Ex-Dragoon said:
Oh really...tell that to the guys who went to Op Apollo 2-3 times.
On this coast I always see critical Manning Lists from the MCDVs looking for personnel
i hope you can back that up otherwise you will have a flame war on your hands soon.
Not the way I see it
Too bad you see it that way Ex-Dragoon, I was honestly just being curious.
Concerning the time spent at sea, look at this thread. There is a discussion about this topic. In it one person confirms that he transferred to the regular force to get LESS sea time.
http://army.ca/forums/threads/23040.0.html
As for training standards, I was thinking more of officer training rather than NCM's. I am completely open the possibility that I am wrong, but I would prefer hard information.
Here's my thinking. I will use reserve infantry officer training and MARS as examples, as those in the two I am most familiar with.
Reserve infantry BOTC seems to be the 10 weekend BMQ/10 weekend SQ (Only 40 days - that can't be right, can it?) and sometimes there seems to be some additional week long training module but this seems to be dependent upon location. Going through the various posts here, the average length of training including the module is about 47 days (?).
Naval reserve IAP/BOTC at Esquimalt is accredited as equal to the regular force, and is nearly four months long full-time. (My source is the naval reserve magazine, The Link). The regular force sends candidates to Esquimalt sometimes.
Militia infantry CAP-R an PLC courses are shorter in length and lack some of the training included in the regular force counterparts. There are several threads in the forums concerning this.
MARS officer candidates take the same 40 weeks of training whether they are regular or reserve. The watch keeping certification qualification at the end of this training is the same. Then off everyone goes to apprentice in their particular ship type.
As for NCM's, in both the naval reserve and the militia training seems to be one-third to one-half that of the comparable regular force courses. I do note that there are several discussions on these forums about militia spending several months upgrading their training before they can be deployed. Of course naval reserve personnel being deployed would have to come up to some higher standard if they have not spent much time at sea, but I have not heard of anything this extensive being required for naval reserve personnel. This suggests that the standard is closer to the regular force than in the militia.
Of course, the naval reserve has an operational tasking and deploys units composed and commanded by reservists. It would make sense that they would be trained to a decent standard so that this mission can be achieved. The militia deploys individual members but is not responsible for deploying complete units.
I used to be a reserve infantry NCM. I took a long look at my former trade when I was considering reenlisting. Using my knowledge and experience for comparison, I am quite impressed with what I see in the naval reserve.
Now, I am making no attempt to say that this is better than that. What I see are two different branches, with different missions, that need to prepare their members in different ways. And I am certainly not making any comment at all on individual member professionalism. I have met some very professional, competent militia members. I am certain that there will be some bumbling fools in the naval reserve.
Thank you for the information concerning the Manning lists. That's new information for me.
