Mountain Operations Course

[tatonka]

First off, let me say what a pleasure it is to read some intelligent discussion online. A nice change from the slagging I‘ve seen on other sites.

The adoption of a mountain ops role is something being discussed within the Calgary Highlanders. Junior leaders are in favour of it; seniors need more convincing. I think it makes sense for a number of reasons, given our geographic location, our light infantry designation, and the desire to challenge young soldiers with tough training and new skills (They are equally enthusiastic about FIBUA and really enjoyed a brief amphibious ex off Albert Head in March). Of course, mountain ops would augment core combat skills (ie, we wouldn‘t be doing this to exclusion of other general purpose skills). The challenge is finding time to conduct specialized training, acquiring the necessary equipment, and then wrapping everything up in a realistic tactical scenario.
Just conducting a basic mountain ops course will require a good deal of effort.

If such skills as FIBUA, airmobile, amphibious ops and mountain ops are to survive, we don‘t need specialized units for each one... but it makes sense to assign these tasks to specific units based on their geographic locations and the availability of specialized resources--whether they are regs or reserves.

 

[madorosh]

Nice to see another Calgary Highlander here -

I‘ll make one historical comment regarding assigning specific specialist roles to units - and it is an obvious one. And that comment is - once a role is assigned, it has to be maintained, with trained troops/instructors able to perpetuate the unit in that role.

The Calgary Highlanders were one of two (I believe) battalions in the Second Division to receive assault boat training when in England during WW II (it was expected that an assault crossing of the Seine would be necessary, and the Second Div would be assigned to that task once on the continent after D-Day). The Seine crossing never materialized, at least for 2 Div, but later on in October when it was decided to cross the Sloe channel with assault boats, they found that most of the boat trained personnel had gone - either casualties or transfers. In the end, that crossing was called off as well due to the unsuitable terrain.

The point is, in this instance, and even (perhaps especially) in peacetime, you have the question of retention rearing its ugly head. Personally, I think more challenging training like mountain, amphib, etc., will attract soldiers and keep them around. But those who look at the flip side will say that such training is more costly and if specially trained troops arent‘ sticking around to keep the level of employability in that role high, then why bother.

I do know that I enjoyed being in the mountains on our last exercise a lot more than I would have being in Wainwright (AGAIN). I‘m sure the whole question of retention is something that mystifies people at all levels. Hopefully challenging training is something that can realistically address that issue - unfortuntately it‘s not a matter of having to please the dedicated - I will spend my weekends in the same grid reference in Wainwright every weekend if I have to - it comes down to trying to please the fickle high school student who may or may not decide to go on exercise at the last moment because he is bored with it.

Pretty crappy way to run an army, but it‘s what we‘ve got.

Is there any way you can discuss the objections of the senior leadership to mountain training here in open forum (without getting into trouble?) Are the objections economic ones, or is there resistance to the idea of specializiation in general?

 

[bossi]

Regarding the question of "discussing ... without getting in trouble ...".

It‘s fairly simple, Mr. Dorosh - as long as a serving member of the Canadian Forces does not represent themselves as such, and as long as they only state their PERSONAL opinion, they should be able to keep out of trouble.

But, that‘s just my personal opinion.

Dileas Gu Brath
Mark Bossi, Esquire

 

[Bob McGonigal]

To armdfist: I am former RCD but never did have the hatch come down on my head. Audax Et Celer

 

[madorosh]

Mark, my father was named Mister Dorosh. You‘re free to call me Mike if you wish.

The point is - tatonka has already represented himself as a member of the CF - as have I, you, and many of the posters here. I was asking him about matters that may or may not be subjects fit only for behind closed doors discussion. It is for that reason that I left it to his discretion whether or not to answer. It is his call.

 

[Mike Bobbitt]

Unfortunately, those with a memory going back a year or so will remember some people from this forum and from the mailing list getting reprimanded for their postings.

It caused a flurry of opinions with regards to when it‘s right and wrong to post controversial info, but in the end I don‘t think we figured that one out. Personally, I think there are times when discretion is the better part of valour.

However, just because something may be provocative doesn‘t mean it shouldn‘t be said. Usually it‘s the opposite. (Just another reason for DND to hate my site...)

Regardless, I have created a new account to allow people to post anonymously, if they feel the situation warrants it.

The username and password are both "anonymous" (no quotes). Feel free to use it, but it it gets abused, of course, it will disappear.

Cheers

 

[Art Johnson]

Michael: I have some answeres to your questions directed at me. Yes the 48th did have mountain training in Scotland in fact they left directly from that training to go to Sicily.
The present regiment has an establishment for 35 Bandsmen but I understand this may be reduced to 25 sometime in the future.
Still working on the disbandment of the SSF in Italy, at least the Canadian part of it. The 48th received reinfrocements from the The SSF, you have a picture of one of them on your web site, I believe it was after Ortona.

 

[Mr Magoo]

Our Army is too small to have much else besides a
General Purpose Combat Capability.

Having said that, we should all in our lifetimes in
uniform, in peacetime, learn mountaineering, Arctic
operations, air-mobile and FIBUA.

Much of the world is mountainous. Check an atlas
that has relief on it. Besides, mountaineering
training is tough, requires teamwork, keeps people
interested and develops the ability to adapt to
another environment.

Most of the world‘s population lives in cities. Cities
are where the wealth, and industry are located. Why fight
over open country, farmland, forests? Cities have water,
food, transport links, infrastructure, banks, governments...

SAR techs are too valuable a resource to put into combat.
They‘d be needed in wartime to rescue downed pilots, and
sunken ships‘ crews. They‘re also not combat arms, not trained
in logistics to resupply themselves, don‘t operate above section level, don‘t train with weapons, have no officers...

 

[MedCorps]

Does anyone know of a Basic Mountain Operations Course (AGLY) being run? I know they are run often by the light btn‘s and sometime the ResF.

I have one of my troops I want to send on the AMO Course (not the next one, but next year) but he needs BMO first.

I would also be interested in a copy of the BMO or AMO trg plans (A-P9-004-SCF/PC-B01 and A-P9-004-SCG/PC-BO1) if anyone has a copy. The DWAN CFPD site is (still) down and I cannot seem to locate a copy.

Cheers,

MC

 

[Doug VT]

AMO is an instructor course (MOI) your "troop" must be PLQ qualified or higher. No word on if we will be running a basic course this year yet. Normally there aren‘t any pers from outside BN course loaded, due to the fact that it is an infantry dominated skillset.

 

[combat_medic]

Our unit is running a BMO course at the moment, but it‘s also an infantry only course.

 

[MedCorps]

It is too bad that most people feel that AGLY (Mountain Operations - Basic) is an infanty-centric course. A-PD-055-004/PQ-001 makes it clear that the course is of value to a number of trades.

From a less pam / more practical application, it makes good logic to have the people who are with you on patrols in the mountains (read: Med Tech‘s, Sig Ops, FOO tm pers, Fd Eng) also qualified in the BMO skill set. Oddly enough pers get injuried in the mountains and need to be cared for in that environment.

I have a group of Med Techs now that are civilian High Angle Rescue Level (1-3) qualified and/or HAR instructors, but I wish that I could find a BMO course for the MCpl so that I could get him on AMO someday. It would be an asset to have a military slant placed upon his current skills.

Good read (if anyone cares) on the importance of mountain operations skills with notable attention to CSS pers who have to work in that environment. It was by Sgt Gauley of 3 PPCLI and can be found in The Army Doctrine and Training Vol 6, No. 1, Spring 2003.

Cheers,

MC

 

[Dogboy]

i was wondering how often do they offer the mountain warfair course. and how hard is it
iv always loved the mountins and would love to go and train their and the course sounds like fun.( iv alwes loved a long uphill hike)
also how dose one get to be a instructor?

I'm joining soon and its a path id love to look in to.

 

[Spooks]

Umm...being not from the mountain company I can't say for sure, but I may take a crack at it.

Basic Mountain Operations (BMO) you can take. I believe it's only a few weeks long but strenuous. You first learn A LOT of knots. You then goto the Rockies and spend some time applying skills there such as asssited assent of a mountain, walking down, rappelling (lots of it) and in the end is casualty evacuation or something along those lines. Your PT while on course is mainly your hike (with rucks varrying in weight) for maybe and hour each way to and from your 'classroom' from your camp area. You get to use the oh-so-comfortable Swiss seat for the entire time as from what I'm told, you can't wear a harness until you are Rappell Master qualified.

To instruct you need your Advance MO course which you take when you are of a rank above Pte I believe. I know nothing of this except for the fact that once you have this you are qualified to set lines for your entire company to use and make bridges etc.
Don't quote me on this, but I do know that it's a handy qualification to have under your belt esp. if you are LightInf

-Spooks

 

[I_am_John_Galt]

Basic Mountain Operations (BMO) you can take.

They featured this course on one episode of "Truth, Duty, Valour" (OLN), if you get the chance to catch it ...

 

[Dogboy]

achuly thats why im asking
becuse i saw it

 

[MedCorps]

Basic Mountain Operations (BMO or AGLY) can be taken by any rank that is MOC qualified and has an MOC (based on A-PD-055-003/PQ-001) that could have a use for it.  It is generally unit run.   As mentioned it covers the basics including such skills as maintaining and handling ropes, knots / lashings / seats, rappelling and belaying.  There is also fixed line, rope bridges, vertical hauling lines, suspension traverse and casualty evac work covered on this course.  

The Advanced Mountain Operations (AMO) Course is at least 42 days long and is conducted by CPC.  The generally only run one per year.  You need to be at least a MCpl (or Cpl with PLQ, I have heard they will exempt load)  / 2Lt to do this course.  Why MCpl / 2Lt because once you graduate you will need to be able to advise your CO on operations in mountain terrain.  Once qualified AMO you can teach BMO courses.   This course is not only hard to get loaded onto, but also hard in nature both brains and brawn.  

Both some of the few good courses we have left.  Too bad we do not do more of this kind of stuff.  

Cheers,

MC

 

[Gunnerlove]

Ah, at the mention of the Swiss seat repressed memories of pain and discomfort come flooding back. Sounds like an interesting course though.

 

[Spooks]

Now how about the normal memory of the swiss seat combined with a very jumpy breakman who can break very suddenly without your knowledge?

-Spooks

 

[axeman]

hey what about a good seat crappy gloves and a brake man who has his head up his.... i watched a friend break his ankle   because ofthe brake man not knowing what to do .   :