# Naval Reserves in Afghanistan



## Stoker (31 Dec 2006)

Apparently there are a few in Afghanistan right now, I know of a Bosn and a couple of officers. They are getting a lot of volunteers, but NAVRES is limiting the amount of deployed personnel to 10 pers. Anyone know of anyone gone?


----------



## navymich (31 Dec 2006)

There was a solicitation message out in the fall for positions available.  I don't think it was limited to just navres personnel, but I do know that alot of them here on the West Coast applied.  When I am back at work on Tue, I'll see if I can find the message.

Where did you get the info that navres is setting a limit?


----------



## Stoker (31 Dec 2006)

airmich said:
			
		

> There was a solicitation message out in the fall for positions available.  I don't think it was limited to just navres personnel, but I do know that alot of them here on the West Coast applied.  When I am back at work on Tue, I'll see if I can find the message.
> 
> Where did you get the info that navres is setting a limit?



They were looking for Log O's, Cooks, RMS, and Supply Techs. The only ATR i'm aware of is drivers. I think some bosns are doing base security. We haven't seen any messages on recruiting for Afghanistan, apparently there are emails going around,but they usually don't make it to the ship. I think this limit is for all deployed operations not just Afghanistan. This was mentioned in Dec in the Career Managers meetings, what they said was you were free to apply,but with the shortages on the ships and ashore right now don't count on it. A friend of mine got the reply from his career manager, and I believe it came from his boss. I am looking into this. I think personally its something put in place by someone at Navres and not policy.


----------



## navymich (31 Dec 2006)

I'll definitely look into the message that was circulating around out here.  I know for sure that it was looking for ops types.

Things are very short-handed out here too, both on the ships and ashore, and I can only imagine Navres beating their heads against walls trying to figure out how to handle it all.  I wasn't at any of the CM briefs out here, as I was busy with my transfer.  And even though I have CT'd now, this is all still very interesting to me, so I will definitely be following what goes on with it.

It would be interesting for sure, if Navres decides to make this a policy....


----------



## Stoker (31 Dec 2006)

airmich said:
			
		

> I'll definitely look into the message that was circulating around out here.  I know for sure that it was looking for ops types.
> 
> Things are very short-handed out here too, both on the ships and ashore, and I can only imagine Navres beating their heads against walls trying to figure out how to handle it all.  I wasn't at any of the CM briefs out here, as I was busy with my transfer.  And even though I have CT'd now, this is all still very interesting to me, so I will definitely be following what goes on with it.
> 
> It would be interesting for sure, if Navres decides to make this a policy....



Actually some people at the recruiting center was told that in the near future that if a person does a component transfer they could be treated as a "new recruit" and be expected to spend up to 2 years in a infantry role before they will be allowed to do trades training.  This was in the news sometime back that it was being looked at that new recruits before they would be accepted into the Navy or Air Force could be expected to spend time as "boots on the ground". 
We are so short right now that my shore draft right now is in question because I hold a critical billet. After sailing straight on a MCDV since 95, i'm looking for a rest.
Afghanistan anyone?


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (31 Dec 2006)

The component transfers were for those that already were going for Combat Arms, Gen Hillier and Mr O'Connor already released a statment saying this did not apply to Air Force and Navy recruits


----------



## Stoker (31 Dec 2006)

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> The component transfers were for those that already were going for Combat Arms, Gen Hillier and Mr O'Connor already released a statment saying this did not apply to Air Force and Navy recruits



Didn't hear that, but I thats good news for the component transfer people.


----------



## Sub_Guy (31 Dec 2006)

I do know for a fact that there are several TFA volunteer solicitation messages out there for MARPAC, the latest one I read was for a LT(N).  There was also one for 3 OS-LS for general duties in Afghanistan.  

The messages usually read like this

"MARPAC has been tasked to provide 3 OS-LS any MOC to perform general duties in Afghanistan"  Then it goes into specifics like dates and such.

Anyway I am sure there are quite a few naval folk running around KAF looking for their 10 soup.......


----------



## fear-acfhuinn luinge (31 Dec 2006)

airmich said:
			
		

> There was a solicitation message out in the fall for positions available.  I don't think it was limited to just navres personnel, but I do know that alot of them here on the West Coast applied.  When I am back at work on Tue, I'll see if I can find the message.
> 
> Where did you get the info that navres is setting a limit?



Came out near the end of Nov - I wrote up some messages on some of the volunteers. ATR positions at HQ.


----------



## navymich (31 Dec 2006)

fear-acfhuinn luinge said:
			
		

> Came out near the end of Nov - I wrote up some messages on some of the volunteers. ATR positions at HQ.



Roger, thanks.  I'll look it up next time I'm at work.


----------



## navymich (31 Dec 2006)

Here is the msg, plus an amendment to it:

R 242129Z NOV 06
FM MARPACHQ ESQUIMALT
TO AIG 2615
AIG 2616
XMT HMCS OTTAWA
BT
UNCLAS J12 3363
SIC WAA
SUBJ: STAFF CHECK - TASK FORCE AFGHANISTAN ROTO 3 - INTERNATIONAL
SECURITY ASSISTANCE FORCE (ISAF) HQ PART 2
1. MARPAC HAS BEEN DIRECTED TO CONDUCT A STAFF CHECK TO MAN 5 X POSN
(OFFICER/NCM) FOR TASK FORCE AFGHANISTAN ROTO 3 - ISAF HQ PART 2, IN
KABUL BASED UNITS. READ REQR IN COLUMS OF 6:
(POSN TITLE/RANK/MOC/COMPONENT/DATES/REMARKS)
A. ASSESSMENTS-ANALYST/LCDR-MAJ/ANY MOC/REG OR RES FORCE/01 JUN - 15
DEC 075 MAY - 5 NOV 07/CANDIDATE TO ATTEND TRG 5 - 14 FEB IN NORWAY
B. DCOS OPS-THEATRE TRG TEAM-TM LDR/LT(N)-CAPT/MAY BE OVER RANKED TO
LCDR-MAJ/ANY MOC/ REG OR RES FORCE/1 APR - 15 OCT 07/CANDIDATE TO
PAGE 2 RCWEWLA5027 UNCLAS
ATTEND TRG 5 - 14 FEB IN NORWAY
C. SO ESCORT/LT(N)-CAPT/MAY BE OVER RANKED TO LCDR-MAJ/ANY MOC/ REG
OR RES FORCE/1 JUL 07 - 15 JAN 08/-/
D. CMD GRP OPS-JOC/PO2-SGT/MAY BE OVER RANKED TO CPO2-MWO/ANY
MOC/REG OR RES FORCE/1 MAY - 15 NOV 07/3 ENG RECOMMENDATION - CLS
E. CMD GRP OPS-TM JOC/LS-CPL/MAY BE OVER RANKED TO PO2-SGT/ANY
MOC/REG OR RES FORCE/1 APR - 15 OCT 07/CANDIDATE TO ATTEND TRG 5 -
14 FEB IN NORWAY
2. RETURN TO THE UNDERSIGNED NLT 1200 HRS, 1 DEC 06 WITH CO
CONCURRENCE. TASKING WILL BE ASSIGNED ON A FIRST COME FIRST SERVE
BASIS
3. MARPAC POC: SGT MOONEY, J12-2, 3-2796
BT


R 282036Z NOV 06
FM MARPACHQ ESQUIMALT
TO AIG 2615
AIG 2616
XMT HMCS OTTAWA
BT
UNCLAS J12 3366
SIC WAA
SUBJ: STAFF CHECK AMENDMENT TO - TASK FORCE AFGHANISTAN ROTO 3 -
INTERNATIONAL SECURITY ASSISTANCE FORCE (ISAF) HQ PART 2
REF: J12 3363 242129Z NOV 06
1. AMEND PARA 1D OF REF TO READ CONTROLLED MATERIAL DIRECTIVE GROUP
OPS - JOINT OPERATION CENTRE (CMD GRP OPS-JOC)/PO2-SGT/MAY BE OVER
RANKED TO CPO2-MWO/ANY MOC/REG OR RES FORCE/1 MAY - 15 NOV 07/-/
2. AMEND PARA 1E OF REF TO READ CONTROLLED MATERIAL DIRECTIVE GROUP
OPS - TEAM JOINT OPERATION CENTRE (CMD GRP OPS-TM JOC)/LS-CPL/MAY BE
OVER RANKED TO PO2-SGT/ANY MOC/REG OR RES FORCE/1 APR - 15 OCT
07/CANDIDATE TO ATTEND TRG 5 - 14 FEB IN NORWAY
PAGE 2 RCWEWLA5028 UNCLAS
3. REMAINDER OF REF UNCHANGED
BT


----------



## Halifax Tar (1 Jan 2007)

I get a kick out this. The Navy has been there for a long time. In base supply (Halifax) right now we have people going on their 2nd tours already. I myself just finished one in August, during which my Sgt was from the left coast ,the Navy isnt there so they say. I guess just goes to prove the thought that the Supply Dept is not considered part of the Navy.  Dont even get me started on the soft sea, hard sea crap there sonny jim!  ^-^

As for NavRes personel, I think thats awsome. I was once a Nav Res Sup Tech, and let me tell ya, was I douped into that. I was told I would be sailing and all that stuff... NOPE I get to stay behind while the others go bomb about. Finally some chances for those lads and lassies to be deployed! I hope it comes about.


----------



## Journeyman (1 Jan 2007)

airmich said:
			
		

> *ASSESSMENTS-ANALYST...CANDIDATE TO ATTEND TRG 5 - 14 FEB*


 Nine _whole_ days training?! I think I may have found one gap in our war-winning strategy.


----------



## GO!!! (1 Jan 2007)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> Nine _whole_ days training?! I think I may have found one gap in our war-winning strategy.



Boy do I ever feel dumb! We did 130 days in the field between July and November with courses, new kit, and leave thrown in too, getting ready for deployment, but Navy guys are so good they can do all that in 9 days! 

They must be the best men in the CF! ???


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (1 Jan 2007)

GO!!! said:
			
		

> Boy do I ever feel dumb! We did 130 days in the field between July and November with courses, new kit, and leave thrown in too, getting ready for deployment, but Navy guys are so good they can do all that in 9 days!
> 
> They must be the best men in the CF! ???



Considering the navy and air force are not there to provide boots on the ground (sometimes  think you forget thats what _you_ signed up for) I think its better that those people that will be the ones putting their lives on the line everyday will be the ones to have the maximum training not the ones who will not use it or need to use it


----------



## armyvern (1 Jan 2007)

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> I get a kick out this. The Navy has been there for a long time.



Absolutely, those FLS boys & girls have been there for quite awhile. They were quite the characters too, IIRC from my time there!!  ;D


----------



## Halifax Tar (1 Jan 2007)

I have herd some stories of saliors in dubai!   

I mean actually in KAF and Kabul though


----------



## armyvern (1 Jan 2007)

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> I mean actually in KAF and Kabul though



Well, I know there were a relative few of hard navy guys there (   ); but to have naval and airforce uniform wearing purple tradesmen in-theatre is not unusual to this tour or any other.


----------



## GO!!! (2 Jan 2007)

The Librarian said:
			
		

> Well, I know there were a relative few of *hard navy guys * there (   ); but to have naval and airforce uniform wearing purple tradesmen in-theatre is not unusual to this tour or any other.



"hard navy guys"  ;D (tee hee!)



> Considering the navy and air force are not there to provide boots on the ground (sometimes  think you forget thats what you signed up for) I think its better that those people that will be the ones putting their lives on the line everyday will be the ones to have the maximum training not the ones who will not use it or need to use it



You make an excellent case for only the cbt arms troops recieving danger pay in theatre - but really - nine days? - I can think of nine days training for deployment right off the top of my head for our CSS - how can this be possible?, especially considering the camp security duties that inevitably befall all soldiers?


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (2 Jan 2007)

So what you are saying you don't want support to get the actual combat arms types back in the field because you don't think other elements deserve incentive to go on deployments such as this?


----------



## GO!!! (2 Jan 2007)

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> So what you are saying you don't want support to get the actual combat arms types back in the field because you don't think other elements deserve incentive to go on deployments such as this?



Hey, you were the one that said they'd never use any training they did get and that their lives were'nt on the line. 

If they are already trained to do their jobs, and the danger to them inside the wire is minimal, then there is no reason for either a lengthy workup training or a bundle of cash or tax incentives - they are doing the same job as back home.

BUT

IF they really are deployed to a potentially lethal theatre of operations, where they recieve significant extra pay and bonuses, does this not require a significant and in-depth period of workup training, just to keep them alive? especially for those who do not work for the CF on a daily basis?

Which is it? You can't have it both ways!


----------



## axeman (2 Jan 2007)

QUOTEING  GO !!!! and librarian ....

my avatar is Patricia  as once a Patricia always a Patricia .  {background knowledge before anyone tries to flame me ] now in the navy 


Well, I know there were a relative few of hard navy guys there (   ); but to have naval and airforce uniform wearing purple tradesmen in-theatre is not unusual to this tour or any other.


"hard navy guys"   (tee hee!)


I agree go after now deretably being in the navy for 2 +yrs yes there are no hard navy guys unless its a long time army guy that has remustered.  seems it us remusters that just shake our heads and just get the job done ....


Quote
Considering the navy and air force are not there to provide boots on the ground (sometimes  think you forget thats what you signed up for) I think its better that those people that will be the ones putting their lives on the line everyday will be the ones to have the maximum training not the ones who will not use it or need to use it


You make an excellent case for only the cbt arms troops recieving danger pay in theatre - but really - nine days? - I can think of nine days training for deployment right off the top of my head for our CSS - how can this be possible?, especially considering the camp security duties that inevitably befall all soldiers?  

i dont think S--tcanning  danger pay for them but definitly a longer ramp up time say 2 months .. how can one get into proper army style fit when they dont understand the physical robustness that one req to pick up the rifle, webgear and ruck... day in day out.  even the circus bn does it . not as well or as much  but they still tighten the laces and getto the blacktop  to get out there...


----------



## aesop081 (2 Jan 2007)

I would think that those "9 days" are job specific as their employement relates to working in ISAF HQ.....since the training is to be taken in Norway.  I would expect that their actual pre-deployement training (weapons, NBC, etc, etc......) will be longer and done back here in Canada.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (2 Jan 2007)

GO!!! said:
			
		

> Hey, you were the one that said they'd never use any training they did get and that their lives were'nt on the line.
> 
> If they are already trained to do their jobs, and the danger to them inside the wire is minimal, then there is no reason for either a lengthy workup training or a bundle of cash or tax incentives - they are doing the same job as back home.
> 
> ...



GO...is there really a point of discussing this with you? You made your disdain known a long time ago for Air Force, Navy, and Reserve Personnel. Your opinion has not changed in that time nor will ever change so I will do you the favour of not wasting my time or yours.


----------



## navymich (2 Jan 2007)

This msg has just come out:

R 291803Z DEC 06
FM MARPACHQ ESQUIMALT
TO AIG 2615
AIG 2616
XMT HMCS OTTAWA
BT
UNCLAS J12 3392
SIC WAA
SUBJ: INCREMENTAL TASK SOLICITATION - TASK FORCE AFGHANISTAN ROTO 3
1. MARPAC HAS BEEN INCREMENTALLY TASKED TO PROVIDE A CANDIDATE IN
SUPPORT OF TASK FORCE AFGHANISTAN ROTO 3. DETAILS ARE AS FOL:
2A. POSN: 315679
B. POSN TITLE: SO2 J1 OPS 1
C. RANK: LT(N)
D. MOC:  ANY
E  COMPONENT: REG OR RES FORCE
F. DATES: 15 APR 07 - 22 FEB 08
PAGE 2 RCWEWLA5014 UNCLAS
G. QUAL REQR: MARS OFFICER WITH POST CERTIFICATE OF COMPETENCY LEVEL
II
AT A MINIMUM
3. PREDEPLOYMENT TRG TO COMMENCE 20 FEB 07 IN KINGSTON, ON
4.INTERESTED PERS TO FWD THEIR NAMES THROUGH THEIR DIVISIONAL SYSTEM
WITH CO CONCURRENCE TO THE UNDERSIGNED NLT 15 JAN 07. THE TASKING
WILL
BE ASSIGNED ON A FIRST COME FIRST SERVE BASIS
5. MARPAC POC: CPO2 LOEPER, J12-1, 3-2019
BT



It actually makes mention of pre-deployment training, while the other one I posted a couple of days ago does not.  I also went through other msgs similar to that above, that also states the timing for PDT.  The trg that was indicated on the earlier msg (in Norway) was only listed on one position which leads me to believe that it is job specific trg, and that PDT was simply left off of the msg itself.


----------



## Journeyman (2 Jan 2007)

....and I was referring to the ability to create a competent analyst on a 9-day course - - especially on a NATO-school course, which have a _tendency_ to be dumbed down to the lowest common denominator to avoid hurting allies' self-esteem. 

I wasn't referring to any other pre-deployment training.


----------



## GO!!! (2 Jan 2007)

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> GO...is there really a point of discussing this with you? You made your disdain known a long time ago for Air Force, Navy, and Reserve Personnel. Your opinion has not changed in that time nor will ever change so I will do you the favour of not wasting my time or yours.



Can your emotional response and answer the question - we both know CSS and the other elements are essential to the mission - I asked a valid question in reference to minimal workup trg.


----------



## Sig_Des (2 Jan 2007)

The sad thing, is, and to be perfectly honest, I agree with GO....that to DAG green for Afghanistan, (At least for TAVs with CFSU (O) ) is a Pistol PWT1, C7 PWT1, CBRN, Fire Fighting (use this extinguisher for that fire), and SJA Standard First Aid.

I've seen many run through this, Navy, Air Force, and ourselves, Army. On my team, we do it to constantly keep our DAG status Green.

Now, I look at the messages for some of those position, and IIRC, they mentioned working out of Kabul. Now what about when they travel between areas? Convoys, etc. No TCCC, no contact drill, no IED drill, no ambush drills. They can't take the C6. Dead weight that may end up being just that.

Myself, I know that while I'm going to be in theater, I may not be trained on as much as others, but I want to be able to perform in a situation. That's the nature of the beast with Combat Support. You may not see some of those situations, but on the other hand, you may be required to perform.

IMHO, if the 9 days is pre-dep training...not sufficient.


----------



## aesop081 (2 Jan 2007)

Sig_Des said:
			
		

> IMHO, if the 9 days is pre-dep training..



The message traffic already established that it is not. We have already deployed personel from this base on very short notice who received C7, 9mm, CBRN and a few other things only. I'm not familiar with TCCC but are you telling me that every single soldier deploying gets this training ?  Dont get me wrong, i am not against more training but is creating maditory training for ttades not likely to need it ( notice i didnt say "wont need it") limiting our ability to quckly fill short-notice positions?

Just currious


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin (2 Jan 2007)

Perhaps some light amidst all the heat here.

NATO HQs are all validated at Stavanger in Norway.  That's the 9 days quoted in the first tasking message.  This is NOT predeployment training, but instead is a "team-building" exercise aimed at HQ ISAF and some other NATO formations.  The second tasking message specifically states that predeployment training will begin in Kingston on 20 Feb.

The Army remains the lead force generator for Afghanistan and sets the predeployment training standards.  There is, as some have mentioned, a minimum standard for anyone deploying to theatre that _must_ be followed.  The JTF HQ (the Canadian HQ) will undergo separate training in Kingston _and_ potentially at CMTC (hence the 20 Feb "report to Kingston" date quoted).

Ergo, an individual augmentee would be expected to report to the Army lead force generator for individual predeployment training, including the BFT, weapons, first aid, mission specific training, and all the other hoops.  This typically takes 14 days or more.   Most units, the JTF HQ included, have a collective training requirement to meet battle task standards set by the CLS.  This adds additional training days  In the case of NATO individual augmentees, that collective training requirement is fulfilled in Norway when they join their NATO units.

People need to relax.  There is a well-established system in place for predeployment training - led by the Army.  In the past, there has been much kicking and screaming about attending this training from other force generators, but that's been muted as of late given the nature of the mission in theatre.  The fact of the matter is that the Army's been carrying the lion's share of the burden on the ground in Afghanistan, and if a Navy officer wants to step up to be the J1 Ops and relieve us of assigning a Company 2iC to perform that function, more power to him/her.


----------



## aesop081 (2 Jan 2007)

Thanks Teddy, individual and small group augmentations have been going on for a while so i knew there had to be a well run system for dealing with training these people.



			
				Teddy Ruxpin said:
			
		

> and if a Navy officer wants to step up to be the J1 Ops and relieve us of assigning a Company 2iC to perform that function, more power to him/her.



Now how about a job for a MCpl sensor oprator like ..... oh i dont know........ME ?

 ;D


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin (2 Jan 2007)

cdnaviator said:
			
		

> Thanks Teddy, individual and small group augmentations have been going on for a while so i knew there had to be a well run system for dealing with training these people.
> 
> Now how about a job for a MCpl sensor oprator like ..... oh i dont know........ME ?
> 
> ;D



Careful what you wish for...it's wabbit season and we're on the hunt...


----------



## aesop081 (2 Jan 2007)

Teddy Ruxpin said:
			
		

> Careful what you wish for...it's wabbit season and we're on the hunt...



Well aware.......In case you are wondering, I'm the one with the sign that say "here i am" in bright orange with flashing lights  ;D


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (2 Jan 2007)

Thanks for the clarification TR, much appreciated.


----------



## Halifax Tar (4 Jan 2007)

The Librarian said:
			
		

> Well, I know there were a relative few of hard navy guys there (   ); but to have naval and airforce uniform wearing purple tradesmen in-theatre is not unusual to this tour or any other.



GRRRRRRRR lol I hate that designation... hard sea soft sea crap grrrr its worth about as much as a bosn's C7 handling drills...


----------



## axeman (5 Jan 2007)

off topic  
ah yes the bos'n's handling skills.   : is that why EVERY WPN i've seen here in the navy   would have earned a ARMY person a long list of charges . i mean whats so difficult about oiling wpn's ? for some reason the navy just doesnt grasp that in the end, the weapon is the reason for the soldier /sailor / airman to be where they are .


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (5 Jan 2007)

axeman said:
			
		

> off topic
> ah yes the bos'n's handling skills.   : is that why EVERY WPN i've seen here in the navy   would have earned a ARMY person a long list of charges . i mean whats so difficult about oiling wpn's ? for some reason the navy just doesnt grasp that in the end, the weapon is the reason for the soldier /sailor / airman to be where they are .



can't they?  I know the last 3 NBP teams I have been on weapon maintenance after was always a priority, never a rusty weapon to be seen. Methinks you heard far too much BS. Or amybe your ship is not keeping up with what they are suppose to be doing


----------



## aesop081 (5 Jan 2007)

I know for my part...the Mk46 Mod 5 lightweight ASW Torpedo  is the reason why i'm here !!!


----------



## navymich (5 Jan 2007)

Concur ex-D.  I know I heard more grumbling in the flats regularly from the junior bosns about "weapon cleaning again  :"  As for when we did an actual shoot, the cleaning and maintenance was scheduled into the flex to make sure that nothing else was scheduled to ensure that it was done.


----------



## jollyjacktar (8 Jan 2007)

I have volunteered for a TAV and have been accepted.  There will be training involved prior to deployment.  Both in Gagetown and Kingston.  I don't have details on the Kingston side of things as yet.  The Gagetown agenda is such as BET, Rangework, CRBN etc etc etc.  I am sure that in no way will it be any patch close to what is covered by those who will be outside of the wire, I am not going there for that role.  If I was going to be expected to be on the line conducting patrols etc, then I am sure the Army would see that I am given the tools and training to safely conduct any such work/role.  Further, I am sure that their training system has enough on it's plate already without taking up valuable time and space with perhaps unecessary effort.  They have been at this for some time now and I trust those in the decision making positions have a grip on who needs what training and to what extent.


----------



## Halifax Tar (9 Jan 2007)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> I have volunteered for a TAV and have been accepted.  There will be training involved prior to deployment.  Both in Gagetown and Kingston.  I don't have details on the Kingston side of things as yet.  The Gagetown agenda is such as BET, Rangework, CRBN etc etc etc.  I am sure that in no way will it be any patch close to what is covered by those who will be outside of the wire, I am not going there for that role.  If I was going to be expected to be on the line conducting patrols etc, then I am sure the Army would see that I am given the tools and training to safely conduct any such work/role.  Further, I am sure that their training system has enough on it's plate already without taking up valuable time and space with perhaps unecessary effort.  They have been at this for some time now and I trust those in the decision making positions have a grip on who needs what training and to what extent.



Well said JJ. I think were seeing a leaner meaner Army again, one that is very focused and serious in what it does, not that it wasn't before perhaps jue more real. I know my time in the army people would gripe about soldier training saying theres never going to be another war, well then 9/11 came around. 

What I'm trying to say here is I think your seeing a very well oiled training starting to show through. I know my pre-deployment training was taken very serious by my instructors. Probably one of the few times in my military career that I really herd people get yelled at and corrected in a not so PC way. Its refreshing to say the least, perhaps it will spread. 

JJ I can say that your training may be short but it will be intense.


----------



## jollyjacktar (10 Jan 2007)

There have been a few hiccups, but I think that it more due to the interface between the two arms (Army N avy) at the command level.  Also this coming up at the last minute just prior to the Christmas leave period also threw a monkey wrench into the gear box.  That being said, I get the impression that the overall the Army does seem to have their collective shit together in the administration of sorting things out.  For those here who do have experience within the two systems they will understand that these are two different beasts in how they go about their roles.

On a side note.  Thank you HT for the heads up on what I can expect  in theatre.


----------



## Navy1234 (11 Jan 2007)

Hello,

   I am looking for some advice.  I applied for and missed out on going to Afghanistan for general duties and was wondering if there was a more proactive way to pursue a deployment to Afghanistan?  I could just wait around and keep an eye on message traffic but that seems like a long shot and too dependant on luck to be in the right place at the right time. Is there an official way to volunteer for any future postings.  It seems like it would be better to just ask for any volunteers and then organize taskings as they come up according to individuals skills and I was hoping that such a thing exists.

thanks.


----------



## George Wallace (11 Jan 2007)

That very topic has been discussed once or twice here.  These topics may help you in your quest and time on Army.ca:


*Army.ca Conduct Guidelines*: MUST READ - http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/24937.0.html

MSN and ICQ "short hand" -  http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/33247.0.html

Regarding the use of "MSN speak" versus the employment of prose which is correct in grammar, spelling and punctuation, please see: http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/34015/post-260446.html#msg260446

Tone and Content on Army.ca: http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/51970.0.html

FRIENDLY ADVICE TO NEW MEMBERS - http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/24937/post-259412.html#msg259412

Recruiting FAQ - http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/21101.0.html

Army.ca Wiki Recruiting FAQ - http://army.ca/wiki/index.php/Frequently_Asked_Questions


Canadian Forces Aptitude Test - http://army.ca/forums/threads/21101/post-103977.html#msg103977
Fitness requirements at enrolment, see page 12 of this brochure: http://64.254.158.112/pdf/physical_fitness_en.pdf

Infantry Specific FAQ - http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/21131.0.html

Search page - http://forums.army.ca/forums/index.php?action=search;advanced

Google search of Army.ca - http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=+site%3Aarmy.ca+%22search+term%22&btnG=Search&meta= (follow the link then replace "search term" with what you are looking for)

Army.ca wiki pages  - http://army.ca/wiki/index.php/Main_Page


To summarize. Welcome to Army.ca, start reading.


----------



## bison33 (11 Jan 2007)

axeman said:
			
		

> off topic
> ah yes the bos'n's handling skills.   : is that why EVERY WPN i've seen here in the navy   would have earned a ARMY person a long list of charges . i mean whats so difficult about oiling wpn's ? for some reason the navy just doesnt grasp that in the end, the weapon is the reason for the soldier /sailor / airman to be where they are .



I'll go along with that axeman. Here's a pic of a .50 cal on the Protecteur during roto 1 in '02. Me, being an ex army type saw this and could not believe what I saw. Seems it's the norm for the most part. All the .50's were in the same shape.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (11 Jan 2007)

What a lot of you guys just are not grasping is the Deck Department is usually short personnel and are the busiest onboard. 1o to 1 says when they had a spare minute those weapons were cleaned, no CBM would ever let weapon maintenance get too far behind. Plus back on topic this is about Naval Personnel going to Afghanistan not whether or not on weapon maintenance.


----------

