I agree entirely with the above.
Also Sqns ‘sharing’, some run quite a lot of FT but don’t offer spaces out to other units, even if those units could bring their own FTIs. Seen that in several Wgs.
This is not exclusive to Fieldcraft.
Very often local squadrons could do a lot more together.
As a social sort of person I quite enjoy meeting up with other staff and collaborating, but more jaded members of our organisation seem a lot less keen.
Quite often the local rivalries are taken a bit too far and other squadron staff are viewed with suspicion.
Historically here there has been a lot of Willy waving and a tendency to try and get one up and over on each other which is sad.
In recent years it has got notably better - and I think once we’re back it’ll force squadrons into collaborating more and that will be good for the cadets and good for staff.
2 Likes
I had to do both weekends for FI and ECO, even though I came over from 15 years as an ACF instructor, ex TA solider and Sergeant Major in CCF Army section. It’s a box ticking exercise.
3 Likes
Back on the original point… Now that FMST has a new owner (it now falls under control of the new TG 5) I would expect that we will see some sensible changes to bring SAA and FMST properly into line.
I’d be surprised if the potential for a progressive syllabus isn’t also considered.
2 Likes
Desperately trying to get back to the topic, to an extent the current syllabus is progressive, there are 2 defined levels.
Level 1 : Lesson 1-19 DRY training
Level 2 : Lesson 1-22 with B&P
If you then look at the different approval levels there are 4, which a cadet would in theory, progress through potentially skilling the first level;
Sqn Trg on the Sqn + ESF - OC Approval
Deployed Daylight Trg up to 8 Hours DRY - Wing FTO
Deployed Daylight Trg 1-3 days - OWg
All B&P / Improvised Shelter / Night Training - Region FTO
1 Like
Excuse my ignorance, not being part of the JL band of brothers, but it was always explained to me, and backed up by the course title that JL is a leadership course - not a fieldcraft course.
although i appreciate and recognise a lot of fieldcraft is completed the course is training/teaching the students how to be good leaders not world-class, or even “top of their Wing” Fieldcraft experts.
I am often at a loss why for some reason having the JL patch on ones arm suddenly implies a fountain of FC knowledge when the real “take-away” should be “exceptional leadership”
^^^this
if the JL was not based around FC, but lets say a sport, be it football or rugby, and how to be an effective “leader” (for instance either as team captain or manager) would the JLs have the skills to run a sports evening knowing full well the risks?
If the situation was fighting fires, or moving a “field Gun” (example video) would those JLs be expert firefighters, or gun operators??
I recognise as a military themed organisation why fieldcraft exercises were chosen but in the same way our OASC officers are assessed for their leadership potential (and position in a team) on the horse, beams and oil drums (aka hanger exercise) are then not seen as experts for similar themed exercises why are JLs automatically assumed to be a fieldcraft guru before they are considered a good leader?
perhaps I am too ignorant and take the title to literally and my understanding the course was to build, and develop leadership…when that is more the excuse to be doing lots of fieldcraft?
1 Like
Hi Steve,
You are indeed correct and I fully agree with all of your points.
However, as of JL 20 (Last course was JL 21, cut short by Covid) graduates have also undergone the FCI Syllabus, they had to do everything in accordance with the current FCI Course regulations including the creation of WI (Written Instruction or cut down version of EASP) and therefore are indeed qualified FIs.
The main issue is that they are still cadets and therefore cannot act as ECO or conduct training unless supervised by another, qualified, adult instructor.
Right, I have in theory deleted all that bilge water you’ve all posted. If you want constructive, useful comment on the Junior Leader’s course revisit one of the many threads in existence.
If you just want to antagonise one another please bore off. Remember your contributions must meet the AUP. Keep it civil or I’ll lock it again.
2 Likes
aahhh ok. news to me and welcome the education. i am not very fieldcrafty so if this was announced would have missed it. I guess over time as people get used to the idea of both leadership and FC qualification some CFAVs won’t scoff quite so much as a JL claiming they know what they are doing - seems they’ll now/soon have a bit of paper to back it up
I think that having all our training modular would work quite well.
No we don’t need more badges.
Yes it would make it easier to see who has done what training and tailor accordingly (i.e. if you’re blue badged then we know that for a fact rather than “I think I’ve done some fieldcraft before”).
Would it make it a bit like box ticking? Maybe
Would having a top-down syllabus make my training officer’s life easier? yes!
It’s already split into lessons.
Why not just record individual lessons on the SMS, in the same way LFs are for shooting?
Fieldcraft is something that has totally alluded me…
I’ve had a little hunt around, but what might be really helpful is if there was a shiny portal in Sharepoint, like the recent AT portal - with pathways to quals etc…
Fieldcraft isn’t really my bag, it involves going outside and there isn’t always a readily available top up of tea available… And I might get dirt under my nails and cam paint doesn’t do my complexion any good at all…
But I would love to know should a member of staff roll up on squadron and want to partake in this sort of training where to direct them. At the moment I would just be emailing the wing bod to ask for direction, but it would be good to be able to see what sort of training and commitment is required before pestering other people…
3 Likes
Well if someone could make something just like that and wave it under my nose that would be really helpful. Honestly, this organisation!
(thank you! 
)
2 Likes
This is true, but having attended as a cadet, those for whom FT and weapons weren’t second nature were more likely struggle.
Reason being the more you had to focus on FT/weapons/nav skills the less you could actually focus on the leadership skills.
The shifts in the FT syllabus so far will have helped this as long as cadets actually go through it. The switch from ACP16 to the Fieldcraft Pam was a great start in giving us a broader and more structured pattern of relevant training to follow. Lessons 1-3 are needed before overnighting and apart from CPTing the shelter building can easily be done indoors if necessary. CPT of shelter building then being the first overnight.
There’s been talk for a long time of bringing in a PTS framework, but I don’t think it’s really necessary. I’d rather it was broken into modules instead and these modules would be a slightly less laborious task to update on SMS than individual lessons, while maintaining the freedom to somewhat tailor the training you deliver.
I don’t believe it should have to be in a particular order beyond module 1 being pre-depoloyment and maybe having to “Module X” before doing “Module X (Weapons)” and maybe a couple of other caveats.
I’d look potentially at something like:
A - Lesson 1-3
B - Lesson 4-6
C - Lesson 7-8
D - Lesson 9-10
E - Lesson 11,12
F - Lesson 13-14
G - Lesson 15,16,17,19
H - Lesson 18,20,21
At a glance each module is max a couple of hours + CPT so you can hit many of them on a parade night or two on EUF.
I’m a bit anti setting up a predetermined day/weekend syllabus 1>2>3>4, because I’m lucky enough to have a number of different training areas that I can use that each have strengths and weaknesses and are best suited to different types of training and exercise for overall training value. Although you don’t like to hear it, different instructors have preferences and increased competency in some areas over others, so again an EPO/ECO might like to tailor an event to who they have available - for max training value.
If you want a Nitex, you have to run the night training module or have it as a prerequisite.
Bottom line though, without something we’re going to continue consistently missing bits of the training out because no one tracks previous training and it’s impossible to tailor weekends for the training deficiencies of all attendees.
4 Likes
My Wing already present FC in a Bronze, Silver, Gold format, and it works. SMS will tell you whether a cdt has done a course before, so you know where they’re at. No need for badges.
Or how about:
Blue: Sqn trg / 1 day in field
Bronze: overnight in bashas
Silver: as bronze with wps
Gold: section i/c
We have all the above in place apart from Gold, JL could maybe produce a condensed course or syllabus. JL would be Gold + as as others have said it goes beyond FT.
1 Like
Thats fine, but how often are these courses run?
I see where you’re coming from, but we will be putting our progression in the hands of DTE/Weather.
Personally, I think we have a robust syllabus as it is - let’s not shoehorn it into a 4 stage system that doesn’t really suit it.
Well, not at all currently…
But in the before times, probably once every 2/3 months or so.
1 Like