BMOQ - Reserve ( merged )

[Darcy Lyle]

Hi there. Does anybody know the dates and locations for BMO Q land 2016? I know it starts in September and I'm assuming it'll be in Gagetown but I would like to know if anybody knows of other locations and other start dates of this year 2016? Answers will be very much appreciated. I couldn't find anything searching more recently for common army phase dates thanks in advance all

 

[Dave12]

There has been some debate at our reserve unit as to whether the course can still be done in modules by a reservist? It was obviously easier for a member to do the course over 2 summers rather than get 10 weeks off at once. Can somebody please provide some guidance as to where we can find information on this?

 

[shootemup604]

I was informed by the Infantry School this past summer that BMOQ(A) is being extended by one week to 11, and will no longer be done in mods.  I believe the course currently running is the final course in the mod format, to allow those who have outstanding mods to finish.

 

[RocketRichard]

Rumint that this may revert back to mods in the future as will be difficult for most reserve officers to do this in one go. We shall see...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[George Wallace]

Rumint that this may revert back to mods in the future as will be difficult for most reserve officers to do this in one go. We shall see...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Or we will leave it as it is and only those who can do the whole crse will attend, as they did in the past with the (PRes) ROUTP and later RESO entry plans.  Those PRes who will not be able to do so, will be given a "watered down" modular entry plan; and the end product will be lesser than the "full-time entry plan".  The full-time crse will be catering primarily to the university students, and the modular crses will be catering to persons who have full time civilian careers.

 

[RocketRichard]

Or we will leave it as it is and only those who can do the whole crse will attend, as they did in the past with the (PRes) ROUTP and later RESO entry plans.  Those PRes who will not be able to do so, will be given a "watered down" modular entry plan; and the end product will be lesser than the "full-time entry plan".  The full-time crse will be catering primarily to the university students, and the modular crses will be catering to persons who have full time civilian careers.

A


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Dave12]

Thanks for the prompt replies.

 

[Mike5]

Any news on BMOQ(Army)?  Any changes?

 

[Mortar guy]

One more modularized BMOQ-A will be run, probably at 5 Div TC, then it will be only 55-day demodularized courses from then on. With less than 1% of candidates starting BMOQ-A using the mod system, and less than half that number successfully completing training, it made no sense to carry on with the modularized version of BMOQ-A.

 

[Flavus101]

I would be curious to see the stats on reservists taking the course?

I assume (a problem in and of itself  ) that the 1% stat you threw out was for both reg and reserve. If we look at only reserve candidates, what is the percentage that opted for the mod based version?

 

[RCPalmer]

I would be curious to see the stats on reservists taking the course?

I assume (a problem in and of itself  ) that the 1% stat you threw out was for both reg and reserve. If we look at only reserve candidates, what is the percentage that opted for the mod based version?

I have heard that number quoted before, and while not completely off the mark, I haven't seen it anywhere officially.  I can tell you that purely on the basis of the officers my unit has sent (to say nothing of the other 54 PRes Infantry units), it would have to be more than 1%.  I would say that 1/3-1/2 of the officers that have come through my unit over the last decade have attempted modular training in one form or another. 

The Infantry School does issue a Commandant's report on BMOQ-A and DP 1.1 every year, and you can find the completion stats for individual courses there broken out by RegF and PRes.

The real question to ask is the number of officers who have reached DP1 one mod at a time, and I am sure that those numbers are very low.  In fact, I would not be surprised if it was 0.  The reality is that the while there are around 309 PRes Infantry Officers occupying 315 unit level Lt/Capt positions across the branch, only 66 of those are DP1 qualified, meaning that only 21% of our establishment (or 22% of PML) positions are occupied by trained pers. 

This has a variety of implications to include impacting our ability to support the critical IT which sustains the PRes,  limiting the scale and scope of PRes CT, and restricting our ability to force generate for domestic and expeditionary operations. 

While there is an establishment issue here (ie we shouldn't have to hire OCdts against Lt/Capt positions), there is still clearly a significant training backlog composed primarily of members who can't commit to the RegF courses. This is why I think you will see a push towards tailored PRes training, rather than RegF courses modularized for the PRes. 

 

[dapaterson]

I'd argue that the fundamental establishment issue is the existence of so many units, all striving unsuccessfully to push out a LCol and CWO every three years.  Slow that churn through a radical restructure and the pressures are alleviated somewhat.

Of course, do that and then a collection of rump platoons will claim that their heritage is being diminished...

 

[TheIntrepidSouthpaw10]

...The real question to ask is the number of officers who have reached DP1 one mod at a time, and I am sure that those numbers are very low.  In fact, I would not be surprised if it was 0.  The reality is that the while there are around 309 PRes Infantry Officers occupying 315 unit level Lt/Capt positions across the branch, only 66 of those are DP1 qualified, meaning that only 21% of our establishment (or 22% of PML) positions are occupied by trained pers. 
...
While there is an establishment issue here (ie we shouldn't have to hire OCdts against Lt/Capt positions), there is still clearly a significant training backlog composed primarily of members who can't commit to the RegF courses. This is why I think you will see a push towards tailored PRes training, rather than RegF courses modularized for the PRes.

Do you know if there is a public report available which states the number of PRes officers at each PRes Regiment? And if so, the number of unfilled roles?

 

[RCPalmer]

I'd argue that the fundamental establishment issue is the existence of so many units, all striving unsuccessfully to push out a LCol and CWO every three years.  Slow that churn through a radical restructure and the pressures are alleviated somewhat.

Of course, do that and then a collection of rump platoons will claim that their heritage is being diminished...

There are lots of good reasons for a re-alignment.  While trying to avoid turning this into the PRes roles and missions thread, I have always thought that it would be possible to re-align the structure while keeping the hat badges and traditions, but when every change initiative starts with the assumption that no units will be amalgamated or zero manned, it is hard to move forward.

I certainly think such a structure change would take some pressure off, but I think that the "shop floor" benefit would be limited because the people who are being squeezed up the chain aren't suited to stay at the lower levels anyway.  For the most part we are still talking about officers and senior NCMs with 20+ years of service over the age of 40.  If they were in the RegF, those people wouldn't be directly supporting IT or commanding platoons in CT either.  Absent a BTL, we have a structural barrier preventing us from filling our establishment positions with trained, effective pers.  When you couple that with significant training barriers (at all levels), it is not a recipe for success.  Overall, and to your point in a round about way, I think that there is a general lack of focused institutional effort in keeping the bottom half of the pyramid (Ptes, MCpls, and Lts) healthy.

Part of the issue (even for the university student officer target audience) is that the RegF courses have also become less accessible over time due to sequencing issues, and growing course lengths.  For example, in the manner in which the RESO system was structured when I went through, it used to be possible for PRes officers to complete basic officer training and what was then phase 2 in the same summer.  However, when basic officer training was downloaded to the CBGs, that path was lost because no single CBG would have the critical mass to run a tailored course just for the officers.  Little changes like that accumulate over time to put us into the situation we are in today.

 

[RCPalmer]

Do you know if there is a public report available which states the number of PRes officers at each PRes Regiment? And if so, the number of unfilled roles?

The numbers I provided in my article (insert shameless self-promotion caveat here) on Reserve Infantry Officer training in the Infantry Bulletin on junior officers health in PRes infantry units generally is from an official source, as at the date I specified. 

That article is accessible at:
http://www.ducimus.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/Infantry-Corps-Newsletter-Volume-2-Issue-2-final.pdf

I don't think you would find any publicly accessible source for per-unit manning and vacancies, and the raw information would be of little use lacking the context of the pers management within that unit. With an understanding of who you are and the context of the request, I might be able to provide some further info by PM. 

There was an appendix in the 2016 Auditor General's Report on the Army Reserve that you might find useful specifying individual unit strengths as a percentage of ideal unit size which would give you a general (if incomplete) idea of the health of a PRes unit, keeping in mind that this data is just a snapshot in time.  To provide a bit of context, a unit that manned at say 70% wouldn't necessarily be able to hire new soldiers or officers off the street if their shortages are at the Sgt-WO or Capt-Maj levels. 
http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/parl_oag_201602_05_e_41249.html#appa

 

[RocketRichard]

There are lots of good reasons for a re-alignment.  While trying to avoid turning this into the PRes roles and missions thread, I have always thought that it would be possible to re-align the structure while keeping the hat badges and traditions, but when every change initiative starts with the assumption that no units will be amalgamated or zero manned, it is hard to move forward.

I certainly think such a structure change would take some pressure off, but I think that the "shop floor" benefit would be limited because the people who are being squeezed up the chain aren't suited to stay at the lower levels anyway.  For the most part we are still talking about officers and senior NCMs with 20+ years of service over the age of 40.  If they were in the RegF, those people wouldn't be directly supporting IT or commanding platoons in CT either.  Absent a BTL, we have a structural barrier preventing us from filling our establishment positions with trained, effective pers.  When you couple that with significant training barriers (at all levels), it is not a recipe for success.  Overall, and to your point in a round about way, I think that there is a general lack of focused institutional effort in keeping the bottom half of the pyramid (Ptes, MCpls, and Lts) healthy.

Part of the issue (even for the university student officer target audience) is that the RegF courses have also become less accessible over time due to sequencing issues, and growing course lengths.  For example, in the manner in which the RESO system was structured when I went through, it used to be possible for PRes officers to complete basic officer training and what was then phase 2 in the same summer.  However, when basic officer training was downloaded to the CBGs, that path was lost because no single CBG would have the critical mass to run a tailored course just for the officers.  Little changes like that accumulate over time to put us into the situation we are in today.

Excellent post sir.

 

[Jarnhamar]

I think the modular system causes a lot of obstacles for the students and staff alike.  Removing the modular system will cause a few less members to be qualified but I think it will improve the quality of the students.

 

[TheIntrepidSouthpaw10]

The numbers I provided in my article (insert shameless self-promotion caveat here) on Reserve Infantry Officer training in the Infantry Bulletin on junior officers health in PRes infantry units generally is from an official source, as at the date I specified. 

That article is accessible at:
http://www.ducimus.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/Infantry-Corps-Newsletter-Volume-2-Issue-2-final.pdf

I don't think you would find any publicly accessible source for per-unit manning and vacancies, and the raw information would be of little use lacking the context of the pers management within that unit. With an understanding of who you are and the context of the request, I might be able to provide some further info by PM. 

There was an appendix in the 2016 Auditor General's Report on the Army Reserve that you might find useful specifying individual unit strengths as a percentage of ideal unit size which would give you a general (if incomplete) idea of the health of a PRes unit, keeping in mind that this data is just a snapshot in time.  To provide a bit of context, a unit that manned at say 70% wouldn't necessarily be able to hire new soldiers or officers off the street if their shortages are at the Sgt-WO or Capt-Maj levels. 
http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/parl_oag_201602_05_e_41249.html#appa

Terrific information! I really appreciate you sharing it all.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Mortar guy]

I would be curious to see the stats on reservists taking the course?

I assume (a problem in and of itself  ) that the 1% stat you threw out was for both reg and reserve. If we look at only reserve candidates, what is the percentage that opted for the mod based version?

Reg Force candidates do not and cannot do BMOQ-A by mods. Again, of all reservists who have done BMOQ-A (and it's predecessors) since 2010, less than 1% have attempted to do the course by mods and, of those, less than half completed all five mods.

 

[Flavus101]

Reg Force candidates do not and cannot do BMOQ-A by mods. Again, of all reservists who have done BMOQ-A (and it's predecessors) since 2010, less than 1% have attempted to do the course by mods and, of those, less than half completed all five mods.

If a Reg force member fails they are not slotted back onto the mod they failed to complete (assuming they get another go)? They have to start at the beginning again?

Thanks for the info though everyone!