IG course content
- Thread starter CT57
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 36,465
- Points
- 1,090
IG is the equivalent of a pilot becoming a test pilot, but with a dorky hat instead of a leather jacket.
- Reaction score
- 21,389
- Points
- 1,010
Why do you think a posting to the School would only be two years?
- Reaction score
- 8,497
- Points
- 1,260
Because they generally have been?
Yeah if every pilot was obliged to become a test pilot as part of their regular career progression.
- Reaction score
- 21,389
- Points
- 1,010
- Reaction score
- 8,497
- Points
- 1,260
Well you generally used to have enough officers to have more than one foo in a regiment.
- Reaction score
- 21,389
- Points
- 1,010
It kind of depends on where you are in the stream.
- Reaction score
- 18,004
- Points
- 1,160
I've been too long away from the RCA to speak knowledgeably about this but there are a few points true today as back in my day.
The key thing to remember is that if any given battalion or armoured regiment does things a bit differently from any other battalion then its no big deal. Artillery and engineers, however, are technical roles where everyone else expects that their support is carried out with some uniformity across the army. This is particulalry true of artillery whose biggest strength is to be able to mass fires from several regiments on a common mission. Standardization of practice matters.
IGs and AIGs are the gatekeepers of those standards. Essentially the courses teach all artillery skills, beyond those already learned as subalterns and FOOs (or their AD/STA equivalents) necessary to run a regiment, to fill artillery staff positions at all levels above regiment, and how to allow them to develop artillery doctrine and teach artillery skills to all ranks.
In my day neither the IG course nor the AIG course were a mandatory course but I never knew a CO or BSM who wasn't an IG or AIG. Since the IG course is given to captains, some, but not all majors are IGs. Again, in my day they would run one IG course and one AIG course per year with around a dozen candidates each (I note that in 2024 8 x IG and 10 x AIG students started the courses). Some graduates stayed at the RCAS to become instructors. Others left after that year to take up roles as OpsOs and RCPOs in the RCHA regiments. A few, who were already in the zone, might be promoted to major and would usually go to take over as battery commanders after the course.
Here are some extracts from an article that gives a few points on their roles.
This institutional memory came to the fore at the beginning of this century when Canada revived the artillery surveillance and target acquisition (STA) system after decades of nonexistence. Only about a half a dozen IGs and AIGs retained these skills (mainly by having done the British IG and AIG courses) and were able to rebuild the specialty from scratch.
IGs and AIGs will be at the forefront of reviving divisional artillery and rocket artillery and air defence as well as incorporating many of the new technologies which are coming on line weekly.
The key thing to remember is that if any given battalion or armoured regiment does things a bit differently from any other battalion then its no big deal. Artillery and engineers, however, are technical roles where everyone else expects that their support is carried out with some uniformity across the army. This is particulalry true of artillery whose biggest strength is to be able to mass fires from several regiments on a common mission. Standardization of practice matters.
IGs and AIGs are the gatekeepers of those standards. Essentially the courses teach all artillery skills, beyond those already learned as subalterns and FOOs (or their AD/STA equivalents) necessary to run a regiment, to fill artillery staff positions at all levels above regiment, and how to allow them to develop artillery doctrine and teach artillery skills to all ranks.
In my day neither the IG course nor the AIG course were a mandatory course but I never knew a CO or BSM who wasn't an IG or AIG. Since the IG course is given to captains, some, but not all majors are IGs. Again, in my day they would run one IG course and one AIG course per year with around a dozen candidates each (I note that in 2024 8 x IG and 10 x AIG students started the courses). Some graduates stayed at the RCAS to become instructors. Others left after that year to take up roles as OpsOs and RCPOs in the RCHA regiments. A few, who were already in the zone, might be promoted to major and would usually go to take over as battery commanders after the course.
Here are some extracts from an article that gives a few points on their roles.
This institutional memory came to the fore at the beginning of this century when Canada revived the artillery surveillance and target acquisition (STA) system after decades of nonexistence. Only about a half a dozen IGs and AIGs retained these skills (mainly by having done the British IG and AIG courses) and were able to rebuild the specialty from scratch.
IGs and AIGs will be at the forefront of reviving divisional artillery and rocket artillery and air defence as well as incorporating many of the new technologies which are coming on line weekly.
- Reaction score
- 3,535
- Points
- 1,190
I'm a deputy instructor and I've worked for three different instructors in the past 3 years...
I was a Fd IG at the RCAS. The IG course has likely changed a bit since I was there but at its core, you will refresh the prior courses (DP1.1/1.2/FOO) with a focus on both how you teach and assess them (lots of recce, and fire planning), get a healthy dose of arty science (ballistics, math, flight, etc), learn a lot about complex ranges and running courses, and then do the Arty Ops and BC courses.
Most people tend to spend 3 years at the school. The rare ones get 2, a few get more.
You don't need to be an IG to do well in the Arty but it doesn't hurt (4 out of the 5 COs right now are IGs). I will say that the IG course (and then being an IG after) really hones your understanding of the job. Both because you learn more of the why as well as just doing the job more. If you love doing artillery stuff, it is a great way to extend your time on the guns.
Most people tend to spend 3 years at the school. The rare ones get 2, a few get more.
You don't need to be an IG to do well in the Arty but it doesn't hurt (4 out of the 5 COs right now are IGs). I will say that the IG course (and then being an IG after) really hones your understanding of the job. Both because you learn more of the why as well as just doing the job more. If you love doing artillery stuff, it is a great way to extend your time on the guns.
OldSolduer
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 20,410
- Points
- 1,260
This. Not just learning the job but working in the environment after really does improve your skills and understanding.
Especially science related knowledge that is useful everywhere
- Reaction score
- 21,389
- Points
- 1,010
I found that teaching itself is where I really learned the job.
If you cannot explain it in simple terms to someone else, you don’t really understand it yourself.
OldSolduer
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 20,410
- Points
- 1,260
- Reaction score
- 21,389
- Points
- 1,010
Yes, and AIGs.
