• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

I dislike RMC

I will be blunter. More beholden to that institution than THE institution, and will sacrifice the latter to protect the former.
Would you feel the same if rando's with no affiliation whatsoever were saying the same things about the Dirty Patricia's?

๐Ÿ˜‰

Didn't think so. Now you know how RMC Cadets feel when everyone under the sun who never went there voices their opinion about the place.


The mission of the College has never been to "Produce Officers for the Canadian Armed Forces". It's been to "Produce Leaders for Canada".

Given the disproportionate number of Alumni that have gone on to not only high ranks in the Armed Forces but also gone on to be Rhodes Scholars, Captains of Industry, Astronauts, Olympians, Diplomats, Politicans, etc. (The list is impressive, especially for the size of the school), I'd say they have done a pretty good job.
 
Would you feel the same if rando's with no affiliation whatsoever were saying the same things about the Dirty Patricia's?

๐Ÿ˜‰

Didn't think so. Now you know how RMC Cadets feel when everyone under the sun who never went there voices their opinion about the place.


The mission of the College has never been to "Produce Officers for the Canadian Armed Forces". It's been to "Produce Leaders for Canada".

Given the disproportionate number of Alumni that have gone on to not only high ranks in the Armed Forces but also gone on to be Rhodes Scholars, Captains of Industry, Astronauts, Olympians, Diplomats, Politicans, etc. (The list is impressive, especially for the size of the school), I'd say they have done a pretty good job.
Cry me a river snotter ๐Ÿ˜‰! ๐Ÿ˜‚๐Ÿ˜‚


Seriously, Mrs Marples finishing school for wayward boys and fallen debutants is a pretty good place. But I think the facilities can be better used as a centre of excellence for leadership and strategic thought. And CFC should be moved there from Toronto.

Just an opinion from a DEO MARS who paid for his liberal arts degree. ๐Ÿคช
 
Would you feel the same if rando's with no affiliation whatsoever were saying the same things about the Dirty Patricia's?
I was there for 10/90. I have said, on the record, that symmetrical brigades are indefensible. I served in a very famous Regiment that no longer exists: The Royal Green Jackets. The pressures on the larger institution demanded the amalgamation, and I heard some of the discussion amongst the Regimental leadership to know that they leant into to making the best of it, rather than fighting to the last Gurhka.

If (as I have sometime thought and occasionally said in public) that the designation and management of the three Reg Inf Regts were doing more harm than good, I would welcome the change. And I acknowledge that that time may have come.

Affiliation does not necessarily lead to the most objective outcome....so perhaps randos are the answer
 
Given the disproportionate number of Alumni that have gone on to not only high ranks in the Armed Forces but also gone on to be Rhodes Scholars, Captains of Industry, Astronauts, Olympians, Diplomats, Politicans, etc. (The list is impressive, especially for the size of the school), I'd say they have done a pretty good job.

You forgot train engineers. ;)
 
Cry me a river snotter ๐Ÿ˜‰! ๐Ÿ˜‚๐Ÿ˜‚


Seriously, Mrs Marples finishing school for wayward boys and fallen debutants is a pretty good place. But I think the facilities can be better used as a centre of excellence for leadership and strategic thought. And CFC should be moved there from Toronto.

Just an opinion from a DEO MARS who paid for his liberal arts degree. ๐Ÿคช
Given that the CAF today is extremely anti-intellectual, it's probably for the best that RMC maintains their somewhat arms reach approach ๐Ÿ˜„

I was there for 10/90. I have said, on the record, that symmetrical brigades are indefensible. I served in a very famous Regiment that no longer exists: The Royal Green Jackets. The pressures on the larger institution demanded the amalgamation, and I heard some of the discussion amongst the Regimental leadership to know that they leant into to making the best of it, rather than fighting to the last Gurhka.

If (as I have sometime thought and occasionally said in public) that the designation and management of the three Reg Inf Regts were doing more harm than good, I would welcome the change. And I acknowledge that that time may have come.

Affiliation does not necessarily lead to the most objective outcome....so perhaps randos are the answer
Agreed,

But you see the problem now with RMC and why people who went there get defensive about it. They get defensive because most of these calls for changes end up turning in to what kind seems like an attack against them ๐Ÿ˜‰

I am an ex-cadet and think the time for a change may also be warranted but the College is older than the current CAF itself.

It has a deeper history that goes beyond the current construct of the modern day CAF. It was, up until fairly recently it seems, considered a pretty presitigious Institution to get accepted in to.

Even when the CAF was going through the dark ages of the 90s, RMC still maintained its sheen. That has now worn off it seems and it's just "another school".

But that seems to be par for the course with the CAF today. The entire brand of our Armed Forces is in the shitter so I suppose we may as well just chuck one more product line in there for good effect ๐Ÿคฃ
 
You forgot train engineers. ;)
I am not a Qualified Locomotive Engineer, yet ๐Ÿ˜‰.

That is on my bucket list though. You need to hold a Conductor Qualification for a minimum of two years before attempting to certify as a Locomotive Engineer.
 
Even when the CAF was going through the dark ages of the 90s, RMC still maintained its sheen. That has now worn off it seems and it's just "another school".
To be fair you had many high up folks doing bad things to help keep it's "sheen". Thats worn off now because it's not so easy to bury people anymore...
 
Given that the CAF today is extremely anti-intellectual, it's probably for the best that RMC maintains their somewhat arms reach approach ๐Ÿ˜„


Agreed,

But you see the problem now with RMC and why people who went there get defensive about it. They get defensive because most of these calls for changes end up turning in to what kind seems like an attack against them ๐Ÿ˜‰

I am an ex-cadet and think the time for a change may also be warranted but the College is older than the current CAF itself.

It has a deeper history that goes beyond the current construct of the modern day CAF. It was, up until fairly recently it seems, considered a pretty presitigious Institution to get accepted in to.

Even when the CAF was going through the dark ages of the 90s, RMC still maintained its sheen. That has now worn off it seems and it's just "another school".

But that seems to be par for the course with the CAF today. The entire brand of our Armed Forces is in the shitter so I suppose we may as well just chuck one more product line in there for good effect ๐Ÿคฃ
And that is the argument for keeping every single Reserve Unit. And never evolving. Or changing. Or even doing a though experiment as to how to become more relevant.

Shrug. Change is scary. Status Quo kills
 
And that is the argument for keeping every single Reserve Unit. And never evolving. Or changing. Or even doing a though experiment as to how to become more relevant.

Shrug. Change is scary. Status Quo kills
If you want to make changes, you need to convince the stakeholders that it's in their benefit.

Much to dismay of some here, RMC does hold significant sway in certain halls. You need to convince those people that change is not only necessary but 'beneficial' to them.

No sane person is going to willingly go along with something that weakens their own hand, that's just stupid.

It would be nice to see a proposal to change RMC that doesn't involve spitting on everyone who went there and dragging names through the mud for a start ๐Ÿ˜„
 
It would be nice to see a proposal to change RMC that doesn't involve spitting on everyone who we there and dragging names through the mud for a start ๐Ÿ˜„

Dude.... welcome to the club ;)

sarcastic season 3 GIF by NETFLIX
 
And that is the argument for keeping every single Reserve Unit. And never evolving. Or changing. Or even doing a though experiment as to how to become more relevant.

Shrug. Change is scary. Status Quo kills
It is- we had an organization in Winnipeg called the Winnipeg Infantry Tactical Group. It basically combined the two regiments into one unit, each retaining its customs and traditions. There were a lot of concerns, as well there should be. It was a decent arrangement in my opinion. One LCol and one CWO for the entire group. Two Regiments - one a Rifles regiment and a Highland regiment PLUS the Band, and the Pipes and Drums.
It worked quite well for a time.
 
Would you feel the same if rando's with no affiliation whatsoever were saying the same things about the Dirty Patricia's?

๐Ÿ˜‰

Didn't think so. Now you know how RMC Cadets feel when everyone under the sun who never went there voices their opinion about the place.

It's almost like the continued operation of RMC has an impact on the entire CAF, and thus everyone has very reasonable grounds to be voicing their opinions on whether or not the place should keep going. RMC isn't a sacred cow; it has real world impacts and thus any criticism of it is completely legitimate.

The mission of the College has never been to "Produce Officers for the Canadian Armed Forces". It's been to "Produce Leaders for Canada".

Given the disproportionate number of Alumni that have gone on to not only high ranks in the Armed Forces but also gone on to be Rhodes Scholars, Captains of Industry, Astronauts, Olympians, Diplomats, Politicans, etc. (The list is impressive, especially for the size of the school), I'd say they have done a pretty good job.

Frankly, if your assessment of the actual mission of RMC is accurate, then it just seems to me like that in and of itself is a pretty good reason for the CAF to stop funding it. The CAF should not in the business of spending boat-loads of money providing free education to be primary used elsewhere. The federal and provincial governments provide plenty of funding for general education programs. The CAF needs to be focusing its efforts on things that actually help us accomplish our mission.

And frankly, I'm unconvinced that RMC does that better than simply focusing on DEO enrollment would do, or shoring up any gap that might cause with the far more affordable option of Civvie U ROTP.

But you see the problem now with RMC and why people who went there get defensive about it. They get defensive because most of these calls for changes end up turning in to what kind seems like an attack against them ๐Ÿ˜‰

Frankly, if they interpret "RMC officers aren't actually better than DEOs" or "the benefits from RMC aren't worth the cost" as some sort of personal attack, they really need to work on their grown up skills. If they can't handle a discussion about an institution without perceiving all points against the institution as a personal slight... well then that's probably a pretty good argument that said institution didn't properly prepare them to act as leaders like it claimed it did.
 
@Humphrey Bogart I think the role for RMC is in the post graduate area. No more degrees offered. You come in with your degree, this is where you earn your commission. Upon completion and commission we (Canada/CAF) pick up the tab for your degree, with a contract for X years service. Any self caused/chosen break in that regular force service causes the immediate reversal of tuition coverage.

You get the young uni grad in turn them into officers there, a year at most. You also get higher up commissioned officers in to progress on their mandatory training and staff coursing. Close CFSC in Toronto and port it over to RMC.

Its should almost wholly be staffed by military personnel only using civilians in niche areas we cant cover.
 
@Humphrey Bogart I think the role for RMC is in the post graduate area. No more degrees offered. You come in with your degree, this is where you earn your commission. Upon completion and commission we (Canada/CAF) pick up the tab for your degree, with a contract for X years service. Any self caused/chosen break in that regular force service causes the immediate reversal of tuition coverage.

You get the young uni grad in turn them into officers there, a year at most. You also get higher up commissioned officers in to progress on their mandatory training and staff coursing. Close CFSC in Toronto and port it over to RMC.

Its should almost wholly be staffed by military personnel only using civilians in niche areas we cant cover.

In keeping with the Army.ca great tradition of never letting a tight, focused thread go for an off-topic rabbit hole or twoโ€ฆ ๐Ÿ˜‰

HT, thisโ€ฆand some kind of Sandhurst-like military-specific leadership training that is not at all focused on a baccalaureate degree. Properly formed and implemented, an appropriate training structure for CAF officers isnโ€™t or shouldnโ€™t be, or be seen to be a bad thing in and of itself. That some nihilistic behaviour developed (arguably Government has a large hand to play in this IMO with the Withers Report and implementing an agressive โ€˜All-Degreed Officer Corpsโ€™ policyโ€ฆso it wasnโ€™t just RMC coming up with the pivot to the degree thing) means that such behaviors should have been addressed and directed by outside the organization for correction. Does an officer core really need a degree at all?

Back on topic, for the original poster, youโ€™re going to find pilot training a lot more intensive both in pressure and timelines within which you will have to perform with far less room for error than during your time at RMC. Consider RMC good practice for developing effort management/coping strategies to allow you to perform at acceptable levels that will support subsequent success.

Good luck and all the best with your time at RMC and when you get to flight training. Pass both and then you can give people the pilotโ€™s smug stare when they dig at your for your time at RMC. ๐Ÿ˜‰ ๐Ÿ˜†
 
Nice whataboutism.

The MilCols should have been shut down a long time ago....but almost all of the decision makers over the last half century or more are products of said institutions.

#VMI
Following down G2G's rabbit hole: The biggest strength the MilCols have is that there is no consensus, not even a really strong minority opinion, on how we might do the job without them.

I, personally, favour a model that might be something like:

1. First phase officer training: brutally hard "military stuff" - a mix of PT, square bashing, small arms and boot-polishing. About 20% of candidates opt out - because the short (10 week) programme is designed to achieve that result;​
2. First (100% paid: tuition, books, fees + salary) academic year in a university chosen by the CF to meet the needs of the occupation the candidate and the CF have agreed is right for both. Another 10% of candidates fail out;​
3. Second phase officer training: something akin to "adventure training" and/or escape and evasion - fieldcraft and confidence building and teamwork, Teamwork, TEAMWORK and learn to trust people who are not like you. Another 10% fail and/or opt out;​
3. Second academic year;​
4. Third phase officer training - academic work related to leadership and the military ethos;​
5. Third academic year;​
6. Fourth phase officer training - introduction to your part of the military at your branch/corps school - may include aircrew selection;​
7. Fourth academic year - graduation from uni and degree awarded.​
8. Summer holiday! :cool:
9. Military occupational training begins in earnest.​
 
Following down G2G's rabbit hole: The biggest strength the MilCols have is that there is no consensus, not even a really strong minority opinion, on how we might do the job without them.

I, personally, favour a model that might be something like:

1. First phase officer training: brutally hard "military stuff" - a mix of PT, square bashing, small arms and boot-polishing. About 20% of candidates opt out - because the short (10 week) programme is designed to achieve that result;​
2. First (100% paid: tuition, books, fees + salary) academic year in a university chosen by the CF to meet the needs of the occupation the candidate and the CF have agreed is right for both. Another 10% of candidates fail out;​
3. Second phase officer training: something akin to "adventure training" and/or escape and evasion - fieldcraft and confidence building and teamwork, Teamwork, TEAMWORK and learn to trust people who are not like you. Another 10% fail and/or opt out;​
3. Second academic year;​
4. Third phase officer training - academic work related to leadership and the military ethos;​
5. Third academic year;​
6. Fourth phase officer training - introduction to your part of the military at your branch/corps school - may include aircrew selection;​
7. Fourth academic year - graduation from uni and degree awarded.​
8. Summer holiday! :cool:
9. Military occupational training begins in earnest.​

If we went your route.

I like this but I would like to propose an adjustment to your serial 3. Adventure training.

I would like to see this period used, for the RCN, to get those folks into fleet as something akin to a midshipman's cruise. Expose these folks to life at sea and the routine of ships and submarines. This would not be an occupational level course, more a chance to experience the uniqueness of life at sea.
 
Back
Top