No longer an OT Trade

[aesop081]

but for AES Op the skills you develop could be applied to most airframes no?

Sure, we could do that for the initial phase of training but then there is still the OTU bottleneck. We cant train folks on the CP-140 anywhere else in the world for example, because nobody else flies the CP-140.

This type of approach was effective when we were preparing our transport pilots for the reception of the C-17s.

Sure it was effective. It worked because the CF was going to fly the C-17 as well. See my comment above.

 

[Im Not Telling]

Actually most people who OT INT end up Air, so the NCI op who knows his c6 drills has become a FOBBIT still needs to learn air frames, tactics and just what each person on the air crew may need to know when he briefs them (dosn't all ways work) as well Navy INT guys don't get a hole lot of time on the boats as some Mars guy dose the job as the navy has issues with manning and personel.

I actually agree with CDN Aviator about the need to redo the TP if your allowing direct entry.  I also agree that a change from one element to an other should come with an understanding that learning about the people your supporting is needed and shouldn't not be left totaly to the individual to catch up.

don't even try to compare someone from a hard army position to those from hard air and navy.  I'e neer done RAS, or Been part of an Air crew I don't hae the training.  Just like most air and navy guys havn't taken artic warfare, or R2I, or LAV driver classes

 

[zorro]

Actually most people who OT INT end up Air...

Why is that? You would think army would be the more stressed environment these days?

 

[scoutfinch]

don't even try to compare someone from a hard army position to those from hard air and navy.  I'e neer done RAS, or Been part of an Air crew I don't hae the training.  Just like most air and navy guys havn't taken artic warfare, or R2I, or LAV driver classes

That is my point exactly.  It doesn't matter what element you come from -- you are going to be faced with tasks that are entirely new.  Same as the direct entry individual.  If you are going INT, depending on your posting, it won't matter to which element you belong currently or belonged previously, you will end up studying things outside your 'comfort zone'... army, navy or air.

 

[scoutfinch]

Also the Intelligence Trade is the dumping ground for the Navy of our desirables at all levels.

I think that historically there may have been some truth to this but I think things have changed over the past 4 or 5 years.  One of the solutions to this very problem was to recruit qualified candidates directly off the street.

I don't know why this is such a problem for some people.  The Americans have been doing it for years... and no one would accuse the American Military Intel community of being a 'dumping ground for undesirables'.

 

[George Wallace]

I don't know why this is such a problem for some people.  The Americans have been doing it for years... and no one would accuse the American Military Intel community of being a 'dumping ground for undesirables'.

I go back to my previous statement about comparing our Trades with those of another nation.  What works for one nation, doesn't necessarily work for another.  How one "Tradesman" works or operates, does not necessarily match what his/her counterpart does in another nations military.

Back in the Cold War Days, the Bundeswehr survived mostly on conscript soldiers.  They had thousands of Leopard tanks.  Canada had just over 100.  Their Armour Crewmen drove and gunned their tanks just as our Crewmen drove and gunned ours.  That is where all similarities stopped.  Our training and theirs was completely different.  Our Crewmen were taught to use a lot of initiative, and also to do parts of, if not all of, another crew member's job.  The German conscript wasn't.  Nor was the American tanker.  A Canadian crew, if their vehicle brokedown would often conduct their own repairs, while crews of other nations waited for Recovery.

 

[aesop081]

German conscripts notwithstanding, If we tailor the training apropriately, there is no reason why we cant integrate direct entry INT Ops.

 

[scoutfinch]

The simple fact is the system wasn't working and a solution had to be found.

The bottom line is that the re-muster system worked to produce both good and poor INT staff... that is how the branch got its reputation as a dumping ground.  

The defining characteristic of good INT pers is not what they know, but how they think.  ORBATs, tactics and doctrine can be taught.  It is less easy to teach how to think analytically.  I know of a guy who spent over 20 years on submarines who then became an Army INTO... and he is very good at his job.  But he will also tell you his navy time did not prepare him to be an army INT O.

The trade is sufficiently broad to require people with different skillsets and experience.  The common denominator should be how people think, not necessarily what they know, when they enter the trade.

Personally, I think the 'pushback' on direct entry into the branch is because people find it threatening to their little corner of the world.  I have also found much more resistance in the reserve world than in the Reg Force.

 

[Im Not Telling]

The Army dose need people as dose the Navy, but the bulk are Air force

 

[George Wallace]

The Army dose need people as dose the Navy, but the bulk are Air force

"dose"?  As in having the dose?

You aren't a Newf by any chance are you?   ;D

The Land Element (Army) "does" need people, as does the Sea Element (Navy); but currently the Air Element is creating a brand new "unit" that needs a lot of people to fill its positions.  That is why most are going "Air", even if they are coming from Land Cbt Arms.

 

[aesop081]

even if they are coming from Land Cbt Arms.

Thus proving my earlier point.

 

[Im Not Telling]

and makes me feel really cheap for coming from a Land environment

You aren't a Newf by any chance are you?

From far northern Ontario, with dyslexia I'll keep working on it

 

[scoutfinch]

Dyslexics of the world -- untie!!

 

[aesop081]

I suffer from "cant-typeitis"

 

[NCRCrow]

I am suffering from reading bad PER's that make me laugh!

Sounds like a Facebook line!

 

[aesop081]

Badly written PERs make baby Jesus cry............

 

[Arctic Acorn]

Hiring personnel off the street for these trades is not a bad way to resolve recruiting shortage, as long effective screening of candidates takes place and the training they recieve suits the element they are tasked to support. Otherwise, we are missing out on a pool of potential Int Ops/Int Os at a time when we really need the people.

Lets take Int as an example. The biggest arguement against hiring Int folks off civvy street is that they will not have the depth of experience and background to provide effective support to the operators. I disagree with this. I believe that as long as the person is motivated and has a head on their shoulders (which can be identified by effective screening), you can train them (and this is the key bit...the training needs to be there) to do anything. The same applies to remusters too...just because you've got 10 years at a Bn and a bunch of deployments does not mean you're suitable for the Int Branch.

Not to detract from George's point about this, but the US, UK, and Australia hire their intelligence personnel off the street and they seem to be able to make it work. So why can't we? Continuation and work-up training, if effectively employed, is supposed to bring CF members to a deployable standard, within their specific trades. As long as for Int that includes honing and expanding on their core SQ skillsets, it shouldn't be an issue. This training should be expanded to suit where they are employed. An Int Op at the battle group ought to have more training than one employed higher up in the food chain, to better support their particular commander. Having Int Ops/Officers posted to the Reg Force Bns (which I understand has started up again), will hopefully go a long way to support that.

 

[George Wallace]

Please do not get too hung up on comparing Canadian Forces Trades to those of other nations.  Just because a Job Title in the CF is the same as that in another military, does not mean that the qualifications and training we give to our personnel are "identical".  In most instances they are not. 

Strictly sticking with the Land Element, those of you in the Cbt Arms can readily see that you are not trained to the same standards of those in other militaries.  Canadian soldiers have quite a bit more training than those of most other nations.  An Infantry Machine Gunner can do all the positions and work in his MG team; an American MG team member can not.  The same can be said in the Armour, Artillery and Engineer Trades.  I have heard of Canadian Sigs sent out in two man teams as Linemen doing the work quicker and more efficiently than American Linemen in teams of ten or more.  This is a common factor in most of our Trades.  We do a whole spectrum of work, while other nations specialize, and require more people to do the same jobs that we can do with only a few.

Hiring off the street can be done.  I just think that the experience that these people need is not necessarily there when they need it.  It takes time, and I don't see us really having it.

Those of you in the Land Element, and having been deployed, especially Cbt Arms, are a quick to judge.  What would your evaluation of an INT OP who can't talk the talk, or walk the walk, who looks like a 100 lbs of shyte in 50 lb bag, be - even before they opened their mouth to give you a briefing?  Appearance.  Experience.  These do count.  Would you listen to their presentation, or brush it off as some UFI from someone who has "never seen the elephant"? 

Can you hire right off the street?  Sure you can.  That is why you must have a very good and well managed selection system in place.  I will agree with you on that point.  Do I fully subscribe to opening the floodgates?  No.

 

[aesop081]

I would gladly quote you George before responding but it would sound like this "

army, army,army,army,army,army,army,army,army,combat arms,army,army,combat arms,army,army,army,combat arms,army

I'm sorry but you have a very good set of blinders on. INT Op recruits from all trades. INT Ops serve in all 3 environments regardless of their background.

 

[George Wallace]

I would gladly quote you George before responding but it would sound like this "

I'm sorry but you have a very good set of blinders on. INT Op recruits from all trades. INT Ops serve in all 3 environments regardless of their background.

That was not the intent of my post.  I just did not want to cover the whole CF (All three Elements) with a generalization.  I know INT Ops serve in all 3 elements, and if you want to be specific then apply the examples as they pertain to whatever Element you want.  I just wanted to center on Land for the example. 

And this is not only related to INT Ops, which I was also trying to point out.

So if we want to talk about blinders.............