were allowed in and directly onto the trade STA course and then all bombed spectaculally (ranging from very bad weapon drills after passing WHT, bad phys, crap nav, inability to do as told and to stop thinking that they were still in the OTC - plenty of 'Oh well in the OTC we didnt do it like that...' lines, etc.) the decision was made to make all of them do recurits that way the training DS knew that everyone was of a standard where they were safe to start and probably finsh the course rather than fail after the second or third weekend, and that they did not need someone to follow thier partol around and stop the rest of the patrol from filling in little Lord Fonteroy who as an ex-OTC chap didnt think he had to help dig the OP, or carry the kit or etc.

(Serious head on now...) Admitidly there were 1 or 2 that probably did not need the recruit training, but as the level of OTC traing varied so much how can we under the duty of care policy not ensure that everyone is safe, competent and capable on the various tasks without there being a set test like CMS/CIC. Some OTC's have a much higher standard than others, and also it depends on the individual as well. They may be uber-wary but it still lacks the level of importance. In my currant job I come across alot of ex and currant OTC, and while they individually try hard, some take a bit of time to remove the 'jolly hocky sticks OTC have another party' atmospher mentality and replace it with a more serious 'you could be mobilised in under a year and getting shot at you bell end so stop c0cking about and pay attention' attitude.
 
#7
Carlos_Hathcock_II said:
If they did have a commission we made them resign it and do recruits again, because they were still *ank.
Glad to see you got the tense correct, policy has now changed, the requirement to resign the commission is no longer there - they are however looked at closely whilst on the course.
 
#8
I'm going to make myself unpopular here but I'm in the mood so I'll try it.

Ignoring the usual piss taking of the OTCs (party and playtime only)

You have to understand the following about ex-UOTC members.

1. They have just spent 3 years at Uni. being told to think openly and to expand thier knowledge base (assuming they have done a half decent degree)....this is the opposite of basic training where you are expected to learn by rote and follow orders. They will be wanting to know 'why' as well as 'what', hard to turn off after 3 years of being told to ask.
2. They are probably in a job where they are expected to use the skills they have learnt at uni...hence think for themselves and work without direction....again the opposite of basic training.
3. Re-learning the 'skills ' you have been previously taught is more dificult than turning up with no skills and learning from scratch.....took me a good few weeks of practice to automatically carry out the forward assist on the A2 as I'd spent the previous 4 years on the A1 with different drills.
4. Some of them have also spent the last year of UOTC being expected to 'teach' the new recruits, so you've now got someone whose spent a year in a position equivalent to a Cpl or even Sgt...then being told they are all wrong and should start again at the bottom.

I am not excusing the idiots who have no clue and those who don't think they need to muck in but people need to understand the history of these guys and what is being asked of them.

Just to put the 'alternative' view across for completeness.

S_R
 
#9
It all depends on the individual, I was invited to join a local TA Battalion halfway through MTQ2 after spending a weekend with my local company, and was given a platoon to play with whilst I finished off my OTC training at the same time (Tuesday nights TA, Wed nights OTC and twice as many weekends) which gave me a nice wodge of cash at the end of each month.

Whilst having good permanent staff and TA training staff at their OTC is important (who don't just let the JUOs - who have no mil experience outside cadets and the OTC - run everything ) you will have to take the time to assess their individual level of skills and competency.

I think my having spent a weekend with the unit prior to transeferring assured them that I wasn't completely gash alaong with having a good set of NCO's in my company who kept me on the straight and narrow; except when enjoying having an officer cadet for a platoon commander and playing the normal tricks without the potential repercussions of doing it to an actual subbie.

Also I was willing to take a back seat and be a soldier when on weekends where there were more officers than needed, as opposed to some former OTC people who felt they were gods gift, but then I left the OTC during my 2nd year rather than staying the whole 3/4 years.

Though maybe the difference was my 4.5 years in the ATC ;)
 
#10
I went from the UOTC to a TA infantry battalion, and had an interview with the OC about how I was going to fit into his unit. He knew, since I was in my final year, that there was no chance of me going off to do catterick. He told me that he would decide what to do with me after a while of seeing how I fit into his unit. He also knew I wanted to go for a TA comission.

After finishing my degree, my name went down for Op Telic...
 
#11
Carlos_Hathcock_II said:
No, they came from all over, and were all *ank.
Fair enough, just wondering.

Having done 4 years in the OTC, I have been in the "real TA" (as many seem to put it) for 2 years now, and I prefer it so much more, for many reasons.

I hardly mention "This one time, in OTC", as I would like to think I'm not an ex-OTC c0ck.

Well if I am, no one has told me yet - you would think someone would have told me by now?
 
#12
watch_the_birdie said:
Carlos_Hathcock_II said:
No, they came from all over, and were all *ank.
Fair enough, just wondering.

Having done 4 years in the OTC, I have been in the "real TA" (as many seem to put it) for 2 years now, and I prefer it so much more, for many reasons.

I hardly mention "This one time, in OTC", as I would like to think I'm not an ex-OTC c0ck.

Well if I am, no one has told me yet - you would think someone would have told me by now?
No you just get back to the TAC and find your bergen contains half the platoons rubbish from.....or was that just me?....it only happened once honest
 
#13
Bailey said:
Carlos_Hathcock_II said:
If they did have a commission we made them resign it and do recruits again, because they were still *ank.
Glad to see you got the tense correct, policy has now changed, the requirement to resign the commission is no longer there - they are however looked at closely whilst on the course.
I made a point of it... shame though, and the 'close looking' didnt quite work out with at least one of the miscreants, from what I am told....

And shame that the goal posts are also moved. Maybe that will change now, new broom and all that. Hope so.
 
#14
Sympathetic_Reaction said:
I'm going to make myself unpopular here but I'm in the mood so I'll try it.

3. Re-learning the 'skills ' you have been previously taught is more dificult than turning up with no skills and learning from scratch.....took me a good few weeks of practice to automatically carry out the forward assist on the A2 as I'd spent the previous 4 years on the A1 with different drills.

S_R
The problem is, you had to do that with the A1 as well, so your drills and skills were.... you got it...*ank!

Not your fault admitidly, but your instructors. And SAA should only be taught by qualified people, in the OTC that will be the PSI's or the TA attached.


Attitudes aside a lot of the problem was the individuals skills were not up to the mark. Be that thier fault or that they were taught by 'has been past its' who were sent/transfered to thier OTC to escape soldiering or mobilisation (yes I know a few who did that too) but the end result is still the same. A none base line level of skills across a wide ranging area of the Army requiring retraining due to incorrect initial training. If all OTC students were made to do CMSR for thier first year, jointly with the TA soldiers who were doing it as TA soldiers then the OTC skill base level would rise. Then in the second year start Mod/MTQ training. Or send them on a intensive recurits course like summer leader... oh, funnily enough thats what a lot of them are doing this year to get the Mod 2 and 3 tick in the box.
 
#15
Carlos_Hathcock_II said:
The problem is, you had to do that with the A1 as well, so your drills and skills were.... you got it...*ank!

Not your fault admitidly, but your instructors. And SAA should only be taught by qualified people, in the OTC that will be the PSI's or the TA attached.
My SAA was taught to me by a qualified person, in this case a Reg. PSI.

I'm 99% sure that the original drills for the SA80 did not include a forward assist as part of the normal NSPs, it was the frst IA on encountering a stoppage.

It was then added into the A1 drills as part of any drill involving working parts forward in about 2000ish when there was all the complaints about reliability, prior to the A2 coming into service.

S_R
 
#16
Sympathetic_Reaction said:
Carlos_Hathcock_II said:
The problem is, you had to do that with the A1 as well, so your drills and skills were.... you got it...*ank!

Not your fault admitidly, but your instructors. And SAA should only be taught by qualified people, in the OTC that will be the PSI's or the TA attached.
My SAA was taught to me by a qualified person, in this case a Reg. PSI.

I'm 99% sure that the original drills for the SA80 did not include a forward assist as part of the normal NSPs, it was the frst IA on encountering a stoppage.

It was then added into the A1 drills as part of any drill involving working parts forward in about 2000ish when there was all the complaints about reliability, prior to the A2 coming into service.

S_R
Forward assist with the A1 has been in since the early to mid 90's, not that long after GW 1 IIRC, one day we were all marched to the armoury, signed out the rifles and was shown how to do it, I do not believe it has ever been removed.

I am guessing the guy who taught you the A1 never bothered to upgrade himself which is an inherent problem with the lazy instructor.
 
#17
Sympathetic_Reaction said:
Carlos_Hathcock_II said:
The problem is, you had to do that with the A1 as well, so your drills and skills were.... you got it...*ank!

Not your fault admitidly, but your instructors. And SAA should only be taught by qualified people, in the OTC that will be the PSI's or the TA attached.
My SAA was taught to me by a qualified person, in this case a Reg. PSI.

I'm 99% sure that the original drills for the SA80 did not include a forward assist as part of the normal NSPs, it was the frst IA on encountering a stoppage.

It was then added into the A1 drills as part of any drill involving working parts forward in about 2000ish when there was all the complaints about reliability, prior to the A2 coming into service.

S_R

I was about to launch, but Wellyhead explaind it far better than I could....

I am a Skilly, and your chap was either teaching bollox because he was lazy, or was not qualified.

Or you just remembered incorrectly.

End of really.
But you have given a perfect example to my point, thank you. OTC instruction is not up to the required standard. OTC students do not have to pass CMSR or any other basic recruit level training. The people at you OTC who were doing the WHT's were also doing you no favours by passing you in what was obviously an area you were not correct in. Sorry to make it sound like I am picking on you....
 
#18
Carlos_Hathcock_II said:
But you have given a perfect example to my point, thank you. OTC instruction is not up to the required standard. OTC students do not have to pass CMSR or any other basic recruit level training. The people at you OTC who were doing the WHT's were also doing you no favours by passing you in what was obviously an area you were not correct in. Sorry to make it sound like I am picking on you....
Perhaps there is some method in the madness of renaming MTQ (Military Training Qualification) to Military Leadership and Development.

msr
 
#19
Carlos_Hathcock_II said:
Sympathetic_Reaction said:
I'm 99% sure that the original drills for the SA80 did not include a forward assist as part of the normal NSPs, it was the frst IA on encountering a stoppage.
I am a Skilly, and your chap was either teaching bollox because he was lazy, or was not qualified.

Or you just remembered incorrectly.
Out of curiosity, when did you do your SAA course? If it's after 1992 or so, you may both be right...

Because my memory of the original drills for SA80A1 (as taught 1990ish) also did not involve the forward assist; it arrived soon afterwards. Yes, it was a very early modification to the drills, perhaps even before some units converted.
 
#20
Bailey said:
Carlos_Hathcock_II said:
If they did have a commission we made them resign it and do recruits again, because they were still *ank.
Glad to see you got the tense correct, policy has now changed, the requirement to resign the commission is no longer there - they are however looked at closely whilst on the course.
[no-wah]

If this is a Unit in the City with a rather interesting role is this the case? I was always told that all Officer transferees in (even for the Signals wing, which is what I was interested in) had to resign their commissions & do the recruits course.

Or was someone trying to tell me subtly that my face wouldn't fit?

[/no-wah]
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Knut OTC and ACF 6
P OTC and ACF 43
woopert The Intelligence Cell 8

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top