# From CWO Richard - C&E Training Requirements



## MOOXE

I found this memo from CWO Richard very informative and agreeable to. Read the part about our soldier skills. Alot of people complain when we go practice with our bang sticks. Here is the cold hard truth to prove that being a soldier is first .



Memorandum

11 Sep 2006

Info

TRAINING REQUIREMENTS

1.	The history of the Signal Corp was founded under fire during the world wars.  Today it seems that for the most part, that portion of the Signal’s history has been relegated to the sidelines. The tendency/perception in today’s more modern and technological army is to concentrate on technical skills vice basic soldiering skills.  Unlike anything experienced in the past, present day soldiers are facing threats in an asymmetrical theatre of operation.  The premise that “Technical Job Knowledge” is the "be all to end all" is no longer true.  A soldier in today’s Canadian Forces needs to be well trained in the basic soldier skills, including the ability for junior Non-Commissioned Members to be able to make informed and decisive decisions in a timely manner while under duress.  These basic skills are not being taught in favour of a more technical career progression.  

2.	C & E Branch soldiers employed in an operational theatre such as OP ARCHER, in Afghanistan, require what would at first glance be seen as a new toolbox of skills.  This in fact is not so.  What is required is a more concentrated training regime of basic soldier skills ultimately including leadership training possibly in the form of a more advanced and field intensive PLQ course (in line with the once mandated Combat Leaders Course).  As an example, prior to this deployment the unit participated in BTE 05 in Wainwright Alberta.  Although the training was sufficient for the yearly qualification, it failed to address some of the key concerns that were passed back in the Lessons Learned series and other Army periodicals.  Being cognizant of this fact, it was quite apparent that our Signallers were not ready to be employed outside the confines of the Kandahar Airfield (KAF).  Therefore once in theatre, approval was sought to further the competency level of our soldiers.  An intense training regime was developed and implemented to ensure our soldiers received the mandated training.  Prior to our soldiers being given the “Green Light” to proceed outside the confines of KAF, an intense validation exercise was conducted. The training in question erased all doubts and gave them the confidence they desperately sought and required to act and react to every situation. To this day, I still firmly believe that given the volatile conditions that our soldiers faced daily during this deployment, that without the added training, they, we would have suffered much more tragic losses.

3.	Training progression at this time does not address the problem.  The normal career progression for a member of the C & E Branch for most MOCs / MOS ID, at this time would be (approximately) as follows:

a.	Basic Soldier Qualification (DP1)– St. Jean – 33 Training Days;

b.	Specific Trade Training – Varied by Course;

c.	Primary Leadership Qualification (DP2) – 8 weeks; and

d.	Intermediate Leadership Qualification – 24.5 Training Days non-inclusive of the DL package.

4.	Some of the C & E Branch personnel that are presently on OP ARCHER have been exposed to a myriad of situations that they were not sufficiently trained for prior to the deployment.  Although as mentioned above, the annual training was at one time considered sufficient for a deployment, this is no longer the case.  During this deployment, C & E Branch personnel have been employed on various tasks including combat patrols both mounted and dismounted with the in place Canadian Battle Group, as well as with foreign countries, such as Task Force WHITESHARK (Romanians), to being responsible for the Camp security as members of Force Protection, manning the Entry Control Points (ECP), clearance patrols, as members of the Quick Reaction Force (QRF).  Some of them have been exposed to Improvised Explosive Devices (IED), small arms fire and rocket propelled grenade attacks from the enemy as well as rocket and mortar attacks on the Main base as well as various PRT locations. Many also administered real time Combat Casualty Care on badly injured and maimed comrades. These soldiers for the most part have adapted remarkably well, usually with an extremely short training period, completing the tasks assigned of them, usually under situations of extreme stress.  Soldiers that deploy outside the wire are expected to have an exceptional background of combat casualty care, convoy operations, IED training, ECM TTPs, as well as of course their basic soldier skills including a high level of technical knowledge within their own trade group.  The expectations of the higher leadership far out weigh the skill-sets of the soldiers and junior leaders in some cases until they have been exposed to the different situations.

5.	All the above leads to the conclusion that more theatre specific training is required, including pushing for individual soldiers to complete both the DP2 and the DP3 phases of their careers.  This will ultimately allow soldiers to expand on the theoretical knowledge that they have gained when placed in more stressful and demanding situations.  Some of the suggested training is listed below, keep in mind though that the actual Battle Task Standards (BTS) will be issued by the Standards cell of the mounting Brigade or units:

a.	Force Protection Tasks – This area of training encompasses a variety of subjects, including conduct of checkpoints, roadblocks and escort tasks.  Some of the personnel within this unit were tasked with force protection at the onset of the mission once they had arrived on the ground.  Normally this is not a problem if they are to be simply employed as augmentation to more “qualified” units such as the Infantry.  In this case though, Signal’s personnel provided the leadership as well as the troops to complete various tasks: 

i.	Personnel Searches – An important skill to learn.  Explosives and weapons can be concealed in a myriad of items, from on the body itself to a cell phone being turned onto a single shot pistol.  On this deployment, Force protection personnel have access to newer technology such as walk through metal detectors, that are calibrated to be extremely sensitive, and a personnel X-Ray machine that will basically enable to see through all items of clothing.  All soldiers involved must master proper body search techniques that ideally should be instructed by a SME, such as the Military Police; and 

ii.	Vehicle Searches – Due to the high number of large vehicles that are required to sustain the camp itself, proper search techniques for any contraband is essential.  Items that are confiscated range from electronics (radios, phones etc.) to drugs.  Although the vehicles are given a preliminary search utilizing scent dogs (Explosives), a vehicle search team must be extremely cognizant of the fact that contraband can be hidden in many different locations on a vehicle.  There have been incidents where dashboard gauges have been replaced with assemblies that hold cameras, cell phones or other items. All soldiers involved must master proper veh search techniques that ideally should be instructed by a SME, such as the Military Police. 


b.	Instinctive Shooting – Although members of the Sqn received only a 2 day introduction to instinctive shooting, it was a great success, not only for the actual skilled acquired, but also for the individual soldiers as their confidence while using their personal weapon increased immensely.  This is a time (5 Training Days) and resource (ammunition) intensive phase of the training, but ideally all personnel deploying on operations, and in fact all personnel should also complete this training on an annual basis.  The training schedule and resource list can be obtained from 3 PPCLI;

c.	Convoy Ops training – No specific period of time has been designated for this subject, however, due to the nature of this and possibly future operations, it should receive more than just lip service.  A method of instructing as well as practical exercises should be incorporated into the pre-deployment training.  This could be done (conveniently enough) in Wainwright utilizing the CMTC facilities.  This will allow for an accurate assessment of drills etc.  There remains a distinct possibility that with the arrival of the new Battle Group, that the day-to-day operation of supporting elements will change, in turn changing the TTPs and SOPs that are used at this time; 




d.	Electronic Counter-measures – Although a fairly new field of expertise, especially to the level it is now being employed on operation, this is a vital phase of training, not just for the technical aspects but also more for the testing and operation procedures.  The soldiers who employ these devices need to be absolutely confident of its abilities.  During the training it should be stressed that the equipment is only as good as the operator’s knowledge of its operation and limitations.  TTPs for ECM are still in the developmental stage at this time.  The TTPs that have been developed at this time remain classified, and therefore that information would be passed on a need to know basis, once in theatre;  

e.	Tactical Combat Casualty Care (TCCC) – Although this is covered during pre-deployment training, due to the nature of these conflicts, this subject must be constantly stressed and reviewed during the deployment.  Included in the training should be a complete introduction to any new equipment (such as the new tourniquet, blood clotting agent and the Israeli field dressing) that is available to all personnel.  A comprehensive training package for this subject should be available from the integral medical resources.  As a note, a qualified and experienced medic or Doctor must present this subject;  

f.	Casualty Extraction – As has been seen during this deployment, the number of IED strikes and vehicle accidents is at a rate never before experienced by the Canadian Forces.  Training to ensure that a casualty is extracted from a disabled vehicle without exacerbating the injuries is essential.  Although most personnel would believe that extracting a casualty from a disabled vehicle is a simple thing, variations of the injured soldiers mass as well as the final resting position of the vehicle, make this an important topic to be extensively practiced;

g.	Vehicle Recovery – There will always exist situations when vehicle crews must be able to self-recover their own vehicles due either to battle damage or because they simply broke down.  Ideally all convoys should have integral support with them, but that is logistically impossible.  Convoys, at a minimum, should deploy with serviceable vehicles, with tow chains/cables.  Best-case scenario would be to deploy with “A-Frames” to tow any disabled vehs.  Proper recovery techniques will prevent injury and further damage to the disabled vehicle.  This information must be presented by a Maintainer, and must also include recovery procedures for all types of SMP in use at the time; and

h.	Pairs/Group/Section Fire & Movement – Although nobody expects that Signals personnel become as proficient at “the Art of War” as the Infantry, being a member of one of the Signals trade does not mean that they should not be proficient with their personal weapons either individually or as part of a small group.  Fire & Movement training up to and including Group size manoeuvre elements should be a requirement for deploying soldiers.  Fire & Movement up to Section level would be preferred in the long run.  It must be considered that Signal’s soldiers can be employed with the Battle Groups, and as such must have the training that will, if required allow them to fight along side the Infantry, regardless of the situation, be it a Patrol, Advance to Contact or an Ambush.  

6.	Leadership – Although the proficiency of the leadership skills at the junior level is very good at this time, there must exist more training that is relevant to what the Army is facing today.  Leadership courses must evolve away from the classroom-based instruction and focus more heavily on the practical “hands on” aspects of leadership.  More challenging teaching scenarios that force the potential Jr. NCO to perform under greater levels of stress and duress can accomplish this.  Simply completing a “Management” style course is insufficient given the situations that these junior leaders may find themselves in.  An abundance of initiative must be stressed at all times during their training, ensuring that they can find the best solution for any problem they may encounter.  The training progression with regards to the CF PLQ is currently under review, and has been previously identified as being insufficient for the training of Jr. leaders at this time.  





7.	TTPs and SOPs are subject to constant change, dependent on the user at the time.  Signals units that are slated to deploy will be given a Task Matrix, consisting of identifiable BTSs that must be completed as part of the training.  The matrix in itself should be used as a guide with regard to it being the MINIMUM standard that is required from soldiers and units prior their deployment.  Every effort must be made to obtain the most up-to date information that is available, and use that as a training block.  This will ensure that all soldiers are equipped and prepared for the deployment.

8.	There appears, at this time to be a “disjoint” in the training that is received by the C&E Branch personnel.  During the DP1, all soldiers are supposed to receive an introduction to Field craft, Platoon Weapons operation and deployment and basic field operations as is shown below:

a.	PO 101 – Participate In Dismounted Offensive Operations;

b.	PO 102 - Participate In Dismounted Defensive Operations;

c.	PO 103 – Patrol;

d.	PO 104 – Fire The C7 With The C79 Optical Sight Unit;

e.	PO 105 –Fire the General Purpose Machine Gun, 7.62mm, C6;

f.	PO 106 – Fire the Light Machine Gun, 5.56mm, C9;

g.	PO 109 – Throw Grenades;

h.	PO 110 – Perform Individual Field craft;

i.	PO 111 – Operate Tactical Communication Equipment;

j.	PO 114 – Perform Army Physical Training;

k.	EdO 101 – Leadership in Peace and WAR; and

l.	Edo 102 - Law of Armed Conflict.

9.	It should be noted again that the DP1 course is approximately 33 days long, and some of the subject matter listed above is not covered, or not covered with any detail.  From talking to several of the newer members to the unit, the majority of weapons training and field training took place once the members were in this unit, and not during their basic training.  This leaves most of the C & E Branch soldiers without the basic skills necessary to perform as soldiers. However the majority of them are technically proficient at their MOC following their journeyman’s training.

10.	At this time, the soldiers are expected to pick up this “Hard Field” knowledge by utilizing a form of osmosis at the units that they get posted to.  Sometimes, depending on the unit, this is not a major problem. However, when these newer soldiers are posted to a front line field unit, employed for example as a Coy Signaller, they are expected to assimilate the information and skills as quickly as possible.  This leaves them at a distinct disadvantage.  As a possible remedy for this problem, I am suggesting that at a minimum, a course be implemented at the Signal Unit level.  This course would address the shortcomings that we are seeing at this time, and will ultimately make for a more rounded soldier, able to conduct his/her job within Combat Arms units, with a more specific background with regards to training.  This suggested course is as follows:

a.	a Unit run, field intensive package of approximately 2-3 weeks in duration, that will encompass all of the above (para 9) subjects, including the weapons training, less the EdOs.  This “package” could be compared to the Land Environmental Training or the Infantry annual Battle Schools that were run in the past, to ensure that the skills of all personnel within a unit were at a relatively high standard.  Ideally this should be run after the soldier arrives at a field unit, and may be run as part of the annual training exercises.  The opportunity exists also for “importing” SMEs to assist with the training; and

b.	this training may also be conducted as a “Pre-Course” for the DP2, Primary Leadership Course (Land), enabling the soldiers to have a more solid knowledge base for the conduct of an important career course.  This will ultimately lead to soldiers with a more rounded experience, able to perform leadership under stress roles not only in Canada, but also when deployed overseas.

11. 		In closing, it is to the benefit of all C & E soldiers to complete more in-depth training, including more “Theatre Specific” training. Training that will prepare them and also allow Jr. leaders the opportunity to take the initiative, and lead subordinates on the ground during times of greater stress.  This added training has and will continue to save lives. In my opinion, all soldiers posted to Combat Arms units, or elsewhere should at a minimum, be mandated to achieve the same standards required of an Engineer, an Artilleryman, a Crewman or a Vehicle Technician (Veh Tech’s are now also mandated to attend PLQ (land)). Soldiers should never be placed in a situation destined to fail.  They must have the confidence and the ability to react in all combat scenarios, and if they cannot, then we have failed to properly prepare them.  Not only do our Signallers need to be proficient tradesmen/tradeswomen, they above all must be soldiers first to survive these adverse and volatile conditions. 

RJ Richard
CWO
Task Force Mercury


----------



## Radop

"However, when these newer soldiers are posted to a front line field unit, employed for example as a Coy Signaller, they are expected to assimilate the information and skills as quickly as possible.  This leaves them at a distinct disadvantage.  As a possible remedy for this problem, I am suggesting that at a minimum, a course be implemented at the Signal Unit level.  This course would address the shortcomings that we are seeing at this time, and will ultimately make for a more rounded soldier, able to conduct his/her job within Combat Arms units, with a more specific background with regards to training."

Although formally an infanteer, I had no idea of what I was suppose to do when thrusted into an exercise with 3 RCR as November Coy Signaller.  It takes time to learn the job and technically, I know everything that needed to be done but practically, I did not have the knowledge or experience that the Coy comd needed.  He expected me to know what he wanted said over the radio before he told me.  By the end of the ex, I had adapted but was still not as effective as I would have liked.  Although I knew the tactics and equipment, I did not know how to combine the two into my new role as Coy signaller.  I thought that running around with a 522 would be a lot easier than managing a Radio Node.  It was neither harder or easier but different!  That is what caused me problems.  More training would definitely have helped.  Voice proceedure is now a small part of the training at the school.  LET is not even in (SQ is suppose to replace this).  What the RSM raises here is not new and the concearns are those we raised in Afghanistan in 2003.  Training was based on a war in Europe not the mountains of Afghanistan.  The training before deployment is getting better though.  Hopefully, it will start from Basic now.


----------



## hank011

This guy is very accurate and I am pleasantly surprised. BUT(here we go)
Definition: C&E Branch: a charity formed by sig ops for sig ops, powerless to stand up for anything and relevant to no one outside Kingston. 
As a Chief this guy should already know that any funding that comes down the pipe will be stolen by RMC to gold line their urinals or build new dorms or a riding stable or monkeys in tutu's to perform at the officers mess in Frontenac. He should publish a letter of apology for neglecting the school in Kingston for the last 20 years. Trenton built new barracks, Borden and RMC too, but not Kingston. It is so embarrassing to have such weak leaders.
In addition...I can see it now:"Good morning troopies, I am your help desk supervisor. I will be leading your platoon on patrol today but dont worry, I have a 5 day course!" It is very dangerous to train people for things that take years to master and that they have no business doing. 
Also, how many 226 techs have access to a Grenade? He really means Sig ops, maybe LCIS and Linemen. I would question anyone who sent a Comm Rsch guy on a patrol in Afghanistan let alone a Radar tech.
Nice thought though, A for effort! He'll be a Captain or a civvie in no time!


----------



## observor 69

hank011, Thanks for that. Right on the money!


----------



## Canadian Sig

Hank. The Sgt Maj is an outstanding soldier with a hell of alot of experiance to draw from ( including time at DHTC ). He was a WO at the school and is well aware of the state of the facilities there but new buildings ect is well above a WOs head. The sqn in Pet has been working in early 1900s horse stables for years and Majors have been unable to rectify that situation so I doubt a WO would do much better. As to the recomendations he makes; I found myself on the streets in Afghanistan a meer 5 weeks after having completed my 3s and I don't feel that I was equiped with the type nor amount of training that I should have been. Signallers are serving in units that are in contact on a regular basis and some are coming home wounded. I would think that any edge we can give to the troop on the ground would be time and money well spent. Just my 2 cents.


----------



## radop215

well said davidmd.  i completely agree, i went from 2 ppcli to desk jockey in suffield.  2 completely different jobs that take time to learn.  I will definitely need a field refresher when i leave here, but still looking forward to getting back to the pointy end.


----------



## geo

Have know and worked with CWO Richard for a number of years.
1.  He needs not appologize for anything that has been done on his watch
2.  What was done on prior watches is water under the bridge
3.  He suggests it't time to wake up and start training our troops so that they can and will survive in theatre...


----------



## MOOXE

hank011 said:
			
		

> This guy is very accurate and I am pleasantly surprised. BUT(here we go)
> Definition: C&E Branch: a charity formed by sig ops for sig ops, powerless to stand up for anything and relevant to no one outside Kingston.
> As a Chief this guy should already know that any funding that comes down the pipe will be stolen by RMC to gold line their urinals or build new dorms or a riding stable or monkeys in tutu's to perform at the officers mess in Frontenac. He should publish a letter of apology for neglecting the school in Kingston for the last 20 years. Trenton built new barracks, Borden and RMC too, but not Kingston. It is so embarrassing to have such weak leaders.
> In addition...I can see it now:"Good morning troopies, I am your help desk supervisor. I will be leading your platoon on patrol today but dont worry, I have a 5 day course!" It is very dangerous to train people for things that take years to master and that they have no business doing.
> Also, how many 226 techs have access to a Grenade? He really means Sig ops, maybe LCIS and Linemen. I would question anyone who sent a Comm Rsch guy on a patrol in Afghanistan let alone a Radar tech.
> Nice thought though, A for effort! He'll be a Captain or a civvie in no time!



This statement could not be any more right *off * the money.


----------



## 211RadOp

hank011 said:
			
		

> This guy is very accurate and I am pleasantly surprised. BUT(here we go)
> Definition: C&E Branch: a charity formed by sig ops for sig ops, powerless to stand up for anything and relevant to no one outside Kingston.



From CFAO's "Personnel Branches were created to enable members of the Canadian Forces in related occupations to identify with each other in cohesive
professional groups." Therefor has nothing to do with "a charity formed by Sig Ops for Sig Ops." When the branch was formed on 1 Oct 68, there was no such thing as a Sig Op.



			
				hank011 said:
			
		

> As a Chief...



I didn't realize that CWO Richard was Navy.



			
				hank011 said:
			
		

> ... this guy should already know that any funding that comes down the pipe will be stolen by RMC to gold line their urinals or build new dorms or a riding stable or monkeys in tutu's to perform at the officers mess in Frontenac. He should publish a letter of apology for neglecting the school in Kingston for the last 20 years. Trenton built new barracks, Borden and RMC too, but not Kingston. It is so embarrassing to have such weak leaders.



Any funding provided to CFSCE is spent by CFSCE, not RMC, Fort Frontenac, the PWOR, HMCS Cataraqui or on monkeys in tutu's (unless the Commandant asks for them  ;D). I also suspect that he has nothing to do with what has happened at CFSCE over the last 20 years.



			
				hank011 said:
			
		

> In addition...I can see it now:"Good morning troopies, I am your help desk supervisor. I will be leading your platoon on patrol today but dont worry, I have a 5 day course!" It is very dangerous to train people for things that take years to master and that they have no business doing.



First, a member of the branch leading a platoon on a patrol in TFA, not likely. Leading a convoy, possibly. Yes it does take "years" to master that properly, but any person with any type of leadership training can lead a patrol.



			
				hank011 said:
			
		

> Also, how many 226 techs have access to a Grenade?



Get posted to a real unit and see.



			
				hank011 said:
			
		

> He really means Sig ops, maybe LCIS and Linemen. I would question anyone who sent a Comm Rsch guy on a patrol in Afghanistan let alone a Radar tech.
> Nice thought though, A for effort! He'll be a Captain or a civvie in no time!



No, he means every person who wears a Jimmy on his/her head.

Edited for grammar and to add I don't think the personal attack on CWO Richard was appropriate.


----------



## hank011

Just a simple question about the rank...if the guy in charge of CFSCE is in the Air Force and is an MWO he is called Sgt Major(hell I'll call him whatever he wants). This guy is a CWO, a Sig Op but is in a project office(it appears from the signature) and he is also Sgt Major. 
What then is a Sgt Major? If a Chief Petty Officer takes over JSR is he now a Sgt Major? Can any MWO or CWO just call themselves Sgt Major in any position? 
I just finished discovering what a Sapper is but no one seems to like being called Master Sapper, now this!


----------



## 211RadOp

hank011 said:
			
		

> Just a simple question about the rank...if the guy in charge of CFSCE is in the Air Force and is an MWO he is called Sgt Major(hell I'll call him whatever he wants). This guy is a CWO, a Sig Op but is in a project office(it appears from the signature) and he is also Sgt Major.
> What then is a Sgt Major? If a Chief Petty Officer takes over JSR is he now a Sgt Major? Can any MWO or CWO just call themselves Sgt Major in any position?
> I just finished discovering what a Sapper is but no one seems to like being called Master Sapper, now this!



First, "the guy in charge of CFSCE" is a LCol, not an MWO. An Air Force MWO can be called Sgt Major if he holds the position of Sgt Major. He may be a Sgt Major at his directorate or hold some of the authority of a Sgt Major, I don't know. If he is not a Sgt Major, then he should not be referred to as Sgt Major, but as Chief Warrant Officer.

Second, Sgt Major is a position, not a rank. If a CPO2 or CPO1, comes to the JSR, and is in the position of Sqn Sgt Major (CPO2) or the Regimental Sgt Major (CPO1), then yes you can call him Sgt Major. Having said that, a CPO1 or CPO2 would probably want you to refer to them as Chief as they hate Sir. In some smaller Sqns, the Sgt Major could very well be a WO.


----------



## George Wallace

I would seriously hate to be either of you, should you call the RSM "Sergeant Major".  If he holds the appointment of RSM his title is "RSM" or "Sir!" to either of you two.  If he is not holding an appointment as a RSM, then he is addressed as "Chief Warrant Officer _____________" or "Sir!" by the two of you.  He is not a "Chief" if he is Army.

As was stated "Sergeant Major" is an appointment, not a rank, as is "Regimental Sergeant Major".


----------



## 211RadOp

You are right George, I would never, and I have never, refered to any RSM as anything other than RSM or Sir.


----------



## Radop

CWO Richard is RSM of 1 Sigs.  Therefore, RSM or Sir.  After the school, he went to Ottawa as the Career Manager and late last year or early this year received the appointment as TASK FORCE MERCURY RSM.  He was given the appointment as RSM 1 Sigs just before his return to Canada.  He took over command of the above mention task force when CWO Lopez took his commission (pause for a shudder, lol).  I think his report echos what has been said in the past and is being said currently.  What we need now is someone to hear these echos.

As for the C&E Branch fund being a charity for the use of RMC, please back up your statement as I hate to say that I agree with MOOXIE. ;D

Hank011,

If you knew how funding was allocated and audited, you would not have made such a stupid statement that just opened the rest of your comments to ridicule.  By the way, TASK FORCE MERCURY is the Sig Sqn at KAF, not a staff job in Ottawa doing projects.

"He should publish a letter of apology for neglecting the school in Kingston for the last 20 years. Trenton built new barracks, Borden and RMC too, but not Kingston. It is so embarrassing to have such weak leaders."  As you have such a vast knowledge of experience, you should know that any funding of capital projects is only autherized by the treasury board as prioritised by the different bases.  Kingston not so long ago was slated for closure!  No new capital projects were conducted on the base until that passed.  All units within Kingston except RMC and Ft Frontnak (excuse the sp) go through the same scrutiny for priorities.  The buildings at the JSR were deamed the priority as they were housed in two different parts of the city with skyrocketting costs for the use of those facilities.  We just were addressed by the G1 from base were the question of barracks and a proper kitchen were asked about.  They told us they were very close to securing funding for both as they are high priorities nationally as well BUT it takes time.  As Cndsigs points out, they are working out of horse stables, ahh the good old M lines, but that will only get me reminising about the abestos and lead paint we had to work in.


----------



## aesop081

davidhmd said:
			
		

> (with the exception of those dirty linemen and their combat arms trade status)



Hunh ?


----------



## aesop081

davidhmd said:
			
		

> Lineman is the only C&E trade that is considered combat arms. Before mosid came into play, their moc was the only one which started with a 0, which is the marker of combat arms.



Yes i am aware of their former MOC......052

i'm a 081.........i'm not combat arms......091 are not combat arms either

an MOC of 0XX....a combat arms soldier does not make


----------



## geo

011/12/13 Armd
021/022/023 Arty
031 Infantry
041/042/043 Engineer

these are / were known as combat arms trades - though the numbers have changed (again) combat arms is combat arms.

Comms is, and was a combat support branch.


----------



## Canadian Sig

davidhmd said:
			
		

> Well signals lore has it... that's what I've always gotten out of my signals history classes... but maybe a lineman could weigh in on this.



You'd have to find one that was sober .......and I just don't have that kind of time.  ;D


----------



## aesop081

Lineman think they are combat arms because their trade comes from the engineers thats all.......


----------



## geo

(UK baloon corp, which eventually became the RAF was also an engineer branch )

anything new and dangerous usually passed thru the engineers hands - so we could figure out how to make it work and how to best utilise it.


----------



## aesop081

geo said:
			
		

> (UK baloon corp, which eventually became the RAF was also an engineer branch )
> 
> anything new and dangerous usually passed thru the engineers hands - so we could figure out how to make it work and how to best utilise it.



Geo, you remember those old 6 Fd Coy recruiting posters featuring engineers laying telegraph cable at the gallop ?


----------



## geo

Heh.... ayup.
That's why the sigs, the infantry AND the airforce march behind the Engineers on any ceremonial occasion


----------



## aesop081

geo said:
			
		

> Heh.... ayup.
> That's why the sigs, the infantry AND the airforce march behind the Engineers on any ceremonial occasion



that and being lower forms of life......


----------



## geo

Heh


----------



## glenndon

EME Branch trades would be closer to combat arms status than Linemen. . .  I do believe on my Intro to Defence Management course it stated that besides the actual combat arms trades, all EME trades were required to do the PLQ Land portion as well as the PLQ stuff everyone else does (too add to the letter at the beginning of the thread that stated only Veh Techs required it).

Also, what is the status of SQ training to those sigs people around?  MOST of the new Pte's are coming to my tech shop at JSR with SQ training.

Glenn


----------



## aesop081

glenndon said:
			
		

> EME Branch trades would be closer to combat arms status than Linemen. . .



Thats like two bums on a street corner aguing over which one of them is more like Donald Trump.......... :


----------



## geo

LOL.... you know what?.... I can picture just that!!!

 :rofl: :cheers:


----------



## Radop

glenndon said:
			
		

> Also, what is the status of SQ training to those sigs people around?  MOST of the new Pte's are coming to my tech shop at JSR with SQ training.
> 
> Glenn



SQ is required for all soldier's who could be employed in a combat arms unit (or so the theory goes) and for the most part, new sigs must go through SQ between Basic and QL 3 training.

Whether linemen are a combat arms trade or a combat support trade is of little relivance to this topic.  The topic is training levels to be able to deploy to a theatre of operations such as that seen in Kandahar Province.  I don't recall seeing any discussion in CWO Richard's memo about whether trades should be combat support arms or combat arms.  Further to this, were are you getting the information as I haven't read anything that said who was and was not combat arms.  I believe that any of the trades that state that our secondary role is to fight along side infantry units, makes us a combat support arms.  The only MOCs I consider combat arms (IMHO) are Infantry, Artillery and Armoured.  Sig Ops have to fight along side the infantry sub-units sometimes down as far as the Platoon level.  

All of our trades could see combat.  The question is are our soldiers ready???  I don't think they are.  After what I saw in Kabul in 03, I would have said yes but after being in Kandahar, I would say no.  The insurgency is getting smarter and smarter and so must we by changing our tactics and training to meet the desired safety threasholds while performing our capabilities at a high level, we need our soldiers to preform their best under changing circomstances.  To add to the complexity of this already complex situation, we must also win the hears and minds of not only the Afghanis but also the people back home to assure all that we want and intend to give Afghanistan a lasting peace.


----------



## geo

Given that green, blue and black trades all have something to contribute to the mission in Afghanistan, I believe the CDS has dictated that all troops - air, sea AND land are to be given the rudimentary training that is provided in the SQ course..... then junior leaders are to be put thru their paces on the "land" part of the junior leaders course....


----------



## Canadian Sig

geo said:
			
		

> Given that green, blue and black trades all have something to contribute to the mission in Afghanistan, I believe the CDS has dictated that all troops - air, sea AND land are to be given the rudimentary training that is provided in the SQ course..... then junior leaders are to be put thru their paces on the "land" part of the junior leaders course....



We have guys in my unit ( me included ) who have multiple tours overseas but have never taken SQ, LET, or a specific BMQ(land). I don't imagine that they will be going on SQ anytime soon so there will continue to be guys deploying who have little to no combat training.


----------



## Radop

Canadian Sig said:
			
		

> We have guys in my unit ( me included ) who have multiple tours overseas but have never taken SQ, LET, or a specific BMQ(land). I don't imagine that they will be going on SQ anytime soon so there will continue to be guys deploying who have little to no combat training.



Most were written off during that little exercise in Wainwright in 03 called BTE.  Some of you needed waivers from Ottawa to take you.  It was all transparent to the Pte and Cpls.


----------



## geo

well....

The CDS dictates to his commanders what he thinks is right and what he'd like to see
Then it's up to those same said commanders to look after business... if, at the end of the day some of the troops are found to be lacking then some members of the leadership will have some explaining to do....


----------



## Radop

Yesterday, I had an interesting conversation with a commander going over to Afghanistan next rotation.  He will have a staff of 28 people working for him.  He leaves in Jan to start training for the deployment.  As of yesterday, he is short 16 people to round out his staff.  He doesn't expect to get people until one or two weeks before they depart for overseas due to key manning possitions that will have to be handed over here in Canada first then train second.  Now these are senior staff officers and NCOs but still may find themselves going out on convoys to evaluate PRT or FOB sites.  The same thing is happening for sigs pers when someone is needed for filling positions that become vacant due to injury while training (because for the most part, there are no alternates).  Some of these people are only getting the PSTC training and going over.  These people are deploying outside of the wire out of necessity.  We need training in the schools to be realistic and benificial to the soldiers not at pre-deployment training.  That period should only reinforce what they already know.  All too frequently, it is not.


----------



## 211RadOp

I don't agree that the training should lie with the schools. Yes the initial training (SQ) should lie with CFSTG, but the indepth training on specific matters should lie with the units to complete. Taking a week of training to go over convoy ops, veh search, IED awarness etc is not enough. The units should take much longer to train the individual. Now I do recognize that, especially here, that this is not practical for various reasons, last minute replacements, other operational commitments, but the CO of each unit should, IMHO, should incorportate it into thier BOTP.


----------



## hank011

Well a position came down for volunteers and this time the excuse is "You dont have the required training". It is the same position that came down 4 months ago but the acronyms for the quals have all changed.  
Oh well, not my problem.
Having discussed this with co-workers from across the country, the story is the same everywhere; too many 226 techs competing for very few positions on deployments. Not to mention that the unit gets no benefit or replacement while someone is deployed so I understand the reluctance to submit names unless specifically tasked.


----------



## George Wallace

This is where the thing we call "Continuation Training" has to be innovative and credible.  It is the Unit's CO and Trg O's responsibility to keep the unit personnel trained.  This may require some imagination on their part.


----------



## LineJumper

+1 to that Canadian Sig. Green C&E trades (with the exception of those dirty linemen and their combat arms trade status) are combat support trades, the emphasis on COMBAT support <--Hey, I resemble that comment!


----------



## Radop

LineJumper said:
			
		

> +1 to that Canadian Sig. Green C&E trades (with the exception of those dirty linemen and their combat arms trade status) are combat support trades, the emphasis on COMBAT support <--Hey, I resemble that comment!



What does that have to do with anything.  Combat support means that you support front line soldiers!!!  You are expected to be able to do your job along side infanteers.  A coy signaller joins the fight while providing comms to higher and lower.  One of my former Ptes, now a Cpl, was wounded in battle and will probably be released as the injury may cause him an eye.  A MCpl was in the Coy 2IC's vehicle during a battle run when the vehicle went over an IED.  He broke his ankle and hip, the gunner lost his legs and the 2IC had his ankles shattered.  When I was in Kandahar last summer, there were 3 sigs who were awaiting their wound stripes.  These are only the ones I know of.  There are probalbly more.  So to make a statement like we are only Combat Support means you don't know what that means!  We can be part of the F Eche.


----------



## LineJumper

Someone needs a time out. I guess slagging Lineman is a cool thing for pimply bums to do.


----------



## LineJumper

Oh yeah, the only reason I replied to this string was because it has my RSM's name on it. Someone I've jumped with, so many moons ago.


----------



## Canadian Sig

I gotta tell ya that I am firmly of the opinion that we need to do more combat training for all the green C&E trades. Radop is right, we have guys coming home to the unit right now who have been under fire and returned fire in multiple contacts. Most of them have done so with very little in the way of training to prepare them.

Radop, from what our one-eyed friend tells me they are trying very hard to retain him. ( unfortunatly with bars on his shoulders  ;D ). He is well and I see him fairly regularly.


----------



## KaptKain

Opening post conclusion: Our new troops need more hands on training with weapons handling as well as situational awareness training before being deployed overseas.

The bottom men <JNCOs> know this. The top men <Officers> believe the system has adequate training at the moment. The middle men <SNCO's> usually find out about this prior to deployment. The Snr NCO's try to fix these shortcomings ASAP when on ground at new deployment. Overall more headaches<and possible life lost> trying to get all peeps trained to acceptable section/platoon standards.
Problem: We are being pushed beyond our limits in troop strength and fleet/combat equipment serviceability by the federal governments military committments <Common sense in ANY nationality>

Answer: Need the top to speak more to the middle man and vice versa. As well as the bottom man not to hold back on any personal training deficiencies. Top man MUST pass this info onto the Top dog, the politicians!

WRT the CFSCE Training buildings. I did a Fiber Optics course at the Line school a few wekes ago and hell yes, THEY NEED MORE FUNDING for training structures. At -32 w/ windchill...at least the radiator shoiuld have worked in the class.....wasnt on at ALL the whole 5 days there. Did I also say the classroom entrance was right into the cold? not some hallway as usual classes are. LOL


----------



## hank011

Looking back on this thread I realize now that my issue is that the words "we""they""them" are being used too loosely. Pre deployment training should be where this is all done for all non regiment based trades because everyone should be brought up to the same level.
The C&E branch does not exist to train troops. It is a charity that supports a museum. When I dont know how to do something I dont blame "that damned C&E branch" I bug the Boss to set up funding for some "required" training. He works for the Base or Wing commander, not the C&E branch. The function of the C&E branch is purely ceremonial.
When a perfectly sound paper is produced by a senior guy in the army on deployment and it is discussed, HE is not the issue. His non specific use of ALL is definitely the issue...we dont ALL need to become super soldiers because we wont ALL be deployed(especially air force techs). 
CFSCE needs to give up and move to Borden or Trenton. They have been neglected for as long as I have been in and it will never...ever...ever get any better. The only debate seems to be who's fault it ISN'T.


----------



## observor 69

hank011 said:
			
		

> Looking back on this thread I realize now that my issue is that the words "we""they""them" are being used too loosely. Pre deployment training should be where this is all done for all non regiment based trades because everyone should be brought up to the same level.
> The C&E branch does not exist to train troops. It is a charity that supports a museum. When I dont know how to do something I dont blame "that damned C&E branch" I bug the Boss to set up funding for some "required" training. He works for the Base or Wing commander, not the C&E branch. The function of the C&E branch is purely ceremonial.
> When a perfectly sound paper is produced by a senior guy in the army on deployment and it is discussed, HE is not the issue. His non specific use of ALL is definitely the issue...we dont ALL need to become super soldiers because we wont ALL be deployed(especially air force techs).
> CFSCE needs to give up and move to Borden or Trenton. They have been neglected for as long as I have been in and it will never...ever...ever get any better. The only debate seems to be who's fault it ISN'T.



+10, 
Spent six years at Kingston/CFSCE.


----------



## Radop

Canadian Sig said:
			
		

> Radop, from what our one-eyed friend tells me they are trying very hard to retain him. ( unfortunatly with bars on his shoulders  ;D ). He is well and I see him fairly regularly.



That's great news.  I saw him on the game a couple of weeks ago.  He is looking good.  I feel bad that I haven't been able to get up there to see him.  I have told a hundred people to say hi for me, so you will be number 101.  Tell him good luck from me.


----------



## Radop

hank011 said:
			
		

> CFSCE needs to give up and move to Borden or Trenton. They have been neglected for as long as I have been in and it will never...ever...ever get any better. The only debate seems to be who's fault it ISN'T.


How will this solve the problem?  Borden has some new buildings but for the most part their buildings are falling apart as well.  The problem occurred in the 90s when there was $0 for funding capital projects and closing bases.  Now we have buildings that are falling apart, ill adept at servicing the soldiers, etc.  Moving to Borden will not solve anything as a new building would have to be built on a camp that is mainly for support trades.  Meafort would be a more logical choice if it had to move but my question is why?  It would take years for the transition and we are already hurting for people in the Sig Op Trade.  As for never ever going to get better, it takes about 10 years to get a capital project the scope and size of what you are talking off the ground.  A new mess, shacks for the students and a few new buildings are being planned and should be approved in the next year (they have been working on it at the school since my QL5s in 98 at least.)  They have one new building in the school already and hopefully it will have the rest completed within the next 5 years.


----------



## hank011

Radop said:
			
		

> How will this solve the problem?  Borden has some new buildings but for the most part their buildings are falling apart as well.  The problem occurred in the 90s when there was $0 for funding capital projects and closing bases.  Now we have buildings that are falling apart, ill adept at servicing the soldiers, etc.  Moving to Borden will not solve anything as a new building would have to be built on a camp that is mainly for support trades.  Meafort would be a more logical choice if it had to move but my question is why?  It would take years for the transition and we are already hurting for people in the Sig Op Trade.  As for never ever going to get better, it takes about 10 years to get a capital project the scope and size of what you are talking off the ground.  A new mess, shacks for the students and a few new buildings are being planned and should be approved in the next year (they have been working on it at the school since my QL5s in 98 at least.)  They have one new building in the school already and hopefully it will have the rest completed within the next 5 years.



Trenton new building time for barracks...design to completion 3.5 yrs
Borden new officers mansion...design to completion 3 years
226,227,215...guess what...like it or not...support trades...surprise, we aint infantry
Do you remember the Jr ranks mess on the Mc Naughton side...torn down
Do you remember what was across from the mess on Vimy...torn down
Do you remember our gym...converted to a school for snr nco's and officers
B2 is nice...condemned...to be torn down
B1 is crap...they dont want to look at it cause the same contractor built it and...it will be torn down
Kingston has always hated the school and treated it like a fiscal welfare haven
Borden was designed for training, Trenton has their poo together.
Meaford...never heard of it, never been there. What about Masset?
Kingston facilities were awesome once but the neglect is heart wrenching.
Sig Ops have always been hurting because they treat their people like poo.
I'd go to Battle School before I'd let some bitter sig op try to mold me into a backstabber


----------



## LineJumper

KaptKain said:
			
		

> WRT the CFSCE Training buildings. I did a Fiber Optics course at the Line school a few wekes ago and hell yes, THEY NEED MORE FUNDING for training structures. At -32 w/ windchill...at least the radiator shoiuld have worked in the class.....wasnt on at ALL the whole 5 days there. Did I also say the classroom entrance was right into the cold? not some hallway as usual classes are. LOL



That's too bad about the Line Training classrooms. I remember on my 3's and 5's putting that in the course critique. I'm back again on course, but we're in the basement of the Genet and have to keep the windows open because the heat cant be turned down. Those poor computers must take a *hit kicking from all that heat. I know from experience that scribing fibre with wooden fingers is a task in itself. One day when I'm old and retired the up and coming Lineman will have better digs, but we work outside all the time, so maybe it's not so bad.


----------



## Radop

hank011 said:
			
		

> Kingston has always hated the school and treated it like a fiscal welfare haven
> Borden was designed for training, Trenton has their poo together.
> Meaford...never heard of it, never been there. What about Masset?
> Kingston facilities were awesome once but the neglect is heart wrenching.
> Sig Ops have always been hurting because they treat their people like poo.
> I'd go to Battle School before I'd let some bitter sig op try to mold me into a backstabber



Nice arguement but do you have one clue as to what you are talking about?  What building could house the C&E School in Borden that would not have to kick out some other school first?  Talk to some of the support trades and see what they think of Borden's schools.  See what kind of state of repairs they are in.  What room is there for housing 300-400 reg force pers for training let alone the staff to train them.  As for the school getting the shitty end of the stick, that wasn't from the base, that's from the units.  CFJSR doesn't have the equipment to lend to them because they mainly deal with Satcom so most of the equipment comes from reserve units who give the vehicles that they screwed up.    The school has a pretty good rep not only with in the signals world for posting to higher possitions (WO and above) but has scored pretty high in its assessments from BORDEN.  I know this because I actually talk to people who have been there, taught there and gone through the school.  Tell me a base right now that doesn't have buildings in disrepair?  I have been in Ktown now for 13 yrs.  I know a little about the history here.


----------



## willy

Radop said:
			
		

> As for the school getting the shitty end of the stick, that wasn't from the base, that's from the units.  CFJSR doesn't have the equipment to lend to them because they mainly deal with Satcom so most of the equipment comes from reserve units who give the vehicles that they screwed up.



Thanks for the vote of confidence, but I'd like to remind you that we aren't the only ones who can break kit.


----------



## hank011

Radop said:
			
		

> Nice arguement but do you have one clue as to what you are talking about?  What building could house the C&E School in Borden that would not have to kick out some other school first?  Talk to some of the support trades and see what they think of Borden's schools.  See what kind of state of repairs they are in.  What room is there for housing 300-400 reg force pers for training let alone the staff to train them.  As for the school getting the shitty end of the stick, that wasn't from the base, that's from the units.  CFJSR doesn't have the equipment to lend to them because they mainly deal with Satcom so most of the equipment comes from reserve units who give the vehicles that they screwed up.    The school has a pretty good rep not only with in the signals world for posting to higher possitions (WO and above) but has scored pretty high in its assessments from BORDEN.  I know this because I actually talk to people who have been there, taught there and gone through the school.  Tell me a base right now that doesn't have buildings in disrepair?  I have been in Ktown now for 13 yrs.  I know a little about the history here.


I havent replied in awhile as it takes me a little while to contain the frustration. Each time I post something, you go off on a tangent and I have no idea how you got there (or you nit pick).
CFSCE has 2 barrack blocks functional for QL3/5. B2 is slated for demolition and B1is for OSQ/Officers. Their classroom space is filled to capacity, their barracks are to capacity as well. The school is not well served in Kingston, hasnt been for years. If new facilities are to be built(and they have to do something)...let them be in Borden or Trenton as they have shown that they CAN support a school if given the funding. The problem is NOT the school it is the INFRASTRUCTURE and the support thereof.


----------



## Canadian Sig

Gotta say that I'm not unhappy with the fact that the Army is getting control. Things are already changing here in Pet. All MCpls are being sent on a Land mod 6 for PLQ ( even if they have already done a CF PLQ ). As we have been informed, we wont be sent overseas until we have completed that Land Mod 6. It's making some Master Jacks real unhappy but it makes sense to me ( we'll see how happy I am when I'm on the next Land Mod 6 come September ;D ).


----------



## MOOXE

Canadian Sig said:
			
		

> Gotta say that I'm not unhappy with the fact that the Army is getting control. Things are already changing here in Pet. All MCpls are being sent on a Land mod 6 for PLQ ( even if they have already done a CF PLQ ). As we have been informed, we wont be sent overseas until we have completed that Land Mod 6. It's making some Master Jacks real unhappy but it makes sense to me ( we'll see how happy I am when I'm on the next Land Mod 6 come September ;D ).



I am three days away from grad on my CF PLQ here in Shilo. We were told this was one of the very last CF PLQ's for field unit based army personel, theres one more course ongoing thats two weeks behind us. We have joked through the entire course that we would end up taking the mod 6 anyways. There is a mod6 going on right now in our shacks, artillery, and its about 6 weeks long.

So where did you hear that all MCpl would end up taking a mod6? The entire course over again or just the mod6 portion? Any CANFORGENs or printed material of any sorts?


edit...

As I sit here and stew about this some questions come to mind. What about other support trades? Will Sgt's and above who only have a CF PLQ be required to take mod6? The Arty mod6 that is going on right now along side us has lost alot due to medical and failures, probably around 10. I think of the average age of our trade... something like mid 30's.... and the amount of medical chits and pensions going around....I'v got to wonder if this will even work in the short term.


----------



## Canadian Sig

As far as I know this is just a Petawawa thing. There are 5 MCpls on the Land 6 right now who have all been CFPLQ qual'ed for a fair while now. .......and yah the average age is kindda high comparative to the combat arms kids. I hav'nt personaly seen any paperwork yet but I have been told to expect to be on a land Mod 6 shortly after finishing the CFPLQ that I am currently on. 

If I see any clarification I will be sure to pass it on


----------

