Coming Changes to Infantry NCM Career Courses

[OldSolduer]

Interesting. Has this been spread throughout the Infantry Corps?

I'd like to see some more on this.

 

[dangerboy]

Jim

  It was discussed at EX Bayonet this year in BC, I was not invited so I could not tell you if there was a rep from any of the Winnipeg reserve units attendiing.

 

[noneck]

This came up on the PRes Inf DP3A last year at the Infantry School. We had a briefing on the changes from the OC (Brit from the RRS) who was about to transfer into the CF as a Royal.

The reason behind the change was to provide the small arms instruction portion earlier in an JNCO's development instead of waiting till the NCO was promotable to Sgt. Sounds good, but what will become of all of us that are caught in the middle? Also during this period of fiscal restraint and cut backs to the green portion of the army, I would have thought we would be cutting back on training and shortening courses not adding new ones!

Seems to me we are going down the British Army model of Junior Brecon and Senior Brecon...."Battle Stripes" anyone!

 

[vonGarvin]

I'll be able to put more info in here, but not right now, I'm just waking up, but just throwing the marker down, and yes, I'll be able to answer any questions with authority and not speculation.

 

[Journeyman]

I'll be able to answer any questions with authority

Why do mirrors reverse images left-to-right, but not top-to-bottom (ie - why is your nametag reversed but you're not upside down)?


I've got nothing; I'll STFU now 

 

[brihard]

Technoviking, a couple questions for when you're able to field them:

The new DP3A; duration? Broken into mods at all? More elaboration of the actual PO checks?

To what extent will the new 3A be similar to PLQ Mod 6 infantry as it would have been run 4 or 5 years ago?

What changes, if any, will be realized in the PLQ Mod 6 Infantry?

Will any qualification above PL Mod 6 Inf be required for appointment to MCpl?

Will any further qualifications beyond Mod 6 be required for Reserve MCpls to teach on DP1 level courses?

Speaking personally, this sucks- redoing offensive/defensive ops at the section level in the course context has about as much appeal to me as buggery. With that said, I taught on Mod 6 in LFCA in the past couple years and frankly was extremely unimpressed with the passing standards for the candidates, and how little actual field time they got and the low expectations they were held to. If the new system means section commanders are better qualified for the role, then professionally I can't fault it. I only taught the one serial, so I can't say if it was a serial problem, a staff problem, a problem higher up in the school, a policy problem (pass the little F*$&ers at all costs!) or if the course itself is now fundamentally flawed.

Putting on my funny hat for a minute, I'm concerned about what this will mean for the reserves. All too often we have Cpls put up the leaf literally on grad parade- I'd say that about 2/3 of the reservists on the mixed reg/res course I taught a few years ago were MCpls the day they graduated, and from followup I know that most of them went home and walked into section commands. I know this is a perennial problem in the reserves, but I'm concerned that this could turn into an impetus to further weaken the expectations of the Mod 6 infantry, at least as I have perceived them.


CanadianTire- If your experience out there is the same as it is here, being put in a leadership role simply means you're the most senior/qualified person available. Most of us are filling a rank up in terms of our actual job, and I know other units have it worse. So while I get what you mean about the new courses hindering career progression rank wise, troops will likely still find themselves in leadership roles, simply by virtue of showing up longer and on one more course than the next guys.

 

[ArmyRick]

For those not in the know, I am going to add in the current infantry career NCM chain as of July 2011

Regular

BMQ, 13 weeks

DP1 Infantry, 14 weeks = Trained Private posted in battalion

DP2A IPSW

PLQ (Infantry) = Promotion to Master Corporal

DP3A Section Comd  (Formerly Small Arms Instructor) = Promotion to Sergeant

DP3B Inf PL 2iC (DL and Residency phases) = Can be promoted Acting Lacking WO

ILQ = Promoted to WO

DP4 = Can be promoted acting lacking MWO

ALQ = Promoted to MWO

CWQ = Promoted to CWO

 

[ArmyRick]

Oops, I did not realize there was an entire page to this already. maybe I should delete the previous stuff?

 

[vonGarvin]

Why do mirrors reverse images left-to-right, but not top-to-bottom (ie - why is your nametag reversed but you're not upside down)?


I've got nothing; I'll STFU now 

It's an optical illusion that they "appear" to reverse.  You see the same image, but from behind is all

 

[BDTyre]

CanadianTire- If your experience out there is the same as it is here, being put in a leadership role simply means you're the most senior/qualified person available. Most of us are filling a rank up in terms of our actual job, and I know other units have it worse. So while I get what you mean about the new courses hindering career progression rank wise, troops will likely still find themselves in leadership roles, simply by virtue of showing up longer and on one more course than the next guys.

Brihard, for sure and I've experienced that myself several times. There is, of course, only so much one can actually do before needing that qualification. While I know the leadership in my unit has no issues putting people they feel can do the job into a 2IC or even IC role (task/situation dependant), I can't see myself being put in charge of our PAT platoon without some level of PLQ; likewise, I'll never be teaching on a course without it either.

Unfortunately, the changes to PLQ caught some guys in the middle, and they've ended up having to start over again.

 

[vonGarvin]

Technoviking, a couple questions for when you're able to field them:

The new DP3A; duration? Broken into mods at all? More elaboration of the actual PO checks?

May the mod system burn in Hell a death in the fires as hot as a thousand suns ;D

(Just kidding). 

The new courses will be able to be conducted in modules; however, that's up to the TP boards which will be sitting soon.

For starters, let us avoid calling the new courses "3A" etc, because those are the names for the old courses.

The courses being implemented are:
DP 1 Infantryman
DP 2 Weapons Detachment Member
DP 2 PLQ Infantry (Section 2IC)
DP 2 Advanced Small Arms
DP 3 Section Commander

As for course lengths, I’ll get into that below, but the DP 3 Section Commander will be about 20 to 25 days, with some DL on top of that.

To what extent will the new 3A be similar to PLQ Mod 6 infantry as it would have been run 4 or 5 years ago?

Not at all similar.  Except in that both will be conducted mainly in the field.  Remember that for the PLQ, the candidates were being trained to be section commanders, and then being employed as Section 2ICs (eg: MCpl).  Don’t think of a garrison role as Section Commander as “performing the job”, or even on FTX.  Think of who was Section Commander on operations.
No longer will the sections be going up and down the trace, in isolation, doing attacks, as an example.  The vision for the DP 3 Section Commander is for the MCpls who are on course to act as Section Commanders (or element commanders for fighting patrols) in a platoon setting.  Yes, they will lead section attacks, but as part of a platoon. 

What changes, if any, will be realized in the PLQ Mod 6 Infantry?

PLQ Mod 6 (“PLQ Infantry”) will retain everything that is on PLQ Mod 6 Land, but will also have hard-assessments for the section 2IC.  Where the section commander will be assessed to “competency level 2” (aka: with supervision), the 2IC will be assessed to level 3 “(aka: no or minimal supervision).  In other words, the Section Commander won’t be required to conduct an estimate: the results will be given to him (aka: your mission is to destroy, block, etc).

Will any qualification above PL Mod 6 Inf be required for appointment to MCpl?

Yes.  In order to be appointed MCpl, an infantryman will need to have DP 2 complete (see above)

Will any further qualifications beyond Mod 6 be required for Reserve MCpls to teach on DP1 level courses?

Yes, they will need to have DP 2 complete and be appointed MCpl by their chain of command.

Speaking personally, this sucks- redoing offensive/defensive ops at the section level in the course context has about as much appeal to me as buggery. With that said, I taught on Mod 6 in LFCA in the past couple years and frankly was extremely unimpressed with the passing standards for the candidates, and how little actual field time they got and the low expectations they were held to. If the new system means section commanders are better qualified for the role, then professionally I can't fault it. I only taught the one serial, so I can't say if it was a serial problem, a staff problem, a problem higher up in the school, a policy problem (pass the little F*$&ers at all costs!) or if the course itself is now fundamentally flawed.

I understand your frustration; however, the thing is for all those who are currently DP 3A qualified will not need to get new qualifications.  Once you are DP 3A qualified, that’s it, that’s all.

This whole realignment began, if I may bore everyone for a moment, during step 6 of the Land Force Systems Approach to Training (LFSAT), which is the validation step.  In this step, LFDTS goes to the field force to assess that what is taught on a course fills the job requirements.  In this case, DP 3A was being validated, and the answer from the field force was a resounding “NO!”, in that the DP 3A didn’t get MCpls ready to be a section commander on operations.

So, the Infantry School did an evaluation, and it turns out that to fix DP 3A, it would affect other courses in the stream.  Without too many details (you see the results in the preceding posts), the main thing found was that Infantry Section Commanders were unable to perform some of the job requirements.  They didn’t “get” mission command, they didn’t have a good grasp of the mission analysis or the estimate at their level.  Were they good section commanders in operations?  Damned straight they were!  Did they have all the tools that would allow them to do their jobs to the fullest of their potential?  No way.

The biggest problem is that we were teaching Ptes and Cpls to be section commanders on the PLQ (Inf), but then not employing them as such for 3-6 years.  Yes, I get it, as a MCpl you need to know how to be a Sect Comd.  Having said that, every rank in the army needs to be able to step up; however, they need to know their primary job first.  And we weren’t training Cpls how to be section 2ICs.  Yes, the stuff on PLQ (Inf) is good stuff, but it was being taught too early.

So, the aim now is to teach them how to be a 2IC and how to properly administer the section, but with enough knowledge to, when required, step up as Sect Comd.  This is not life or death in Canada, in Garrison, but on operations, it’s exactly that.  (Don’t mention stepping up for HLTA, because the entire section goes at the same time.  I’m talking in the unfortunate event of casualties)

Putting on my funny hat for a minute, I'm concerned about what this will mean for the reserves. All too often we have Cpls put up the leaf literally on grad parade- I'd say that about 2/3 of the reservists on the mixed reg/res course I taught a few years ago were MCpls the day they graduated, and from followup I know that most of them went home and walked into section commands. I know this is a perennial problem in the reserves, but I'm concerned that this could turn into an impetus to further weaken the expectations of the Mod 6 infantry, at least as I have perceived them.

Once fully implemented, they will not be eligible for appointment to MCpl until they get DP 2 complete, which includes the advanced small arms.

In short, we will have a DP 2 qualified MCpl in garrison who can train the section on small arms (he will be an expert), and will be able to administer the section in the field, having been trained his job: sect 2IC.  I could have used it during my ISCC, as I felt like a fish out of water during my first rolling replen as a 2IC and I shat the bed: hard.  (I had never done anything like that, but boy, could I do a section attack!  But that was the Sgt’s job to lead, not mine…)  And the MCpls who show up to the Infantry School to do DP 3 Section Commander will be better set to conduct the course.  It will be a tough slog, but they will have the experience behind them to better help with the course.

I hope this helps.  Please feel free to ask any relevant questions on this realignment ;D

 

[dapaterson]

They didn’t “get” mission command, they didn’t have a good grasp of the mission analysis or the estimate at their level.

So are we talking the need to change things at the Infantry School, at Fort Frontenac, or at the college in Toronto?


Edit to add:  > , as the intent was to suggest that the problems extend to ranks well beyond the appointment of MCpl.

 

[vonGarvin]

For those not in the know, I am going to add in the current infantry career NCM chain as of July 2011

Regular

BMQ, 13 weeks

DP1 Infantry, 14 weeks = Trained Private posted in battalion

DP2A IPSW

PLQ (Infantry) = Promotion to Master Corporal

DP3A Section Comd  (Formerly Small Arms Instructor) = Promotion to Sergeant

DP3B Inf PL 2iC (DL and Residency phases) = Can be promoted Acting Lacking WO

ILQ = Promoted to WO

DP4 = Can be promoted acting lacking MWO

ALQ = Promoted to MWO

CWQ = Promoted to CWO

Without course lengths, here is the model once it’s completed its realignment:

DP 1 Infantryman = employment as a rifleman in a unit.
DP 2 Weapons Detachment Member = employment in a weapons detachment as a weapons operator
DP 2 PLQ (Infantry) + DP 2 Advanced Small Arms = employment in a rifle section as a 2IC (appointed to MCpl)
DP 3 Section Commander = employment in a rifle section as Sect Comd (promoted to Sgt)
Etc.

 

[vonGarvin]

So are we talking the need to change things at the Infantry School, at Fort Frontenac, or at the college in Toronto?

None.  The changes have been made and the courses will reflect it.  The sgts on operations were taught Mission Command, etc, but back when they were Pte/Cpl on their PLQ, and then never used it for 3-6 years, and there was a gulf.  So, instead of teaching someone how to drive, for example, and then not letting them drive for 3-6 years, we are teaching them their skills required immediately prior to their employment in the position.

 

[brihard]

That actually makes a hell of a lot of sense, thanks- it's something that at our level we definitely noted; MCpls were never taught how to *administer* sections, and it's a deficiency I've definitely seen when I've been the senior MCpl commanding a section with a guy just off course as 2i/c. The new 3A, with the emphasis on larger context with actual moving parts around you also makes sense. I expect my course was like most- towards the end of it we'd doa  few fighting patrols or hasty attacks and the best couple candidates would lead an element, but that was about it.

So what is currently 3A will, for the most part be retained as 2C (which should still continue to be a pretty good go), and what will then be 3A will essentially be an entirely new section command course that displaces a bunch of other learning downward in the DP chain?

Now, those of us sitting at 2B currently, will our leaf get 'grandfathered', though with 2C being a prerequisite for DP3-SC, or will we be seeing revocation of appointment contingent upon course loadings?

Again, putting the funny hat on and representing the Thursday nighters, this will in effect add another 30 training month to the time needed to qualify for MCpl. Given that it's already hard enough for most reserve units to get guys out for the better part of a summer for Mod 6, I can see some negative impact on the ability of reserve units to generate sufficient MCpls. God knows the leadership school is already minting as many of them as possible, and there are still great deficiencies in numbers for the reserve side. Will the DP2C remain centralized at CTC, or does the possibility exist to download it to the LFAs? I see potential for great difficulty getting enough MCpls to teach summer basic, or for that matter to force generate in some of the specialties that the Reserves seem to keep getting tasked with...

Finally, the powerpoint shows the 2C being intended to start running some time this winter, transitioning without a hard stop to the existing 3A. Should this transition be fairly seamless for those of us in line for a 2C in due course?

 

[ArmyRick]

After reading the material, is there any potential of promoting CPL to MCPL acting lacking (without the small arms instructor) phase?

I do like the hard assessed of section 2IC duties and the better understanding of mission command. Start teaching guys assigned and implied tasks and using the estimate. Off topic *Mentioning understanding of duties, I bumped into someone who actually thought a MWO was 4th in chain of command after OC, 2IC and LAV Capt. I had to explain to him that no, the LT commanding platoons come next and finally after all commissioned guys are out, it falls on the CSM next.

Will all the new leadership course (less PLQ) be done at gagetown? Is there any room to conduct some of the MCPL qualifications at the Area training centers to alleviate potential future back logs?

I read something in there about a shorter FFQ for those of higher rank. How is that being implemented?
Is some of this new training being done on DL?

 

[OldSolduer]

*Mentioning understanding of duties, I bumped into someone who actually thought a MWO was 4th in chain of command after OC, 2IC and LAV Capt. I had to explain to him that no, the LT commanding platoons come next and finally after all commissioned guys are out, it falls on the CSM next.

I had to explain this to an MWO who thought if the OC and Coy 2 I/C were out...he was in command. And NO I did not have to remind myself.  >

 

[vonGarvin]

After reading the material, is there any potential of promoting CPL to MCPL acting lacking (without the small arms instructor) phase?

I'm not sure.  The idea is that there be no "gulf" or "gap" between PLQ (Inf) and DP 2 Advanced Small Arms.  Of course, the best laid plans, and all...

Will all the new leadership course (less PLQ) be done at gagetown? Is there any room to conduct some of the MCPL qualifications at the Area training centers to alleviate potential future back logs?

The DP 2 Advanced Small Arms and DP 3 Section Commander will both be taught in Gagetown.  The remainder will be at units or ATCs.

I read something in there about a shorter FFQ for those of higher rank. How is that being implemented?

Yes, FFQ will become a prerequisite for DP 3 Platoon 2IC.  It will be taught at the ATCs (as far as I know)

Is some of this new training being done on DL?

Yes, the aim is to use as much DL as is practicable.

 

[Infanteer]

I like, in the diagram on the last page, how "Communication" isn't taught until ILQ - yup; we're still knuckledraggers....

In all, I am supportive of this plan and find the progression makes sense.

 

[a_majoor]

I'm not as enthused about the DL part of this, since in my experience DL does not seem to provide the desired results (note this is my own observations, maybe something is skewing the results).

I am currently teaching PLQ, and during the Mod 1-3 portion we discovered the candidates had a very poor understanding of the principles of instruction (Imagine my surprise when during an impromptu review prior to the demo lesson not one candidate remembered the acronym ICEPAC until they got some heavy prompting from me), and inadequate lesson plans (not having or in many cases knowing the relevant prior lessons to review for their own lesson was one concern). They seemed overwhelmed by the "live fire" portion of the mods, and required a great deal of coaching in the practice portion in some cases to be successful in their hard assessed presentations. I had a similar experience when my wife took a web based course from Ryerson; I spent a lot of time attempting to re-teach what she was having difficulty with over the web and the web based help wasn't giving her. (Not that I was a lot of help in this regard).

I don't believe these candidates nor my wife are exceptionally below the curve in any way, so the DL will have to be looked at very closely to ensure the candidates can actually get what's needed.