# Those of us returning from summer courses...



## ninty9 (29 Aug 2003)

How was it?

I myself just got back yesterday from my BMQ/SQ courses in Lethbridge.  I must say it was quite an experience.  To fire the C7, C9 and C6 we went out to Kipp range about 20 minutes away and did our ex for BMQ there.

For our SQ ex we went up to Waneright, which was great as well.

Tyhe only problems I had with the course was limitations on weapons, such as we only had 8 C9‘s to practice on and fire, 10 C6‘s to practice on with no training rounds whatsoever even though we had to lug 4 of them around waneright and 4 Carl G‘s for a platoon of 47 recruits.  It was mighty difficult to get time to practice on each weapon so you knew what you were doing for your PO checks, but we managed.

Another thing was the gas hut.  It was supposed to be done on BMQ but we couldn‘t and pushed it back to SQ and then we couldn‘t get a SME to get us in the hut so we didn‘t do it at all.

In Lethbridge we got to stay in the LCC dorms, which was cool, but may have been a disadvantage from barracks as for standards and such.  

Anyone going to Lethbridge to train in the future should have a good time.


----------



## 311 (29 Aug 2003)

I just got back from my SQ/MQ + a 4 day ex with my unit. I have to say the SQ I was on was awsome...training with the C9,C6, ‘nade, Carl G. The MQ was sweet to...mostly in the fact that it made me a gunner.

I have to say I agree with you on the point about PO checks though. The only thing that saved us ( section ) was the fact that our 2ic decided to help us and sign out the weapons so we could practice after the training was done for the day.We did have practice rounds for the C6 but most of the time the rounds and links got damaged which caused many stopages ( which I guess ain‘t bad for a course teaching ). I can‘t remember how many times my C6 could only be half-cocked because of a damaged link.If you think training time is bad for SQ though you should see the arty course.Doing things ( hands-on ) at most maybe twice before the test..

It‘s a shame you didn‘t get to do the gas-hut. Definitly one of the best times i‘v had...next to maybe firing the howitzer and the carl g.

All in all a great summer, starting school in a couple days. Lookin‘ forward to a warrior weekend comming up..


----------



## ninty9 (29 Aug 2003)

One thing I forgot to mention was that since we wern‘t on base we couldn‘t take the weapons out of the armouries, therefore the only hance we had to practice was during the day.  But everything worked out in the end.  Definitely a blast.


----------



## meni0n (29 Aug 2003)

Hey guys,

Got back from my BMQ/SQ about 2 weeks ago from good ol Shilo, Manitoba dust capital of the world.
Had an awesome time we got to do everything. C-7, C-6, C-9, grenades, gas huts, nav ex, field ex ( slept in a trench for 4 nights because there was too much poison ivy for hoochies.) Gotta love it when a trench collapses on you when you‘re sleeping in it       We did have a shortage of blanks for the field ex and only had like 180 rounds per person but it was all good. Already back in school and going back to unit next weekend so life is good.

Cheers


----------



## sinblox (30 Aug 2003)

Just got back from my SQ a few days ago, we didn‘t even get blanks because of the fire index.

We pretty much just yelled "BANG! BANG BANG!"


----------



## Michael Dorosh (30 Aug 2003)

I am glad to hear that you new guys enjoyed your summer training. I sincerely hope that you will stay the course; the start of the training year in your units will present new challenges - it‘s always disappointing to see the recruits from the summer before melt away as the year goes on.


----------



## Jeff Boomhouwer (30 Aug 2003)

Hey sinblox, try yelling" budget cut, budget cut" next time.Osifers love it!


----------



## Pikache (30 Aug 2003)

No blanks because of fire index? Do I smell bull****?

And next time for firing ‘mo‘litia rounds for the C9, it‘s buh buh budget cut.


----------



## sinblox (30 Aug 2003)

No bull****. I was one of the people who had to sadly load all our blanks back into the truck to be shipped off. 

We have an extremely high fire index in BC right now.


----------



## ninty9 (31 Aug 2003)

I did my SQ in Waneright and they were basically throwing blanks at us, as well as arty sims T-Flashes and smoke grenades.  They said they would have used more pyro if the index wasn‘t so high.  It was pretty dry up there and we still used it all.  It must be really bad next door.

There were also a few of my course mates who are leaving very soon to fight fires in BC.  they asked for volunteers at the end of my course.  They‘re on Class C contract until Sept 21.  More of us would have gone, but its too much school to miss.  There were actually some schools making deals with the gov so that there could be a way for the reservists to go and still beable to fininsh their school work.


----------



## stukirkpatrick (31 Aug 2003)

I just got home from my BMQ/SQ course on the 28th, and I can truly appreciate how much of a dusty hellhole Dundurn SK is.   :warstory:  

My final SQ exercise was good, but the fire index prevented  us from using arty sims, t-flashes, flares etc...   

We did get blanks though...lots of blanks.  Then, last EX day, our warrant told us to gather up all of our (freshly unloaded) remaining ammunition, and empty it the fastest way possible....on fully automatic.

Your point about training time on the weapons was good, but for our course, the problem was the BMQ C7 test, where people failed it because they only tried loading a magazine by hand once before.


----------



## Cpl. Williamson (31 Aug 2003)

I Just Completed My Sq And My Ql3 (Section Member Course) In Cfb Gagetown The Sq Was Phenominal

Lots Of Ammo Alot Of Weapons Experience The 5 Day FTX was ****  Though Rained For 5 Days Put about 5 Inches of Water in Our Trenches Alot of people Got There Feet Eaten Apart

Ql3 Was A Different Story Though For Anyone Who is Going To Join The Engineers Or Is Going To Do There 3‘s Get used to Pushups Running And Lepoard Crawling And If your Going To Sleep In Tents For 6 Weeks Bring Cough Medicine Cause Shack Hack Will Get You


----------



## GhostRecce (31 Aug 2003)

yeah i was in gagetown for a week this summer sleeping in mods. rained the whole time man did that ever suck


----------



## ninty9 (31 Aug 2003)

> Your point about training time on the weapons was good, but for our course, the problem was the BMQ C7 test, where people failed it because they only tried loading a magazine by hand once before.


A few people failed the mag loading as well on my course because I think we only had 89 dummy rounds for the entire course of 55 to practice on.  But the instructors knew this and were pretty leanient on the way they scored us.  I‘s under 55 seconds right?  I took the test and I know I was above that, cause I screwed up on a couple of the rounds.  At least 60 or 65 seconds it took me I bet.  It was only my second time loading manually.  My sec commander said it was close enough though.


----------



## combat_medic (31 Aug 2003)

Well, I recently got out of Wainwright from the PLQ course (formerly the JLC/JNCO). I got medically RTUd for a broken ankle, but on my course the fire index was so darn high, that we were allowed NO pyro, blanks, ball or ANYTHING. Since I spent a few days in the course CQ waiting for the paperwork, I heard the instructors talking about how they had all the ammo and pyro waiting for them, it WAS allotted, but we just weren‘t allowed to take it out.

It reeked of budget cuts to me too, but it was quite legitimate. 

Oh yeah, the PLQ sucks serious @ss. Totally not what I expected, and not something I‘m looking forward to having to go back to complete.


----------



## Pikache (31 Aug 2003)

Yes, I‘ve heard some bad things about new PLQ.

Apparently they lumped every trade together; combat arms, log, medical, whatever.

So they had to dumb down some things (like when will a log do section attack).

Two guys from my unit who completed it wasn‘t very impressed.


----------



## gate_guard (1 Sep 2003)

I‘ve heard some pretty nasty things about the new PLQ as well (mainly due to Arty ncos on an infantry course and a lack of proper planning). But I highly disagree with the statement "when will a log (logistics?) ever do a section attack?"
Before Infanteer opens up on this statement, let me take a crack at it. Suppose immediate reinforcements are required in combat, who do you think will fill this role? Ever heard of the term "soldier first"? A soldier‘s job is to fight, regardless of MOC. I‘m sure even Michael Dorosh could give some examples in history of where this occurred as well, eh Dorosh? Try the US Marines where everyone trains as an infanteer first. Or maybe Heinlein‘s Starship Troopers where "everybody jumps, everybody fights." One EME (remustered from infantry) I worked with actually refused to wear certain types of workboots while on operations cause, if the s*** ever hit the fan, he didn‘t think he‘d be able to run around and fight properly while wearing them. That‘s the type of attitude the CF needs in all arms, and those are the type of support guys I‘d gladly fight along side any day.


----------



## combat_medic (1 Sep 2003)

I also disagree with the statement "when will a Log ever need to do a section attack". I think that the whole idea of the BMQ/SQ course is great. Ensuring that ALL soldiers, regardless of trade have the skillset of an basic infantry soldier is a FABULOUS idea. 

However, the problem with the PLQ course is that you get a bunch of WOG trades who have never, ever, ever participated in a section attack, fired a machine gun, or know how to spell "reconnaisance". These people are now expected to lead a section attack with no prior knowledge of infantry skills. There‘s a massive gap of knowledge, because all of the non-combat arms type have never been through the SQ course, so most of the infantry skills are brand new to them. Often times, the first recce patrol a WOG might do would be leading one on their PLQ. For the next few years, there‘s going to be a noticeable gap in skills, until the kids who HAVE completed the SQ catch up and start doing the PLQ. It sucks, but it‘s something that‘s going to have to be addressed and dealt with.


----------



## Michael Dorosh (1 Sep 2003)

> know how to spell "reconnaisance".


Two "s"es in reconnaissance, combat_medic.      

As for Logisticians having to do section attacks throughout history?   Not really - if it comes to that point, you‘re pretty much screwed anyway.

In 1944 they did begin remustering clerks, artillerymen, and various others into the infantry and they were found to be deficient in basic skills.  Some infantry entering the line in 1944 and 1945 had never seen a grenade or fired an LMG.  Common-to-arms training would have prevented this, so I agree that it is a good thing.  If nothing else, it gives the weapons tech, clerk, or whatever an appreciation for what is going on at the sharp end - our true _raison d‘etre_.  I certainly admire the infantry guys in my unit and consider myself lucky when I get to walk a patrol or man a defensive position with them.


----------



## Jarnhamar (1 Sep 2003)

It‘s a good idea in theory. Needs practical work.
I‘ve heard of (and spoken with) a lot of people who passed because their instructors said "ya whatever you pass".  I think it‘s a great idea to have support trades better trained combat wise (even though i‘m sure it will never be needed) The army has to work on making people actually earn the course though.

And wheres the pity for those of us still on course, april 22 to september 26 is a long time


----------



## GhostRecce (1 Sep 2003)

> The army has to work on making people actually earn the course though


This is true


----------



## Pikache (1 Sep 2003)

I believe that skill unpracticed becomes skill rusty and skill lost.

Yeah, great for other trades guys to know how to use a C6 or a Carl G and do section attacks, but how often do they practice these skills after their course?

So if they get called up to use a Carl G or a C6, they most likely have forgotten it. So they‘d end up learning it all over again.

*shrug*


----------



## Michael Dorosh (1 Sep 2003)

RHF - do you not do Warrior training every year? Out here we‘re required to do the drills on all the weapons (though I think they‘ve pushed it back from every year, to every second year).  This includes Carl G, SRAAW, the C6, C7, C9, grenade, first aid, mine awareness, etc.


----------



## Jeff Boomhouwer (1 Sep 2003)

Out here in 32 Brigade we are required to cmplete warrior training every year, however due to budget constraints you very rarely get any practical time (should read fire ).So you go through the motions but nothing sticks. Inserts and training grenades don‘t count.                                                    carry on!  :rocket:


----------



## Pikache (1 Sep 2003)

I‘m not talking about infantry, I‘m talking about Log, medics, etc.


----------



## Michael Dorosh (1 Sep 2003)

So am I.


----------



## Pikache (1 Sep 2003)

I leave the question open to any log, medics, sigs, etc.

Do you guys do refresher training on Carl G, C6, etc?


----------



## Michael Dorosh (1 Sep 2003)

This log most certainly does, everyone in my regiment is required to.  I thought it was the same throughout the army.  Why do you have reason to believe that there are those who aren‘t doing it?


----------



## Pikache (1 Sep 2003)

Because each trade concentrates on their own skills to practice and refresh?

I believe you‘re with an infantry regiment, Michael. So, you‘d do stuff that the unit you‘re with does.

But I may be wrong. Maybe every unit regardless of trade does practice Carl G drills or section attacks some time in their training year.


----------



## Michael Dorosh (2 Sep 2003)

Are you familiar with the Warrior training at all?  It sounds like you‘re not.  It doesn‘t involve section attacks; just what I outlined above - weapons drills, mine awareness, first aid, NBC, radio procedure - though it does seem to change a little bit each year.  I know I‘ve seen the Med Company doing their warrior stuff.  I thought all the reserve units cross Canada (regardless of role) were required to be doing the same thing?


----------



## Brad Sallows (2 Sep 2003)

"Warrior" (ELOC/MLOC 1) doesn‘t teach or test section attacks.

Is leading a successful section attack or a patrol a requirement to pass PLQ, or is the section attack / patrol simply the vehicle within which leadership is assessed?


----------



## combat_medic (2 Sep 2003)

The PLQ requirement for all land forces is to lead a Section Attack, a Reconaissance Patrol, and either an occupation of the defence, or routine in the defence. None of which, to my knowledge is taught in MLOC (or ELOC, or QLOC or whatever it‘s being called now).

As for warrior training, I count myself incredibly fortunate to be with an infantry unit otherwise I would have been up $hit creek without a paddle on the PLQ. Most people I spoke to that were in non combat arms units were "supposed" to do a full warrior program every year, but never did. For one person I spoke to (no names, no pack drill), their unit‘s MLOC consisted of TOETs on the C7 followed by a shoot of the C7 on the SAT range. Next was basic familiarization with the C9 and C6, no shooting, no dry firing, no strip and assemble, just unload.... that‘s IT. A little bit of a refresher on basic voice procedure, a bit of first aid review, and a field ex. THAT IS ALL!!! 

Granted, this was a WOG unit, but I think those kind of discrepancies in training are inexcusable. Soldier first, right? Now imagine this person having to lead a section attack, having not even a basic knowledge of section battle drills, fire and movement, or having ever participated in a section attack, let alone led one. This person will be competing against infantrymen with hundreds of times the experience. And, for the vast majority, the PLQ is an infantry skills course. THERE is my biggest problem with the PLQ, in a nutshell.


----------



## RCA (2 Sep 2003)

"I‘ve heard some pretty nasty things about the new PLQ as well (mainly due to Arty ncos on an infantry course...." Give me a break

  For one, who do you think is responsible for the defense of the gun position, it sure in the h*** isn‘t the infantry.We are responible for it ourselves. This is includes recce/fighting patrols to ensure the area is clear. As well the Arty must know infantry, armour and combined arms tactics to be able to support all (during WWII the Army Commander, One out of two Corp commanders and quite a few (out of 5) Divisional Commanders were Arty probably because of that reason), and secondly the PLQ is not an infantry crse, it is a Primary Leadership Qualification. The infantry section is a veh to teach  and reinforce leadership.

 Units are only suppose to send merited sodiers on Mods 5 & 6. To ensure success units must ensure those that they send know their section tactics. MLOC should take care of knowing the fundermantals. (and yes my unit dutily does "warrior" training every year.)


----------



## Eowyn (2 Sep 2003)

I agree with you RCA.  The Svc Bn is responsible for it‘s own defense, especially if deployed as a FSG.  We do recce patrols, not fighting.

RHF - I have notice very little differenc in the MLOC trg between the Svc Bn I‘m now serving with and the Calgary Highlanders, with whom I used to serve.  The major difference is that the Calgary Highlanders at least had a resonable chance at getting the ammunition allocated to them for the  C6 & C9 and grenades.


----------



## Gryphon (2 Sep 2003)

> leave the question open to any log, medics, sigs, etc.
> 
> Do you guys do refresher training on Carl G, C6, etc?


I‘m a sig, and i touched the C9, C6, Karl G and the grenades only on basic... otherwise we don‘t use ‘em all that much.. mind you we‘ve been doing CIMIC lately..

the only time we crack out the C9s are during the Winter Warfare


----------



## gate_guard (3 Sep 2003)

RCA,
With all due respect, because you appear to be someone with more than a few years in, I wasn‘t insinuating that ALL Arty folk know nothing about infantry tactics. This is the idea you appear to have gotten. I passed along the opinions of two candidates from a recent PLQ.  I‘m sure there are many Arty NCOs who are more than capable of teaching a PLQ course, but apparently none of them were instructing on this particular course. What I think you should realize is that most infantry soldiers have a certain expectation with regards to the conduct of a course, PLQ or otherwise, and apparently on this particular PLQ, this wasn‘t met. I have no comment as to what other arms expect when attending courses because I haven‘t served in any other trade. Basically, my point is that this course was full of hard charging infantry types who had a certain expectation which wasn‘t met. The two individuals I spoke with attributed it to the NCOs who happened to be Arty. And if the infantry portion of the PLQ is just to reinforce leadership skills, why do they have infantry specific PLQ courses?

On a semi-related matter, in my opinion, it takes infantry NCOs to teach infantry troops. Yes, I know that the Arty does it‘s own area defense and must be familiar with tactics, infantry and otherwise. But I don‘t think this is comparable to the infantry whose job it is 24/7 to "close with and destroy the enemy." Some may disagree, but in my opinion the infantry are specialists at their trade, just like any other. It seems to me that you are insinuating that anybody can do the infantry‘s job.


----------



## RCA (3 Sep 2003)

That was not my intention. I respect the ****  out of the infantry because of what they do. However, everyone above MCpl/Mbdr shold be familiar wit basic infantry tactics, and should be able to teach. It is as basic as digging trenchs, passing simple messeges on the radio, sentry duties etc.

your post seems to imply that only infantry types can teach that,and on leadership crses. Some might take that as arrogance.


----------



## hhour48 (5 Sep 2003)

On PLQ you can fail your patrol or section attack but pass the leadership assessment and still pass the crse. This was not the case with the DP2B Inf crse, not to mention the standard being quite higher.

The PLQ system will most likely be changed next year again to an all-arms PLQ and combat-arms PLQ. The all-arms crse will have no field portion to it, except for small party taskings.


----------



## Doug VT (5 Sep 2003)

The more things change, the more things stay the same.....


----------



## E13E (9 Sep 2003)

You think Dundurn is a dusty hole, try Sufield AB, It is the largest training area in the Commonwealth and you can count the number of trees in the training area by the number of green dots on the map.  :crybaby:


----------



## The_Solecist (31 Aug 2004)

Bratok said:
			
		

> The PLQ system will most likely be changed next year again to an all-arms PLQ and combat-arms PLQ. The all-arms crse will have no field portion to it, except for small party taskings.



Do you have a reference for this?  I've heard rumours and/or wishful thinking, but have no reliable sources.

As a PLQ Mods 1-5 qualified Int Op, I have been waiting for a chance to get three weeks off my civilian job to complete the Mod 6.  I have seen several Cpls promoted to MCpl in the meantime while I await the final 3-4 weeks to qualify.


----------



## CanadianSIG (31 Aug 2004)

RE: WARRIOR TRAINING

ELOC/MLOC 1 mandatory hmmm - that is something we will have to check out 

As for the 'section attack' there is an interesting discussion on this forum that is well worth reading... and be sure to check out the reference materials as well.

http://army.ca/forums/threads/18270.0.html

We do TOETS prior to our range shoot each year.... 

Seems between the mandatory training of having to teach our Voice Procedure courses and a Drivers Wheel course to our new troops to qualify them for their 3's courses - while the rest of us do support ex's - we threw the baby out with the wetnap that we had.... or this may be the result of an overstretched military.   

Are we concerned - Are we frustrated - Are we wondering WHY the motto "Soldier FIRST" seems to have skipped over us  - OH YEAH   :rage:

had more but realized as I read it that I was staring at a BEADWINDOW 2 - doooh - practice what you preach... practice what you preach...


----------



## Gayson (2 Sep 2004)

I got back from my SQ and DP1 Armoured Recce Courses.

The c6 and c9 day was fun.


Also the airmobile recce op I did at SG04 was awesome to!   ;D


----------



## figure_11 (3 Sep 2004)

Got back from the SQ and BIQ/DP1 (Infantry) courses at Meaford this summer...

Not bad, although the weather was terrible for the SQ FTX. We had a couple people go down with heat stroke or hypothermia in a span of a couple days.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (3 Sep 2004)

Ya gotta love a place like Meaford where you can have cases of heatstroke AND hypothermia in a couple of days.


----------



## Northern Touch (6 Sep 2004)

Just back from Meaford, BMQ/SQ.

I found BMQ to be a little boring, but SQ was a lot more fun.  I found there to be a LOT of competition between the platoons, which could be good or bad, depending on the circumstances.  (if you were there you would know)  C6 and C9 were a lotta fun and I heard our Platoon Comander on my SQ FTX actually say we had something like 14 000 blank rounds for the C6, or some ridiculous number like that.  On SQ it seemed that the PT was lacking, we seemed to do more of it on BMQ for some reason, and I know a lot of the other guys felt the same.

The BMQ FTX was more of a camping trip then an actually FTX when compared to the SQ one.  At least my platoon dind't have anyone come down with heat stroke or any serious injuries.  I'm also pretty sure when we were out Meaford didn't have a high fire index because para flares, arty sims and t-flashs were going off ALL night.

Most memorable moment was on my SQ FTX, doing our Recce with the Warent Officer the second night, rendevousing (SP) with another section, and then actually doing a recce by fire on a platoon that had NO idea we were even there, and then watching their C6 open up and hearing someone absolutly chew some poor recruit out for letting a burst go.

All in all it was a good experience, although it sucks watching other people in your regiement become fully trained privates at the end parade when you still have to do your BIQ.  The friendships you'll make and the poeple you'll meet are great.  

I know the guys from my platoon and section (3plt, 2 sec) all hang and party together now.


----------



## nawk (6 Sep 2004)

I just finished my BMQ/SQ course in Meaford as well.  I had an awesome time, and yes there was a lot of rivalry between the platoons.  Let me guess Northern Touch, you were in 3 platoon?  I was in 4 platoon.  Anyways field ex on SQ kicked ass with those recce patrols where we accidentally misplaced some other platoons kit during the night (oops!).  I would highly recommend to any new recruits hesitating joining the Army to just go with it.  It's hard work but it is definitely worth it.  Also, props to our staff who were awesome!!!!


----------



## G-spot (6 Sep 2004)

nawk, whats your real name this is Brown


----------

