# Becoming a Combat Engineer Thread - Merged



## nbk (11 May 2003)

Okay, I have to fill out my 3 choices, and up until recently, I was content on becoming a Field Engineer. I was then told they were now being called Combat Engineers so I was still content on becoming one of those, ‘Combat‘ sounds a wee bit more stylish then ‘Field‘ in my opinion...

Anyways, the Combat Engineer life really looks appealing to me. I want to travel a lot around the country and around the world, I love building things, working with my hands, and you better believe I love seeing things explode.

But the problem is I was never in my life good at mathematics. I can do simple things such as addition and subtraction of course, and I can easily do the sample questions on the entry test. Things like algebra, calculus, trig, etc, are way over my head.

I have always been good at things like computer programming, which people say you need good math skills to know (which I don‘t have), but I can do it just fine.

The line that got me was   "Above average mathematical skills are required to advance to higher ranks in this occupation."  

Does this mean I am sunk, if I choose to to Cbt. Eng?

Would I get to travel as much if I were in infantry? Do you get to build/demolish things in the infantry? Would I be better suited for infantry?  

*What would the advantages of infantry over Cbt. Eng?* 

I am going reg force, NCM by the way.


----------



## Dire (11 May 2003)

Since im not in the forces yet I cannot answer most of your questions but I can say this..


If you want to be a Combat Engineer badly enough then I suggest you put it first as your three choices and maybe choosing another two things that intrest you.

I heard the test was easy so I don‘t think you will have much trouble passin it.

I‘am in somewhat the same boat as you. I want to get into COM Research and if I dont make that, I really don‘t know what else I wanna do besides maybe being a mechanic..

Anyhow, if you really want it this bad, you will get it. I suggest maybe practising as much math as you can before you take the test so you will be ontop of your game.

-Brandon


----------



## andrewvalentine83 (12 May 2003)

Having taken the (reserve) QL3 field engineer course, I can tell you that the math isn‘t extremely hard.  Basically all we did on the course was long division (for demolitions calculations).  Although some people had trouble, everybody passed.

From what I‘ve heard, the math does get a bit tougher on later courses (QL5) but I never took anything past QL3, so I couldn‘t tell you first hand.  But don‘t give up on being a Combat Engineer just because you think the math might be hard.  It‘s a great trade, you will get to build things, work with your hands, and definitely see things explode.  Good math skills are probably something you‘ll acquire with a bit of time in anyway.


----------



## Dire (12 May 2003)

are you allowed to use a calculator?

If so, it shouldnt be too hard


----------



## Illucigen (12 May 2003)

Normally calculators are around, when they are needed, but you normally are trained to go without anything you dont absolutely need. 

And really, it all depends.. if you will be happy sitting at the rank of corporal (which is a very good rank, the working class of the forces) for your career, then go Cbt Engineer. If you are looking to move up... most trades will demand higher math skills the higher you go up....


----------



## nbk (12 May 2003)

Thanks for the info...I just stumbled across this pic, making me feel a little better...  
	

	
	
		
		

		
			




Sorry its so big.


----------



## rolandstrong (18 May 2003)

When I was coming back into the reserves I looked into both field engineering and infantry. I did infantry in the mid 90‘s, and thought a change would be good. I suppose the fact that the field engineering unit was closest to my home was  a factor aswell. Based on what I was hearing (as far as field work), I was disappointed to find the sappers were doing very little but bridging due to budget issues. Sad state for the reserves. The infantry units seem to have more cost effective options for training, so our field work is not so limited. i think because of this infantry is a great reserve occupation.


----------



## Duotone81 (19 May 2003)

Speaking from the point of view of a Civil Engineering Technologist working for an Engineering Firm I can tell you from my experience that the math you use on a day to day basis isn‘t that difficult. In the Engineering field though, you do use A LOT of trig. Especially if your surveying equipment is old school.    The more complicated math comes with the actual design aspect of engineering. In this day in age though most things are not derived as pretty much everything can be looked up in code books. I doubt for your first day they would actually have you designing a 20 floor building in an earthquake zone or a 300 meter bridge. That would just be cruel. Most designers have degrees or many years experience anyway and that‘s where all the difficult math lies. You can be a Combat Engineer without any post secondary education depending on how you score on your CFAT so I doubt they will expect you to have the ability to derive the equation for the Grand Unified Theory. Just do well on the test and I would think that they will teach you everything you need to know to complete your job. Taking a look at the career profile I don‘t think the math is that involved. But then again I still work on civvie street.


----------



## McG (19 May 2003)

Here is another post that discussed the options of going Infantry of Engineer. 

nbk, 
If you meet the standard on the aptitude test, your unit will work to ensure that you have the skills required to progress through the trade.  The amount of math you are required to use is very limited for the first few years in.  All units have math study packages from CFSME and the units will ensure that the people they send on course are prepared for the math they will be expected to do.  I canâ€™t speak for all reserve Engineer units, but I have seen considerable amounts of time spent to ensure soldiers are literate and have the required level of mathematic ability for a course.


----------



## nbk (19 May 2003)

Thanks for everyone‘s replies.

Good link, McG, I am not sure how I missed that one...

I plan on making the army my career, would it really be a great idea to remain as a Corporal fot the next 20 years? Could you actually make a great living like that?


----------



## Illucigen (19 May 2003)

define Great.


----------



## nbk (19 May 2003)

Could I make a decent living?

Decent = support myself well, along with maybe a wife down the road.

Well = Comfortably, not on food stamps, able to have a nice apartment with all the amenities with money left over to save, etc.


----------



## Illucigen (20 May 2003)

Well, an Administration (Log) Corporal who just got his CD (12 years) told me he makes roughly 48,000/year (Without deployments... he‘s airforce, doesn‘t go away unless he wants to)

Works out to be roughly 22/hour if you really break it down...

Depends on exactly what you want to do with your life.. a family I doubt can live off of 48,000, but if your s/o is working too, I dont see much issue.. it really depends on your lifestyle.


----------



## Spr.Earl (22 May 2003)

As McG stated there is a Math package for home study and the Unit will provide help.

 Up to your 5‘s the math is simple as you only do demo.calc.‘s hastie and deliberate and other minor trade related problem‘s.
It‘s when you get on your 6 A were you will need the math as you will do bridge classification and will get into bending moment‘s of steel,reinforced concrete,concrete etc.
Then Bridging require‘s math also.
Don‘t fret get the math package and study it and you will do alright.


----------



## RJG (11 Feb 2004)

I just visited my local recruiter and he kind of convinced me that I would be best suited for a field engineer, I wanted to be an infantry, but he said it was the same nearly the same thing.

He described it as extremelly physically challenging and he was a big guy, I don‘t know if I have the physical strength.

I am 16, 5‘8" and weigh 130, I can bench my weight but that‘s not much. If anyone is or is training to be one, do you ahve any useful info as to the training etc.

And is it hard to run with all the equiptment?


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (11 Feb 2004)

Ask yourself what you want and why.


----------



## RJG (11 Feb 2004)

I want to be in the CF, definately army. I am just wondering what the main difference is between infantry and Field Engineer. The guy I talked to was biased and even admitted he was just trying to get people to join his regiment. It would be nice to hear the pros and cons of infantry from an unbiased perspective. And, is the 10 week BT the same for everyone or tailored to career.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (11 Feb 2004)

Engineers build stuff and blow other stuff up.  Clear mines and booby traps.
Infantry close with and destroy the enemy, or sit on their *** waiting for the day to pass.  LAV races across the battlefield.  If it doesn‘t get stuck on route then you bumble out when it stops, shoot a few paper targets.  Run through and past the trench, get back in the LAV.


----------



## RJG (12 Feb 2004)

Does it involve math because I just got my report card back and I got 76 in math, 11m.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (12 Feb 2004)

Yes you need some math.


----------



## R3tic (18 Feb 2004)

I‘m currently in RHLI doing BMQ and i am very interested in becoming a combat engineer. Will i be able to switch to Combat engineer after i finish my BMQ? Also its all the way in St thomas and i live in hamilton, will the army provide a bus for me??


----------



## D-n-A (18 Feb 2004)

1.) Wrong forum, this is more of a recruiting question

2.) I;m not sure if you can switch your MOC this soon, best bet would be just to quit, then re-enlist

3.) No, the army will not give you a bus, or drive you, you have to find your own way to get there, but if you qualify, you can get some extra money(Travel Assitance) if you live a certain distance from the unit.


----------



## brin11 (18 Feb 2004)

Agreed, topic moved to recruiting forum.


----------



## ShockAndAwe001388 (19 Feb 2004)

Hello, I am currently in air cadets untill I turn 16 this July and become eligible to join the engineering reserves in Calgary. I am wondering when the summer basic training course is so i can know whether or not to apply for summer camp with air cadets. Also i am wondering about what my job would be as a sapper.


----------



## Michael OLeary (19 Feb 2004)

The summer training season starts shortly after school is out for the summer. To be eligible for the summer training courses, you will probably need to have completed your Basic Military Qualification (BMQ), a course run at your unit either through the winter or in the January-June timeframe. Some unit may conduct a summer BMQ, but there‘s no guarantee of this. To be on this course you must have completed your application process (which can take months) before the BMQ starts.

If you are only turning 16 this summer, you will not complete any processing in time for training this summer. I would suggest starting with the recruiting centre as soon as you are eligible, and aiming for joining your unit some time in the fall for a winter unit-run BMQ.

Your question about being an engineer has probably been covered to some degree in earlier discussion threads. Start by opening the Search page and entering "Engineer", that will provide you a fair bit of reading material. After that, if you have more specific questions, please bring them back to the forum.

Mike


----------



## ShockAndAwe001388 (19 Feb 2004)

That answered my question, thanks.


----------



## Lebanese Canadian (1 Jun 2004)

HI

 I applied 2 months ago to the reserves, to field engineering. However,from what i read in the posts,it might not work out because i have like a -6(V4). So i was thinking if for example i get accepted for medic,can i do the basic training ,and then wait untill i get my eyes fixed or something,and then apply for the engineering and continue ....... 

And also,concerning the eye operation that they are doing these days, what age does  one have to be to do it?


----------



## yot (1 Jun 2004)

what I know is yes, u may change ur trade after the BMQ.


----------



## willy (1 Jun 2004)

Don't rely on this forum to tell you if the engineers will work out for you or not.  If you aren't accepted as a field engineer, then the recruiting centre will advise you of that fact, and they will also give you a list of other options that you have open to you.


----------



## Joe_McSweeney (27 Jun 2004)

I am interested in joining the army. I have only one question left: whether to go Infantry or Combat Engineer. Infantry is pretty self explanitory as to what they do, however,> what do I need to do in order be competitive for the engineers?
                             > what kind of overseas positions are there?
                             > what kind of materials should I get my hands on now? i.e.   - books, magazines, websites, etc...
                             > Also, what is the "average day" like?

This site is very well done, thank you guys/gals for doing this.


Thanks alot, 

Joe.


----------



## Scratch_043 (27 Jun 2004)

Hi Joe, I also am interested in becoming an 043 (Combat Engineer)

What I have learned about the MOC is that as an 043, you could be posted anywhere that the CF goes, because anywhere there is a posting, they need engineers. Although your Unit will be in one of four Bases in Canada.

As for the materials aspect, I would suggest contacting the CFRC, and getting info from them, and this site is also a good way to get the information you seek.


----------



## Joe_McSweeney (27 Jun 2004)

yeah, I tried the recruiting site and I have spoke with the recruiter , they both say the same thing, with nothing indepth, maybe I'm just figuring that there is more to it.
If there is I'd like to know. If not then... there isn't.


----------



## Scratch_043 (27 Jun 2004)

well, you're gonna start out as a general engineer, and you will get specialty training later on.

That's about it, you're still going to do the same types of things as the infantry does, but you will also learn how to build and maintain structures, place and remove obstacles, and learn mine warfare (laying and removal)


----------



## belkin81 (27 Jun 2004)

your not going to be going overseas anytime soon, with the reduction both in afghan and bosnia and haiti is going to rap up soon.


----------



## Da_man (27 Jun 2004)

belkin81 said:
			
		

> your not going to be going overseas anytime soon, with the reduction both in afghan and bosnia and haiti is going to rap up soon.




Yeah sounds like they want the troops to prepare for something else... *cough* Iraq *cough*


----------



## McG (28 Jun 2004)

If you have not done it yet, have a look at these threads:

Field engineer info  
Comparing the Infantry and Engineers  
Field (Combat) Engineer


----------



## Joe_McSweeney (28 Jun 2004)

I had tried to read them yesterday but my computer was giving me grief.... I was able to get into the threads today. 
I am going to apply for it. Just have to get the reference letters back, then do the application form.

Thanks guys.

Joe.


----------



## phalen (28 Jun 2004)

10 months of moc!
is there any feild in the army that has longer training?


----------



## McG (1 Jul 2004)

Here is another thread you may want to look at:
What trades are available for Canadian Military Engineers in the Regular Force?


----------



## Craig M (6 Apr 2005)

I was wondering if anyone knows how often people with diplomas are considered for Engineering officers?   Was/is this practice part of the CEOTP?

"The preferred degree is a Bachelor of Civil, Mechanical, or Electrical (Power) Engineering. A Bachelor degree in Science (Applied), Math, Physics, Chemical/Fuels and Materials, Fire Protection, Nuclear, Geomatics/Survey Engineering or Engineering Management may also be considered. *Occasionally applicants with a three-year Community College Technology Diploma in Architectural Engineering, Water and Air Resources, Heating and Air Conditioning, Civil Engineering, Communication Engineering, or Mechanical Engineering are considered*.  All applicants must meet Canadian Forces (CF) medical and physical fitness standards, and go through a selection process, which includes tests and interviews."
http://www.recruiting.forces.ca/engraph/army/jobs_e.aspx


----------



## Pieman (6 Apr 2005)

Craig M, I can't answer about the diploma aspect as I am a applicant myself.

I also applied for Engineer Officer, and I don't have a degree specifically in Engineering (Physics and Math related degrees). 

There are 12 Officer positions this upcoming selection board, and a estimated 36 applicants. Since they prefer to have people with Engineering degrees, the odds look pretty steep to me. But there is not harm in trying is there? Make sure you pick a second choice and third choice that you are going to love.


----------



## kincanucks (6 Apr 2005)

Craig M said:
			
		

> I was wondering if anyone knows how often people with diplomas are considered for Engineering officers?   Was/is this practice part of the CEOTP?
> 
> "The preferred degree is a Bachelor of Civil, Mechanical, or Electrical (Power) Engineering. A Bachelor degree in Science (Applied), Math, Physics, Chemical/Fuels and Materials, Fire Protection, Nuclear, Geomatics/Survey Engineering or Engineering Management may also be considered. *Occasionally applicants with a three-year Community College Technology Diploma in Architectural Engineering, Water and Air Resources, Heating and Air Conditioning, Civil Engineering, Communication Engineering, or Mechanical Engineering are considered*.   All applicants must meet Canadian Forces (CF) medical and physical fitness standards, and go through a selection process, which includes tests and interviews."
> http://www.recruiting.forces.ca/engraph/army/jobs_e.aspx



No degree = not eligible to apply.


----------



## Thirstyson (6 Apr 2005)

Pieman said:
			
		

> I don't have a degree specifically in Engineering (Physics and Math related degrees).



I got Sig O with my physics degree... I don't think your phys-math degree will be frowned upon, that's an excellent one with plenty of relevance IMHO.


----------



## tree hugger (6 Apr 2005)

I was working with someone (who is now on phase trg for 46 airfield engineer) who just has a diploma, but is working towards a degree part-time.  I am also a currently a 46 with a BSc in Forestry.  You can always try to make a case for yourself.....


----------



## Pieman (6 Apr 2005)

> I got Sig O with my physics degree... I don't think your phys-math degree will be frowned upon, that's an excellent one with plenty of relevance IMHO



There may be hope for me yet! Nice to hear.

Craig M, what kind of diploma do you have?


----------



## Craig M (7 Apr 2005)

It's a Mechanical Engineering Technology diploma.  I know that I can take 2 more years of schooling and get the Eng. degree but it's just not feasible right now to commit to fulltime schooling.


----------



## Pieman (7 Apr 2005)

> It's a Mechanical Engineering Technology diploma.   I know that I can take 2 more years of schooling and get the Eng. degree but it's just not feasible right now to commit to fulltime schooling.



If going Officer is not possible, then have you considered joining as a NCM? With that background you would make a exceptional Sapper I would imagine. 

If you plan on making the Army a long term career, then you can upgrade your education with CF support and get the Engineering degree later on. Going Officer after that is also possible. Something to consider.

Anyway, Talk to a recruiter about the exact impact your diploma would have on your career.


----------



## rnkelly (15 May 2005)

I was just wondering if the six different engineering positions in the various elements are profesionally licensed engineers. 
The reason i'm asking is because i'm being considered for an engineering position but am not a licensed engineer.  If you enter as a DEO do they further educate/train you to become a full fledged engineer?


----------



## Korus (16 May 2005)

Before you can become a professionally licenced engineer (PEng), you need a bachelor's degree in engineering from an accredited university, plus several years of relevant work experience under a professional engineer. The amount of time depends which province you practice in (it's 4 years in Alberta, under our regulating body, APEGGA)

Some officer trades in the forces will get you there, but I don't have any specific details. 

A friend of mine did ROTP for the Aerospace Engineer trade at a civilian university (we went to the same uni, but I'm reserves and not doing anything engineering related in the CF). I'll ask him about how it'll work for him for getting his P.Eng next time I talk to him, but that may be a while as he's off doing trades training and I'm on predeployment. Hopefully someone else will be able to pop in and answer your question in more detail than I have.

<Edit: spelling>


----------



## pronto (16 May 2005)

Not entirely accurate. I am a physicist, and was a PEng for years (It was a requirement). If you go to http://www.peo.on.ca/, you'll see the requirements. You can do it with another "hard science" degree.


----------



## Neill McKay (16 May 2005)

To expand a bit on what others have said, some of the CF trades with "engineer" in their names are engineering jobs as you would think of engineers on civvy street, with the appropriate degree, but others aren't.   Without looking at the recruiting literature, I would say that generally officers in engineering MOCs will have an engineering degree, and may be in a position to work towards professional certification as engieers, while NCMs will not.   There are always exceptions, of course.

Those who become professional engineers with another degree typically have to take some additional courses in engineering ethics, law, and perhaps other areas.  This is determined by the provincial or territorial association to which the indiovidual is applying.

I believe the four-year experience figure mentionned above is now standard in all provinces and territories.

My provincial association (New Brunswick) has made a point of building a relationship with the CF School of Military Engineering (located at CFB Gagetown) in the hopes of having more military members.


----------



## McG (16 May 2005)

rnkelly said:
			
		

> I was just wondering if the six different engineering positions in the various elements are professionally licensed engineers.


They can be licenced, but it is not required.  It would be up to the member to pursue this if the licence was desired, and fees would be paid for by the member.


----------



## rnkelly (16 May 2005)

Thanks for the input guys.
I was just wondering because I am being considered for the EME position and my degree is in physics.  My view is that it wouldn't be worth it if I didn't come out being a professional engineer.


----------



## casing (17 May 2005)

rnkelly said:
			
		

> ...My view is that *it wouldn't be worth it if I didn't come out being a professional engineer*.



That is a fantastic reason to join!   :   I'm sure you started your enrollment process prior to this "PEng" idea popping into your head so you must have other reasons for wanting to enroll.   If not, well, you will likely find it much easier to attain that PEng designation in the civvy world.


----------



## RS (18 May 2005)

Some NCM's do in fact hold a civilian licence.  My hubby is an Engineer.......He is an AME. In the military he is a Flight Engineer.   In fact there are quite a few technicians that have their Professional License.  With the military experience the board lets them challenge the exams.  Once they pass the exams they have to get hours on a civilian aircraft.  So that means allot of hard work and dedication.


----------



## AmmoTech90 (18 May 2005)

rnkelly said:
			
		

> Thanks for the input guys.
> I was just wondering because I am being considered for the EME position and my degree is in physics.  My view is that it wouldn't be worth it if I didn't come out being a professional engineer.



Well I would pull my application now, I don't think the troops you would lead as Maint Pl Comd would appreciate the fact that their leader is only there to get 4 letters after his name..  Here is a list of programs that you need a degree to be considered for the first step in becoming a P Eng
http://www.ccpe.ca/e/acc_programs_2.cfm
Unless you're talking Engineering Physics, your degree isn't on there.


----------



## rnkelly (18 May 2005)

I just meant that if the engineering job doesn't require you to be a profesionnal engineer it probably isn't a true engineering job.  Anyways, for those of us that are thinking about joining the military without much military experience have to find out as much info as possible and see if we'll fit well with the military.
(for the sake of the forces and ourselves)


----------



## aesop081 (18 May 2005)

rnkelly said:
			
		

> I just meant that if the engineering job doesn't require you to be a profesionnal engineer it probably isn't a true engineering job.



After 11 years in the canadian military ENGINEERS i can say this : your comment reflect your lack of knowledge about the CF and are also very insulting.  Get some life experience before you go around saying shit like that.


----------



## rnkelly (19 May 2005)

whoa,
  It's different in the military but in civvy world especially nowadays if the job doens't require Peng, chances are you're not an engineer. Now that i look back at what i wrote i suppose it could be interpreted as being arrogant/ignorant.  Sorry to offend anyone.  I shouldn't have said that it wouldn't be worth it if you aren't a Peng but I am just trying to get a feel for what the job entails because if the job isn't what i think a engineering job is then i would be wasting a lot time, not just mine.


----------



## aesop081 (19 May 2005)

So i suppose that designing bridges, roads and buildings, running quarries, calculation weigth capacity for existing bridges, building roads, calculating explosive requirements, designing rope bridges, etc, etc...are not what you consider engineering work hey ?


----------



## rnkelly (19 May 2005)

Good question.  Let me go get some more "life experience" and I'll get back to ya!


----------



## Neill McKay (19 May 2005)

rnkelly said:
			
		

> I just meant that if the engineering job doesn't require you to be a profesionnal engineer it probably isn't a true engineering job



A better way to put that (which would perhaps draw less fire!) is that a job that wouldn't require you to be a professional engineer *if you were doing it in the civilian workplace* probably isn't a true engineering job (and even that would probably be open to further discussion).   As far as I know, there's nothing to require a military engineer to be a professional engineer to perform engineering work on military property.   So designing a bridge is clearly engineering work, and a military engineer who isn't a registered P. Eng. may be able to do it on a base, but a civilian performing that kind of work on a public highway would defninitely have to be a registered professional engineer.


----------



## Neill McKay (19 May 2005)

RS said:
			
		

> Some NCM's do in fact hold a civilian licence.   My hubby is an Engineer.......He is an AME. In the military he is a Flight Engineer.     In fact there are quite a few technicians that have their Professional License.   With the military experience the board lets them challenge the exams.   Once they pass the exams they have to get hours on a civilian aircraft.   So that means allot of hard work and dedication.



 I think what you're describing is a trade certification. Registration as a professional engineer isn't the same thing.


----------



## RS (20 May 2005)

Neill McKay said:
			
		

> I think what you're describing is a trade certification. Registration as a professional engineer isn't the same thing.



Whoops, Sorry.

In the civi world AME's are called Engineers.......Aeronautical Mechanical Engineer.  No it's not a degree, it's a diploma.  Just trying to help out with the question..........not the type of Engineer in question.

Cheers,
RS


----------



## Pieman (20 May 2005)

There has been a push recently to include such disciplines as Theoretical Physics, applied math etc. in with the professional engineer registration. Technology is so multidisciplinary these days, there are plenty of other disciplines that are just as qualified to work on some projects that Engineers are. 

Really, a theoretical physicist and a engineer are two different animals and should not be included in the same category. If the Professional engineer registration is to have any meaning, I always felt they should go the opposite direction and include only engineers and be much more specific on the kind of jobs that are suitable for* only* engineers.


----------



## pronto (20 May 2005)

I agree with pieman. I speak from experience being an ex theoretical Physicist and and ex PEng. They are two (albeit interdependant) things. Engineers should be separate. Maybe Physicists should create their own designation, but really, in my opinion, there is no use for it. Engineers need to be registered and certified to make sure the public safety is protected - that was part of the original concept I believe.

I think allowing others in, dilutes the certification. In these days of "everybody is a winner", reduced standards, and praise junkies in school - I think it is important to have something which is restrictive and exclusive, includes apprenticeship times, and asks for a code of ethics.

my 2 cents.


----------



## Pieman (20 May 2005)

> Maybe Physicists should create their own designation, but really, in my opinion, there is no use for it.


Definitely not, there are simply way too many sub-disciplines within Physics for it to have any meaning in the corporate or academic world. The only good thing that it might do is keep everyone up to date on general knowledge. Say everyone in physics has to write a basic general test with undergrad knowledge. Would force people to review the material every so often. You know how it is, you snooze it, you loose it.  The designation would act as measure of how sharp general physics skills are.


----------



## pronto (20 May 2005)

That's a pretty interesting idea. I am not a practicing (whatever the he** that would be) physicist anymore. I would probably not qualify - but then, most of the PEng's I work with don't practice and wouldn't pass their exams anymore either. But the fact is, at one time they had to, so general physics knowledge may be a good thought.... I would love to see general celestial mechanics questions done as part of it. What about you?

heh heh - my daughter is in Engineering Physics - I'll let her figure it out! (Lazy aren't I?)


----------



## Pieman (20 May 2005)

> I would love to see general celestial mechanics questions done as part of it. What about you?


Child's play. One of my undergraduate degrees is in Astrophysics, so I got that one covered.  If there was a general exam, I would be scared of any Quantum Mechanical type of question. I have not touched QM since my courses, and I am not sure how well I understood the stuff to begin with. :-\



> I am not a practicing (whatever the he** that would be) physicist anymore


I assume anyone that uses physics in their job on a regular or semi-regular basis would be 'practicing'. Problem is that most jobs are very specific to one type of physical method, and therein lies the problem why most physicists lose the rest of their skills/knowledge over the long run. I have used physics on a regular basis since leaving school, but most have been applications to fluid mechanics (CFD), complex systems, good old classical mech, and a boat load of numerical stuff! But really, all the other sub-disciplines I studied are slowly fading from memory. Hence, maybe a general exam really would have a good impact and keep people on their toes.


----------



## Jed (20 May 2005)

Just like Engineers, the Military and Civilian types, to do a poor job with the use of words (as they are not numbers and formulas) and then to slam each other about it.   I include myself in this observation / firefight.


----------



## civiltechguy (20 May 2005)

"Engineers" in the Civilian World are a 4 year accredited university promgram in engineering science ie. a Bachelors degree in Engineering Science. Plus 4 years as an Engineer in Training EIT, then you write an ethics exam, then you get your P.Eng designation, and can legally offer engineering services to the public. Myself, I am a Civil Engineering Technologist, with a 3 year diploma from a community college. Hence i am not an "Engineer", but an Engineering Technologist and cannot call myself an Engineer. The term is trademarked for use only by people possessing a P.Eng. 

myself being a C.E.T. (Certified Engineering Technologist), I am not an "Engineer", and cannot stamp drawings or take ultimate responsibilty for Work to the Public, but I can do all of the work of an engineer ie. design roads, sewers, grading design, Inspecting, etc. We are the ones which take ultimate direction from an engineer and make projects happen.

In the military world the word "Engineer" does not connotate a person with a P.Eng designation. it means anyone who does an engineering job, within the scope of Military Engineering. 


Therfore I am not an Engineer on civvy street, but I am an Engineer in the Military.

Officers in the Engineers should be, or capable of attaining a P.eng designation


----------



## SemperFidelis (22 Jul 2005)

Hey all...okay so here goes...I applied, Ive done 3/4 (fitness test left) and having been 100% sure I wanted to go Combat Engineer that I selected it as my only option on my application, I now find myself not so eager about it.   Ive thought seriously more so about Infantry...but I cannot say for sure because Im not in , and who ever I talk to in their trade (thus far) has said..yaaaaa go infantry its the s*ht..same thing with combat eng..yaaaa go cbt eng   its the s*ht...its great that these (limited # of ppl ive talked to) love their job, but I just need some HONEST ADVICE.   I just seem unsure after I saw the list...I can basically go into any trade available in the CF...but I'd preffer combat arms.   Im not joning the military to do a job that I could have in a civlian world...however logically speaking for a young woman (20) what would all of you suggest I stick with cbt eng or go infantry...or any other moc...I just want your HONEST oppinions...if ur in you know that much more than I do and thats why I will more than appriciate your advice. Thank you so much!


----------



## Pieman (22 Jul 2005)

I am also an applicant like you. I suggest spending a lot of time reading into each trade as much as possible. Get your hands on any material related to Combat Engineering, and to Infantry. Once you have a better idea of the role of each trade it will be easier for you to see if it is something you would like/dislike, or something you would be really good at. From your post it sounds like you don't really have a feeling as to what the jobs would be like. 

In my mind, all the Combat roles are really cool jobs. Each one of them is vitally important in the Army, and have career choices that go in very interesting directions.   I would love to be involved in any one of them. For myself, when I had to pick my a 'First' choice, it boiled down to picking the role that I felt I would be most suited to. But to be honest, stick me in any one of them I will be a happy camper.

Curious, Why are you now not so keen on Combat Engineer? What aspect of the role don't you like?


----------



## paracowboy (22 Jul 2005)

go Engineer. Wimminz don't last too long in the Reg Infantry. For a number of reasons. 
Semper, seriously. If you're going to choose between Echo or India, go with Engineers. But, I'd strongly suggest doing so as an Ossifer, or choosing a different branch of the Cbt Arms, quite honestly. Guns or Tanks would be a little easier on your frame, and you still get to do cool stuff.
(And before somebody jumps my shit for being a chauvinist, the two female-types in my BN [who are both OT-ing] would beg to differ, so save it.)


----------



## HItorMiss (22 Jul 2005)

I have to side with Paracowboy on this, I personally have seen allot more woman in the Cbt Engineers then in the Infantry also the woman tended to like being an Engineer much more then the ones that were Infantry....That being said it's all a matter of personal desire, What do you want to do? you want to blow shit up, prob for mines and save my dumb a** when I step into the unknown minefield, dive into the dark waters and make sure the beach is free and clear of obstacles so my Recce det can come ashore and mark and secure it for follow on forces?. Or do you want to be the one in the breach humping that ruck with the C9 LMG getting ready to do the frontal, or rappel out that Helo with your section and put it that Coy attack, what is it you want to do what drives you when you look at the options.

Support the boys when the going gets tough( and trust me without the support we wouldn't/couldn't do half what we think we can without out it) or to do want to be the very pointy end of a the well supported spear.


----------



## FITSUMO (22 Jul 2005)

I have a very deep respect for 031's, was one and loved it, but when it comes to always learning new things and playing with the best toys sappers have it. With being a sapper you get to do some 031 stuff, but you also get to build bridges, roads, bivvie areas( and then you get to blow them up),  in my view this would be very rewarding.  both 031 and sappers have great esprit de corps and the fitness level is the best.

when choosing a MOC, think of it this way, if you had all the money in the world and you wanted to do something that you loved what would that job be, write it down, and then pick a moc that looks most like your dream job( or at least has the most in common).   At the end of the day, if you are doing a job you love, you will do it great, no matter what moc you choose.

old guy out

respect
FITSUMO


----------



## Beast (8 Nov 2005)

I am currently in the new engineering reserve unit of out the fort garry horse and i am really comtemplating joinging reg force because i have tried university and i do not think its for me and being an engineer sounds interresting and i would learn alot, i was wondering if any reg force engineers could tell mostly is it worth it to go reg force and if they are happy, because that if what i want most in life is a job that i enjoy doing and i am happy, so any feedback would be greatly apprecaited. Thanks.


----------



## Bunt (10 Nov 2005)

Iam currently a combat Engineer, Just recently I passed my 10 year mark. To say the least, I was in your same situation, tried university, didn't like it so I joined the army as an engineer. If you like the Engineers as a Reserve, I can guarantee you will like it as much, if not more in the Reg force.


----------



## Griswald DME (13 Nov 2005)

I'm an electrican (ED Tech) in the engineers and love it, even with the huge difference in pay from civvie street electricians.  I would say go for it, and if you can nab a good trade where you can also do side jobs (ie HVAC or Plumbing or Electrical).  That way if you find the CF isn't for you, after the first three year contract you can say no thanks and have received some excellent training.  The only downfall that I can think of is if you go to civvie tradesworld and don't have your civvie ticket (at least for electricians) you won't get the sweet union jobs because they won't take anyone without their journeyman papers.

Good luck man!  Uni wasn't for me either, at least when I was young. Now I'm an old fart in my 30's I'm taking evening courses to get my engineering degree.  Go figure.

DME


----------



## SinisterAlex (14 Nov 2005)

I'm a Sapper for the 5 CER  in CFB Valcartier, if you want to transfer Reg, don't come here. We practice everything but no sapper  skills like landmine, urban warfare, pontoon or even basic charge. When your IC have to look up in a book to remember how to make a frapping turn, there's a f!!!!ing problem in the training.

I don't no for the other regiment but here, i'll be afraid to go to Kandahar with the training we have.

CHIMO


----------

