I have just completed the SAAI (CF)Course, and must say it is a really good course, its well run, mainly because the delivery team are running a course 10 times a year, which creates slickness, something not seen elsewhere on ACO courses.
The course is of a high intensity but the content taught is 100% relevant, and you have to demonstrate during the course. Prior knowledge of the Rifle and the lessons contained within Pam 5-C is essential, and it showed amongst the course those that hadn’t and they did struggle somewhat. Existing Weapon Instructors should also get themselves on this course to give them the latest qualification, this course had one who came away from the course more confident in their personal abilities.
[quote=“themajor” post=6154]Existing Weapon Instructors should also get themselves on this course to give them the latest qualification, t[/quote]Er, no thanks. I’ve better ways to spend 2 weekends than going on a course to allow me to do something which an existing qualification already allows me to do.
Can you give some examples of what level of knowledge of the rifle is expected? Are we talking knowing the weights and characteristics from the front of the PAM, or more detailed not-in-the book knowledge (the angular rotation of the bolt head required to unlock the breech or other token facts)?
the knowledge required is what you’d expect of an instructor and not necessarily a geek.
ie be able to resite the 5 characteristics, but not the stats as you mention.
i would lean towards knowledge of the Pam more than the rifle is key. you need to be completely comfortable with the rifle before considering the course, familiar with the lessons or at very least the general message (for example lessons 5-6 Marksmanship principles) - the course is teaching how to teach, and specifically how to teach as per the PAM, not the weapon so dont expect to learn anything new about the rifle.
familiarity of the red text paragraphs is essential and the lesson content important to be able to cover all the content - that is where the “knowledge” is required
any WI should be capable of completing the course - there will be nothing taught that will be a surprise or change from exisiting practise, however does offer a level of consistency amongst SAAIs that prehaps was not present for WIs
PS - congrats to themajor, it is not a attendance course at all and i knwo the level of work required to put in so well done.
i will second themajors comments, it is high intensity course and well run by very capable instructors
Of course that should be the case in an ideal world…but I can think of several WIs who wouldn’t stand a hope in hell of passing and to whom most of it would be a surprise.
I thoroughly approve of the raised standard the SAAI course upholds. It’s about time we started sorting the wheat from the chaff.
Now we need to apply the same high standard to other staff qualifications.
[quote=“wdimagineer2b” post=6167]Now we need to apply the same high standard to other staff qualifications.[/quote]Can we put DI high up on the list please?
[quote=“tango_lima” post=6172]No. Because that’s a pointless ‘qualification’ and should be binned entirely.[/quote]Oddly, I find myself agreeing to some extent. Perhaps not binned but certainly modified a lot.
Basic Drill Instructors Course Part I
Prerequisite: Good standard of personal drill.
Content: Week 1 of RAF D&C Course (sort of).
Qualification: DI(1)
Basic Drill Instructors Course Part II
Prerequisite: Part I + Received Arms Drill Lessons, Sword Drill Lessons and Banner Drill Lessons.
Content: Week 2 of RAF D&C Course (sort of).
Qualification: DI(2). You get a Stick and a belt if you want.
Advanced Drill & Ceremonial Course
Prerequisite: Recommended on Basic Drill Instructor’s Course.
Content: Week 3 of RAF D&C Course (sort of).
Qualification: Q-DI. You can wear a sash if you want to look like a thunderbird.
I think every SNCO(ATC) should be able to teach drill. If they can’t they shouldn’t have the job.
The ATC needs to stop getting so priapic over drill in general. It’s important, but that just means it’s something basic everyone should have a knowledge of. It isn’t some sort of lost art, the true knowledge of which is only revealed to the worthy.
[quote=“tango_lima” post=6179]I think every SNCO(ATC) should be able to teach drill. If they can’t they shouldn’t have the job.[/quote]That is a very narrow view of what an SNCO should be capable of and not one which is echoed in the parent services.
Still, there are also those in the ACO who feel that range qualifications should only be in the hands of SNCOs as well - they are wrong too.
Can you give some examples of what level of knowledge of the rifle is expected? Are we talking knowing the weights and characteristics from the front of the PAM, or more detailed not-in-the book knowledge (the angular rotation of the bolt head required to unlock the breech or other token facts)?
It will refresh your instructional skills, benefit you in other ACO activities along with work. The course is looking to attract PTTLS in the near future as well.
From what I’ve seen the content of the SAAI course is little changed from the content of the WI course, just spread over 2 weekends with an extra TP thrown in, and more time to demonstrate instruction.
I don’t think (certainly in our area of the world) that the training is anything less than professional and top notch. I know that isnt always the way across the corps, but if there are issues with people cutting corners, deal with the individual, not the qualification - its like saying all drivers should have to do a full re-test because someone who passed 10 years ago got nicked for speeding!
As I said in the other thread - the issue is skill fade, lack of oversight, laziness etc, which will all still apply in time to those whove passed the SAAI course.
[quote=“themajor” post=6194]To my knowledge the WI(C) qualification will become null and void, something that’s going to happen within the next 3-5 years. [/quote]I wouldn’t be at all surprised now that the cancer which is SASC has settled in
[quote=“themajor” post=6194]If the WI(C) qualification was sufficient then it would still be running now and the SAAI(CF) wouldn’t exist [/quote]WI(C) was perfectly sufficient for the task and worked without issues for some years. The changeover to being more centrally managed is not necessarily a bad move but it has been handled in a ham-fisted manner with scant regard for the customer.
This is generally an issue with the instructor and is not going to go away until they do bring in standards checking
It may have been a factor but all SATTs were under scrutiny and should not have been slacking off either. I’ll admit though that I did send on cadet on a SATT course who was more knowledgeable and competent than the person teaching some of the lessons.
The SATT system was theoretically sound and was capable of producing a quality product more easily than the system we have in place at the moment and with less impact on the students. It could have been improved greatly and eventually fixed completely without tearing it all up and starting afresh if those charged with doing so had wanted to.
PTLLS is a world away from MMOI. It’ll be interesting to see how that goes.
The powers that be need to tread very carefully: unless they come up with a means of converting old qualifications to new ones I’m looking at 2 weekends to “learn” how to teach rifle skills and 3 weekends to “learn” how to run my ranges (though admittedly the new RCO qual would allow me to use ETR: a type of range I am never near). When we also consider that I need to do the (overkill) Dangerous Goods training, that the paperwork required for the most basic of ranges is ridiculous, that ACP26 is next to impenetrable they are very likely to find themselves down an RCO, down a WI and down a squadron capable of being self-sufficient in shooting. I think I’ll focus on First Aid instead.
If that’s the case then they’ll have to remove all of the other ‘past courses’ listed in PAM21 as well. Given the amount of people still working on past course qualifications, I can’t see that going down too well.
Not that it bothers me per se; I’m more than happy with my skill & knowledge level such that I believe I could pass the course. I just don’t see the need to do it at the moment.
i think the difference between the WI course and the SAAI course is the difference between training a Cadet to pass a WHT and training a Cadet in the 10-12 lessons of PAM 5-C to become a competant and skilled user of the rifle in order to pass a WHT.
ie talking to my local SATT the WI course was very much one weekend intensive to get candidates through an assessed TP without making any (safety releated) mistakes
the SAAI course teaches the importance of sticking to the PAM, in credibility of being an instructor (how to reach the level and stay there) and the methods (MOI) used in instruction all which you need to employ for the TPs to pass
Depends on your WI course. Mine wasn’t as you described; it was much more like the SAAI course sounds to be, albeit more compressed.
I shall be interested to see the first SAAI-performed lesson when we get one in the Wing. Particularly the mechanism of the rifle section, as this is where you can tell true understanding (or lack thereof) of the weapon.
[quote=“steve679” post=6210]the SAAI course teaches the importance of sticking to the PAM, in credibility of being an instructor (how to reach the level and stay there) and the methods (MOI) used in instruction all which you need to employ for the TPs to pass[/quote]Sounds like my WI course…
