MedTech said:
Ballz I have to say this. Your experience in the CF is WAY too little for you to be commenting on training doctrine, and how the troops were trained. If there was an ND you cannot blame it solely on the training system, you have to also blame the soldiers that made the mistake. Honestly? in a Platoon of 30 you had 3 NDs? If that was 1 per soldier, 3 soldiers, that's 1% so... the training worked because somewhere along the lines the soldiers neglected to pay attention or as a whole the Pl failed them because no one ever bothered to offer them help. Think about that as a future leader in the Forces.
I will echo what CDN Aviator and MOE said... out of my service time albeit no where NEAR as long as theirs, the only time I've seen NDs were because the drills weren't followed. The soldiers fracked up by not paying attention to instructions and as a direct result NDd. Plain and simple.
You be the judge of that.
Absolutely my time in is petty, but I'm not the only person on here that thinks it's being taught wrong. Soldiers just as experienced as any of you have said on here basically the same thing I'm saying. If I thought I was a lone voice about this against a bunch of experienced soldiers I'd hold my tongue but I'm not.
First I'll say the "brakes on a car" analogy is rediculous. But I could add that you might want to know how they work if something went wrong with them while you were cruising downhill at 100km/h. Much like you will want to know how your rifle works if you're in the field being shot at and it stops working. Also, what happens if your stuck and pick up something other then a C7? You don't know the drills for it so you can't use it?
I'm not sure how your numbers are working but it was 3 of about 45 at that point, which is 6.7%, and only over a period of only 10 days in the field! That is FAR too high.
Now, as for the 2 specific ones in question, it's not because they didn't listen, or put in the effort. They passed their weapons test before they were ever allowed to use rounds, so the CF did certify them as a adequately capable with a rifle. But any time they DID screw up while learning, they were just screamed at to "put the weapon on safe, remove the magazine, tilt the rifle to the right, cycle the action, tilt the rifle to the left, pull back the cocking handle and check the chamber, release the cocking handle, aim at a safe point, put the weapon on repetition, and fire the action" in bout .3 seconds.
Sorry, this doesn't teach them anything, even if the instructor did slow it down so they might even be able to follow. And I'm not blaming the specific instructors. They under specific instructions too.
But if somebody took the 10 seconds to explain why you take the magazine out before you start cycling the action, and why its so serious if you don't, they probably would have "learned" the proper sequence of the drill, instead of just memorizing it for the test, and then have it forgotten 6 weeks later (no weapons handling in between) when we went out into the field. If they learned it, they wouldn't have forgotten it. But nobody's going to "learn" sequences if they don't understand.
As for trying to point the finger at my poor leadership skills, that's laughable. We were in classes of 7-8, and worked in sections in the field. I did everything I could to emphasize rifle theory with those in my sphere of influence, and before the weapons test I put it out there for anybody that was having trouble to come to my room with their rifle, and I did work with 4 people at that. However, there's only so much I can do and so much I can observe of 45-50 peers in those environments. Also, since your so adament that we shouldn't learn rifle theory and only learn rifle drills, and take everything at face value from the instructors, I suppose in a perfect world the whole platoon would be working from zero knowledge and not capable of teaching their peers anything about a rifle.
Oh, and in the course critique our platoon unanimously decided that we would have liked more emphasis on theory. We might not have experience but that should count for something, or why would the CF ask?
But enough of that that's another argument for another thread. In any case, somebody should not be discouraged to learn some beforehand.