Given our training 'philosophy' today,
Quote:
Originally Posted by
TAH
DO NOT agree with the idea/concept of "Snap Training". Soldiers/units will only be good at those tasks/skills they train on/practice regularly. Otherwise , they will probably never progress beyond a "novice" level of ability.
that's generally true. The Task, Condition, Standard system is specifically designed to train tasks by rote and repetition. Add to that the facts that we attempt to train people only for their next job -- both enlisted and officer initial entry training produce only a poorly trained, entry level person instead of a competent soldier or leader -- and that the system is structured to produce promotion levels for personnel management and advancement purposes, NOT for effective operations and you're right.
However, discard the terribly flawed BTMS and its allied stifling idiocy for Outcome Based Training and Education, structure ranks and promotion based on effective operating capability requirements and most importantly, properly and thoroughly train people in the basics then snap or swing training is not only possible but desirable. In fact, one need not do all three of those things, change in any one would allow quick switch in units.
The Troops are capable of doing far more than they are allowed to do. However, if that were proven true (as it has been in other times...), then what we're now doing would be exposed as terribly wasteful (which it is), over-ranking a lot of people (which is certainly true...) and underpaying Joe -- as well as exposing a lack of selectivity in who gets to be Joe... :rolleyes:
The terrible crime of risk aversion does not just stifle actions in the combat theaters... :mad: