Purpose of Reserve Maintenance trades?

[hal8472]

Well, my comments are probably out of date.  I spent five years as a weapons tech in the reserves.  I had a great time and got to do a great deal.  In terms of training I topped my third level qualification (tq3? don't know what it was called then) but also taught TQ1.  I also had local access to some neat specialists at NDHQ for a private course on Balistics.  In that time I made a great contribution to my regiment.  In field exercises it helps to have a tech around.  If I did not attend one MG live fire exercise I am sure all the guns would have come back unfit for service.  Regular troops do not have the same appreciation for how quickly rust can develop. 

I also have known Tech's that were quite useless and did not take on tasks.  One in particular kept forgetting the first thing to do when you pick up a weapon.  I think it is like anything else, the individual involved makes a huge difference.  A tech in a unit can be a benefit or a waste depending.

Hal

 

[chrisf]

I do believe that each Res unit should have an Integral Maint org staffed by Reg Force techs. 

Sounds good to me, but it would never happen, because it's expensive, and techs are as I understand it, in short supply anyway, I can accept the fact that reserve units have to come secondary to reg units in terms of this.

That being said, I don't see a reason to terminate all reserve techs (As they've done). Simple/partial solution is to keep the posistions but stop training pers, any reg forces pers interested in leaving the reg force but continuing their employment with the forces could transfer into the posistions, considering the tech trades have a high turn over rate anyway, might as well hang onto some of the investment the forces have made, as well a keep an open door for possible returns to the regs.

As you indicated above "an FCS tech would have fixed in a half hour or so" there are no Res FCS techs, therefore the repairs were by Reg techs.  "Most frustrating when it's relatively simply repairs that even I could do, but aren't allowed to do"...there are tasks that are relitively simple to repair, but without quals, there is no accountability if the item is destroyed by the repair.  Just follow the PRS and thats it.  Law laid down by LEMS.  What do you mean by "cutting preventative maintenence on our vehicles "  are you saying that oil changes etc aren't being done?  Most preventative maint is done by drivers, not mechs (with the exception of the CF2027 semi-annual inspections).

Of course you are quite right there's no accountability if the repairs are done by unqualified pers, it's just frustrating when many of the repairs are so simple, at least with the electronics, perhaps another partial solution is to offer a short course in very basic/limited repairs, but slightly more advanced then the usual operator maintenence of "tag it" to pers who need (Pretty much, all I'm talking about is teaching people to solder... 9 out of 10 problems we run into as sig ops at least can be fixed by a little solder and some shrink tube)

In terms of quals, it's not the Res Techs fault he's just not trained as effectively as Reg.  This doesn't include Air Res EME, they take Reg QL courses (I had one on my QL3).  Look at the Integ Maint of 400 Sqn (Borden)  They have a Reg Veh Tech MCpl, Cpl and then the rest are reserves.  Effective, but most of the work is done during the day by the full-time techs.

Certainly the most effective work is done by the full time techs, but my biggest beef is with field repairs to electronics, and to a lesser extent, vehicles, a Class A tech would service a class A exercise quite effectively.

End result of course is it's all largely academic, as they took away our techs, and I can't see them giving them back any time soon.

 

[WogCpl]

I will say as a veh tech that most of the res veh techs i have met are qualified civi mechanics, and if they are not then at least on of them in the shop is.
The problem lies in what they are allowed to do, I don't know how many times i have been part of an ATI team and talked to some pretty competent res techs who were "disciplined" for actually doing their job. As far as the reg force is concerned, maitenance beyond the driver level is only to be done in the presence of a ql5 qualified reg force tech. If we stopped tying their hands and recognised some civi quals, we could be getting a lot more out of res veh techs anyway.

My 2Cents

 

[King of Kandahar]

I will say as a veh tech that most of the res veh techs i have met are qualified civi mechanics, and if they are not then at least on of them in the shop is.
The problem lies in what they are allowed to do, I don't know how many times i have been part of an ATI team and talked to some pretty competent res techs who were "disciplined" for actually doing their job. As far as the reg force is concerned, maitenance beyond the driver level is only to be done in the presence of a ql5 qualified reg force tech. If we stopped tying their hands and recognised some civi quals, we could be getting a lot more out of res veh techs anyway.

My 2Cents

Quite right.  It's funny you should mention this, the CF has been using CUPE Civi techs to repair Commercial Pattern equipment for years (another beef, but I won't venture down that path...) but also in the late '90's SMP was reparied "downtown" at private repair shops under ASD.  I know this is a fact, after CFB Uplands (Ottawa) closed it's Wing EME shop it all went to civies.  The problem arises that civi quals are usually only considered for reg-force applicants.  Don't know why?
Like I did say though, irregardless of quals, res techs should stay reserve, not deploy/work at ASU's full time etc.  This should be for Reg force soldiers only.

 

[chrisf]

Like I did say though, irregardless of quals, res techs should stay reserve, not deploy/work at ASU's full time etc.  This should be for Reg force soldiers only.

Using the logic that they shouldn't deploy because they don't do the same trades courses applies to pretty much every reserve soldier, except for a small few trades, perhaps we should just not deploy any reservist? (Sarcasm aside, I'd be totally in favor of *all* trades doing indentical courses to their reg force equivilents, but it's not going to happen any time soon)

 

[brin11]

As far as the reg force is concerned, maitenance beyond the driver level is only to be done in the presence of a ql5 qualified reg force tech.

Not sure where this comes from.  Is this your particular shop's SOP?  I can tell you for certain that there are many places where this isn't happening.  From a weapons view, if you are QL5 (small arms) qualified you are qualified to repair small arms, period;  regardless of whether the reg force are around or not. 

I think we all agree that it's necessary to be confident that our reserve maintainers are qualified and competent in their particular trades.  This will only be accomplished by insuring that 1)  the technician is trained to a competent level (I think equivalent to reg force) and 2) they are allowed and encouraged to maintain their skills during class A service.  The reality is that reservist maintainers are going on callouts, on operations, etc. and they need to be able to do their jobs. 

 

[King of Kandahar]

Not sure where this comes from.  Is this your particular shop's SOP?  I can tell you for certain that there are many places where this isn't happening. 

As cheesy as this is, a QL5 tech is the only one qualified to sign off repairs/insp in any 400 series trade.  At V&R PL, 2 GS Bn (RIP) we have our MRT's set-up with a QL5 Cpl and 1-3 QL3/QL4 qual on the team.  QL3's work with less and less over-the-shoulder supervision as they prove/improve their technical skills, but they're never allowed to complete repairs alone.  The QL5 is always responsible/liable for their fu*k-up's.  It's always been that way, since I was a CFN.  QL4 qual techs are given more leeway, but they still work under the guidance of a QL5.
- As an aside...When I was a QL4 qual Cpl I worked in FRG, 2 Svc Bn with a QL5 Cpl on an MRT.  He was ultimately responsible for the job, but HE was under MY guidance/supervison. 

 

[brin11]

King,

My response was toward the belief that a QL5 Reg force tech could sign off, excluding the reserve tech who is also QL5 qualified.  I realize the QL3/4 cannot technically sign off on work orders although that happens as well,  as we all know.  When I was in 2 Svc Bn I always signed off on the tag but the actual work order was closed by the supervisor who rarely if ever checked your work after you'd been there more than a few months. 

During exercises I remember that we had very few QL5 qualified technicians in the MRTs.  It was almost always two QL3/4 techs who would go out on MRT calls by themselves.  There was definitely a major lack of qualified techs then but this may have changed over the years. 

 

[WogCpl]

As cheesy as this is, a QL5 tech is the only one qualified to sign off repairs/insp in any 400 series trade. 

Exactly, that is why ATI's at res units are done by the reg force and not by a res Svc Bn. Back when i was in BC the only res unit in the lower mainland allowed to work on veh's was 12 Svc Bn, because they had a permanent reg force staff with qalified reg force techs. They had res techs working as well, but there was always a qual. reg force tech in the shop.
Speaking fromthe veh side of the house.

 

[JDMCRX]

Its pretty messed up at my res unit there is only 4 QL3 techs lol. And probly about 3 QL5. I dunno trying to be a res V TECH takes to long. Its goo that they have the units but the problem is keeping people interested

 

[G.R-B]

I thought I'd revive this old topic to see where are the tech trades these days...

I will be enrolling hopefully this summer as a weapon tech (reserve) at the 51e service battalion, in Quebec. I've been thinking about this four the past six months or so, and went trough pretty much all the documentation available on the web. However, there was a lot of questions left about the trade, specifically the Lantern Tech. side of it, and the possibility for further training. I am just coming back from the information night at the battalion, and no one could really answer specific question about the weapon techs, to my disappointment.

So, here are my questions:

Has the situation changed since 2006, in general, but more specifically in Quebec? Also, is weapon tech. prone to be closed, or is it generally open?

Thank you!