i would like to add that 4-5 yearly assessment of a SAAI/WI should be in place
since gaining my SAAI i have seen some woeful instruction, and in some cases in direct contradiction to the PAM and/or what is taught on the SAAI course!
i have done what i can to correct this, but doesnt help the bigger picture. what i have seen will not be the only examples and fearthe tip fo the iceberg (hence the reasoning for the SAAI course to be brought in)
I have nothing against the WI qualification, but for those Staff who did the course 10, 15, 20+ years ago i question how they have maintained standards and what CPD has been in place to maintain their skills
There is also noting currently in place to ensure CPD/Currancy for SAAIs - I dont think that we should in reality look at them as two disparate groups.
If WIs need to stay current then I’m pretty damn sure that SAAIs should as well, otherwise someone will just have to we-write that course in 10 years time when skill fade has set in.
and potentially a review of the record of number of times used (Although that could easily be faked by putting in dates)
at least if there is a review every X number of years then changes in PAM or policy can be address and standards maintained.
i know an RCO who only learnt changes in what was permitted in the RAM/RASP when doing his assessment. now this is arguably not the correct way to find out new information during an assessment, but how else would he have known?
The same way any of us find out stuff pertinent to our roles or jobs, by having the diligence to stay abreast of developments in our industry.
A driving instructor is required to keep himself up-to-date with the changes to driving rules and regulations. He shouldn’t need his mum & dad to remind him when things change, as it’s all part of the job. Why should it be different for RCOs or SAAIs (or any other role int the ACO)?
There are plenty of mechanisms out there for staying abreast of the latest rules and regulations:
[ul]
[li]Set up an alert on Bader so you’re emailed a summary of any new/changed documents on the HQAC sites[/li]
[li]Call your Wing Shooting Officer every month and ask what’s changed[/li]
[li]Speak to other RCOs/SAAIs regularly[/li]
[li]Read this forum[/li]
[li]Read CROs, P Letters and TG Letters[/li]
[/ul]
CMADE
(Edit: Admittedly, if this was just after RAMs were introduced then that’s fair enough. And yes, I s’pose HQAC cold do a better job of disseminating information, but the fact remains: the onus should be on individual SMEs to keep themselves up-to-date, providing the CoC makes the required information easily accessible).
[quote=“steve679” post=15251]CPD = 5 yearly assessment[/quote]No, that is just a 5 yearly assessment; there is nothing “continual” about it!
I have always considered this organisation to be very poor at ensuring everybody was up to speed with the latest requirements or developments in the shooting world, something which has seemed more prominent for RCOs than for WIs. There has been little in the way of development for the ticket-holder but the goalposts at their n-annual assessment shift.
RASPs came in with the wind. RAMs were handled a little better.
[quote=“steve679” post=15242]after all what is the difference between a WI and SAAI post qualification?
they both deliever the same lessons and able to conduct a WHT…it is still up to the individual to follow what they have been taught.[/quote]
The difference being, as you’ve alluded to, that those having passed the SAAI course are generally better trained and have had more importance placed upon the need for them to maintain.
Technically, SAAI is not a ‘superior qualification’, there will be WIs out there of suitable standard already. It’s just that the old WI courses were delivered at varying standards and turned out varying qualities of instructor. Mostly sub par - hence the SASC intervention.
[quote=“blu3zirux” post=15254][quote=“steve679” post=15251]
The same way any of us find out stuff pertinent to our roles or jobs, by having the diligence to stay abreast of developments in our industry.
CMADE
(Edit: Admittedly, if this was just after RAMs were introduced then that’s fair enough. And yes, I s’pose HQAC cold do a better job of disseminating information, but the fact remains: the onus should be on individual SMEs to keep themselves up-to-date, providing the CoC makes the required information easily accessible).[/quote][/quote]
I cant argue with you, however in this case as you identify there was a new policy and none of the RCOs that day (inc Wg Shooting Off) new of the change until the SATT member mentioned it!
I would argue that it is continual (every 5 yrs) but isn’t development
however an assessment [I]may[/I]* help avoid developing bad habits!
*I say may as some will know they are doing wrong and adjust their lesson delivery to pass only to return to there off PAM ways
How many SAAI’s have actually been run in the last 12 months, where have they been run, and, what is the planned delivery for the next 5 years across the UK? How confident can we be that if they are planned, they will happen?
If I am to encourage / enthuse my staff to get themselves on a course, especially wrt to weapons, there needs to be a degree of confidence that the course will actually run. I’ve had staff organise their lives around weapons courses only for them to be binned, generally at the last minute. This has happened three times to different staff from my sqn and now they won’t even consider weapons courses. Mind you this seems to be a default position for many SATT courses and many at ATF. SATTs do seem to be a bit of club and courses get in the way of the club’s antics.
You can have the best course in the world, but if it doesn’t run it isn’t the best course.
I’m sure that ACOCTT will be along to give a definite answer at some point, but knowing them as I do I’d say that if a course is booked to run, it will likely run unless something serious prevents it. They’re professional in the way they operate.
The proposed dates are on Bader , one course has already been run at RAF Wittering, there are courses at Cosford, Beckingham, Leuchars, Wittering, Blockhouse and Linton on Ouse this year, as far as I know CTT has not cancelled any SSAI courses, it has traditionally been a problem with Satts running coaching and range courses that get canned due to logistic problems or lack of students, CTT have been recruiting more instructors to be able to ramp up the number of courses
An up-date would be appreciated concerning the “Air Rifle only” (SR) RCO Cse - it would be invaluable to many units with air rifle ranges. I know that a weekend only cse had been proposed (to be held at Cranwell?) but things things have gone very quiet on that front.
Looking ahead to the future, for the eventual No8 replacement, I do see advantages for a “bolt action/air rifle” SAAI (or similar) qualification - this could also perhaps take in the L81? It would permit a weekend cse, & permit new instructors to build up teaching experience before moving onto the L81/L86?
As I understand it CTT / HQAC were working on a bolt action WI qual but Land (army) are not interested and as they have the overarching authority we could be waiting sometime even though it make sense.
We agree. The only difference is that we can guarantee SAAIs:
a) have all had the same standard of initial training and,
b) have had their competency assessed within the last three years.
Any mechanism for re-qualification will apply equally to SAAIs and WIs. Although it may eventually require WIs to re-qualify as SAAIs, this won’t necessarily be through attendance on a full SAAI course. There’s a lot of ongoing work in this area at the moment, primarily around the qualification requirements for conducting re-quals and the geographic distribution of SAAIs and WIs in the ACO.
You mean a 4/5-yearly re-qual? It’s still being discussed at the moment as there are no ACO SAAIs who qualified more than three years ago. With most other Small Arms and Ammunition re-qual periods moving to a 5-yearley cycle, it’s likely that SAAI will be the same. If this is the case then the first assessments of SAAIs won’t occur until late 2016. Of course, assessment of WIs may begin sooner.
We’ve delivered 17 successful SAAI courses so far, qualifying 143 SAAIs. We’re sorry to say that we have cancelled two courses - one was a 5-day course for S&NI Region and was cancelled due to a shortage of CTT instructors (don’t forget we’re all volunteers, too) and the other is a forthcoming course that’s been cancelled due to circumstances outside of our control. Among other things, we delivered 8 SAAI and one LSW courses in the last 12 months.
We usually plan to deliver between 8 and 10 SAAI courses each year, although that can be affected by other taskings. We can usually accept 24 students per course, although we limit some to 16 students due to limitations on instructor availability or training facilities.
The course plot is available on our sharepoint site, and you’re more than welcome to make enquiries with the Adjutant about the likelihood of a course being cancelled.
While we can’t condone the short-notice cancellation of SATT courses, we ought to point out that most of them rely on having the correct type of ranges available. It’s becoming increasingly difficult to book ranges due to increased use by Regular/Reserve units with a higher priority than the ACO. It’s possible for a range booking that’s been in place for 18 months to be cancelled at the last minute in favour of a higher priority user. We’re sure many of you know that anyway
We don’t necessarily agree with your opinion of SATTs, but for ourselves: as much as we’d like to be a “private club who enjoy port tasting evenings and growing moustaches” (thanks wdimagineer2b), we’re actually in the business of delivering as many high-quality courses as possible to the ACO and SCC. We tend to find that gets in the way of our port drinking, although thankfully it has little affect on the moustache-growing.
Quite. We agree entirely.
The Air Cadet Central SATT (ACCSATT) is planning to run one as a trial this August, although we don’t know the details. We would’t expect SATTs to start delivery until at least next financial year, though don’t quote us on that.
