Pathfinder

[Nat. Cap. Girl]

me too please!!!!

 

[MJP]

Lots of info can be found here. http://army.ca/forums/threads/2052/post-23782#msg23782

 

[Da_man]

The ONLY tactical aviation asset that the CF has (in rotory wing terms) is the Bell 412 ,AKA Griffon.
Kiowa - GONE
Chinook - GONE
Apache - I wish!

What about the RAH-66  :evil:

 

[scm77]

Don't forget the Seakings.  Unless that is the RAH-66

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

SCM...Sea Kings are not a tactical air asset. They are an ASW helo with limited utility capability.

 

[excoelis]

Folks if you are looking for the Pathfinder Pre-study package, the guide and the joining instructions are available on the DIN at the 8 Wing/CPC site.  If you don't have access to the DIN, and you don't have a chain of command to assist you, then I would surmise that you probably shouldn't be in possession of documents like these.  I'm all for professional development, so by all means read and learn, even if it isn't in your plans for this year - or ever.

No offense 'Nat Cap Girl' but why would a civilian with 1 post on this website be looking for a document such as this?  If the answer is sensitive then by all means PM me.

 

[Jarnhamar]

I've had the honour of working with pathfinders. I say honour because these guys are in my opinion the best of the best. Professional soldiers in every sense of the word. The stuff these guys know will spin your head.

Being curious about them is one thing, the stuff they do is awesome and the punishment they go through in training is brutal.    Joining the Canadian Forces with the sole goal of being a pathfinder (or jtf, clearance diver, sniper) is another.   Your gonna close a lot of doors I think.

The pathfinder is arguably one of the toughest courses we have.   I'm not saying you shouldn't set your goals high BUT if you join the army for one sole reason and you find yourself not being smart enough, not physically fit enough, not having good enough vision or whatever else your going to really screw yourself over. Your probably going to be pretty depressed too.   People may disagree of course but i think if your a civilian you should set your goals on actually becoming a good soldier in whatever entry trade you take. Boring? Well maybe a little but it's realistic.   Once your in the military and an established soldier you can set your goals on taking a speciality course. I'm not speaking from first had experience, only through what I've observed and through guys I've spoken with but a civilian or even brand new soldier simply won't have the physical and mental toughness or experience to go from recruit to soldier to pathfinder as quick as some people may want to.

If you join the army for one reason and find its too difficult for you to reach (at the time) you might quit the army and we'll not only end up losing money on your training, salary and the position you occupied BUT we might end up losing a good soldier too which we need most.

One last point, and if correct me if I'm wrong but i get the feeling that people (because of our friends to the south) get the misconception that we have full time sniper and pathfinder platoons. I think I've heard of a pathfinder platoon but I'd never seen them in operation unless it's a very specific thing.   I think they often get tasked out to different roles.   All the snipers and pathfinders I've worked with or met have been guys in infantry companies driving LAVs,   carrying a C7 beside me or have been a section commander. Maybe working in the QM,   right along side guys without the courses. (I'm sure they were better shots though heh). The chances are your not going to be in a high speed special ops unit but in a standard rifle company. (Not a bad thing of course). This leads back to the comment i made about making sure you are a good soldier first and foremost and you  make lots of friends and don't step on any toes.

 

[excoelis]

Good advice Ghost.

I will amplify your last point though with a repost from a discussion I had elsewhere last spring.

3 RCR just conducted 3 weeks of training as RRU. Among other activities there where 2 tactical parachute insertions, one a coy raid, the other the main effort in a Bn push to seize and hold an airfield. There where also 2 airmobile insertions, one a coy live fire landing right on the objective(each coy went through), the other a Bn aimobile insertion, multiple lifts, close proximity to Bn obj.

I realise that experienced soldiers, recce ptlmn, adv recce, etc probably have the expertise to perform the task of recce, mark, secure, guide, develop the obj etc... but who better than Patrol Pathfinders? At the very least it's good to have the guys running the show qualified. There are a lot of perishable skills involved with Airborne, Airmobile, Amphibious, etc insertions. In todays climate of 'more with less' you need to get bang for your buck. Admittedly if you are DZ/LZ controller you can call in a Cont Para or such, but that's not what I'm getting at. There are several patrol pathfinder qualified troops in 3 RCR and in my opinion they contribute greatly to the successful TACTICAL running of DZ/LZ/BeachHead/Austere Airstrips.

They are grouped together, they do hold para positions, they do practice their core skills at every opportunity, they are augmented by several pathfinders within the unit when necessary, and they are employed correctly(for the most part) by the CO(a ranger) who is advised by his RSM(an old pathfinder).

Yes, I've glossed over some issues and painted a rosy picture, but the core of the matter remains the same: pathfinders needed, a few pathfinders better than no pathfinders, pathfinders still pathfinding.

Please understand that the whole reason people like me are on sites like this is not to stroke our own ego.   I bring up these points because I genuinely want to advise people on subjects within my area of knowledge.   I also want to encourage professional development, interest in the CF, and the free exchange of information.   This is the modern day method of expanding one's realm of influence.   However, it is up to the individual to use this medium in a positive and mutually beneficial manner.

 

[Jarnhamar]

My sole purpose in replying was to expose you  ;D

Honestly i was hoping someone with experience could pick up where i left off with observations, thank you.

 

[excoelis]

O.K. 'Poltergeist'

Just admit you are striving for 1200 posts before the end of peak hours and your post got away from you. :

 

[Slim]

Some good stuff in this thread Gents!

One of the things that I've always enjoyed about working with CF personel is their ability to change quickly from one task to another and the scope of training involved with the thought of boosting that thought process within the CF.

During my time in the CF I have, amoung other things, been lucky enough to become a Pioneer ( actually Armoured Assault Trooper but the same course taught by the same instructors-in my case PPCLI). I greatly enjoyed that line of work even though it had nothing to do with driving a tank or track.

My point is this. Even if you don't get to become the high-speed ninja-whatever that everyone is always talking about, there is still plenty of things to do and excell at and some amazing experiences to be had if you keep an open mind!

Cheers

Slim

 

[chriscalow]

Maybe, can you guys let out a small bit of info?  Maybe the requirements for the P.T. test or something, that way us new guys can have something to base our training on.  I personally train to topple the "coopers test".  I probably will never join JTF 2, nor do I have much interest in doing so, but I do see benefits to physical training to their BASIC standards.  I don't mean to step on any toes, but to be the best infantry soldier I can be, I want to be able to keep up to the guys in the "big shoes".

 

[excoelis]

Another re-post from a previous discussion I had elsewhere.

I will say that from experience the PPF (and courses like it) require some very serious MENTAL and PHYSICAL preparation - in that order. You can be the greatest athlete in the CF, if you arrive thin-skinned you'll last about a day or so! Physical conditioning is very important, but don't overtrain and arrive already injured and generally worn down. Case in point - two years running a candidate has experienced mild heart attacks(or close enough symptoms to shut them down immediately) - both resulting in RTU. In both cases they where very fit and young men. It's not a gimme course!
Mission focus, Tenacity, Brass Balls, and an undeniable will to finish what you started...are all pre-requisites. Even then, you may fall victim to an unfortunate injury that precludes you from finishing. A true testament to the aforementioned qualities is the fact that most of the guys that finished the last course would have done just about anything to see it through to the end. Some of them had fallen victim to injuries (or circumstance)on previous courses, but they would not be denied! Ultimately they prevailed and can now wear their torches with pride.

The only 'official' PT test is the Basic Para Test.   In years gone by the troops where required to do the 2X10m back to back, but really, is that a smart way to spend day one of the course?   Given that not everyone is at the same level of fitness, or has been given the same amount of time to prepare (if any), a hard PT test could end up biting the course in the ass.

I have told my troops many a time that I am not a psychologist, but it's part of my job to understand people.   It comes down to this:

Weak or soft body - I can work on that.   Weak or soft mind - not my area of expertise.

What I mean to say is that if you have a strong mind then you are probably worth the extra effort if you are a little soft around the edges.   It all comes down to economy of effort.   I could probably work with and fix a broken spirit (may have even done it in the past) but the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few(or the one).   I would rather spend my time improving and training the mentally astute than correcting the errors of a failed recruiting or basic training system.

NEVER neglect the most important muscle in your body - your MIND

The abilities of a strong minded individual never cease to amaze me.   They always outperform the narcissistic gym monkeys in endurance, perseverance, and grit.

The bonus part of my theory?   My observations in this vocation lead me to believe that the strong mind usually creates a vessel capable of carrying it through some very austere environments, in order to explore new challenges, be they physical or mental.

Simpler definition:   FREE YOUR MIND AND YOUR ASS WILL FOLLOW.

 

[Bert]

excoelis
<"What I mean to say is that if you have a strong mind then you are probably worth the extra effort if you are a little soft around the edges.   It all comes down to economy of effort.   I could probably work with and fix a broken spirit (may have even done it in the past) but the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few(or the one).   I would rather spend my time improving and training the mentally astute than correcting the errors of a failed recruiting or basic training system.>"

Not to nudge the thread off-topic a bit, but what does Pathfinder preresquites have to do with BMQ?   Alot of people comment on a failing BMQ process of it being
too soft and reducing low quality of recruits.   In my experience, this pushes into the realm of arrogance.

Think of it.   BMQ is just a 10 week course.   It cannot be a fitness course.   You're taking raw civilians and giving them the basics of military disipline, knowledge,
and experience.   In no way is a raw recruit after BMQ useful or experienced in anyones era.   Graduates go out into the real military and find it to be less
regimentated and structured than BMQ and suffer mild culture shock depending on the element and unit.

During the course, one can see the what you described "The abilities of a strong minded individual never cease to amaze me.   They always outperform the narcissistic gym monkeys in endurance, perseverance, and grit."   And thats the point.

When these recruits get send to their training units or gaining units, thats when the real show starts of any era.   Blaming BMQ for lacking members after a year
or many years of OJT/MOC training and day to day duties is wrong in my opinion.

But your comments about the training make sense.  

 

[excoelis]

Bert said:  Not to nudge the thread off-topic a bit, but what does Pathfinder preresquites have to do with BMQ?  Alot of people comment on a failing BMQ process of it being too soft and reducing low quality of recruits.  In my experience, this pushes into the realm of arrogance.

ar ·ro ·gance [érr?g?ns] noun
contemptuous pride: a strong feeling of proud self-importance that is expressed by treating other people with contempt or disregard

Who exactly was treating whom with contempt or disregard?  Are you part of the training establishment and feel slighted in some way?  Am I included in your generalisation of 'A lot of people'?  Did I say BMQ? 

Nice hijack.  I'm trying to give advice in a thread that's entitled Pathfinder pre-requisites.  Is there not a more appropriate forum to discuss the military training system?

At the risk of proving my arrogance, I will say that you support my argument in your assertion.

I said: I would rather spend my time improving and training the mentally astute than correcting the errors of a failed recruiting or basic training system.

You said: BMQ is just a 10 week course.  It cannot be a fitness course.  You're taking raw civilians and giving them the basics of military disipline, knowledge, and experience.

My point exactly.  I don't expect to receive physically fit soldiers from the training system.  But they bloody well should show up mentally prepared for the challenges and hardships of military life.  That baseline standard I can work with.  And that is the fitness I should be permitted to expect from any soldier, regardless of his aspirations. 

This thread is about a specific course.  Offer advice or move your argument elsewhere.

 

[Bert]

No harm meant excoelis. 

"I would rather spend my time improving and training the mentally astute than correcting the errors of a failed recruiting or basic training system."

A member may find himself in the training system and in a pathfinder course yet and your comment of the "errors of a failed..." was worthy of some
clarification I thought.   

 

[excoelis]

Bert.

As much as I hate to change the subject, I will clarify.

Who 'failed'???  Hmmmmm........The instructors?............The recruits?...............Maybe in some cases, but it is much bigger than that.

For the military, the core values of Army culture are subordination of the self to the group and the idea of sacrifice: the individual must be willing to subordinate him or herself to the common good â ” the team and common task. Furthermore, there must be a willingness to sacrifice one's life for the team in peace and war â ” without this, an armed force will risk defeat. However, in a more individualistic Canadian society, a lower priority is given to values of the community and the subordination of the self to that of the team. We can say that Canada is not a militaristic society, nor is it likely to become one in the future. Patriotism, as it might be expressed in â Å“proud service to one's countryâ ?, is not widespread.

Canadian social, cultural and legal changes provide a less-than-robust supporting framework for the core values of Army culture. Indeed, a new generation of prospective recruits has difficulty accepting some of the traditional demands of an Army way of life. Deference to authority figures has waned: authority has to be earned and not taken for granted in Canada. This trend poses questions for the Army with its highly-structured authority relations.

Furthermore, significant sections of the youth population are less physically fit than ever before. One of the effects of this is that in order to maintain standards, the costs of training are likely to rise because of the need to bring poorer quality recruits up to the standard required. It will also be a challenge to maintain the traditional expectation that military personnel should conform to a code of moral conduct that is more demanding than that expected in civilian life with respect to issues of honesty, integrity, sexual behaviour, soft drug use and so on.

Professor Donna Winslow, Military Sociology Canadian Society and its Army,http://www.journal.forces.gc.ca/engraph/Vol4/no4/military-socio_e.asp

So Bert, am I still pushing into the realm of arrogance?

Do you see who or what I feel is at fault?

 

[excoelis]

I will start a new topic on Military Ethos and see what that generates.

 

[chriscalow]

Well, excoelis, I see your point, and I agree, I don't know much about how it all works, but what you said makes sense.  Thank you.

 

[Voltigeur]

Anyone here knows what kind of approval it takes to go on the US Pathfinder course?