[quote=“MattB” post=6213][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…[/quote]And mine.
i can only comment on what i have been told by a SATT member who quizzed me on my course to determine the difference, he said it sounded more “book smart” and about maintaining the personal level that way set.
having never been on a WI course i cannot comment and this may only be a local opinion
Take offence at the comment that WI© do not take weapons training seriously as opposed to those that have done the SAAI course. The big difference between the old course and the new one is that students get more time to prepare for the assessment with the break between the 2 weekends the MOI for Weapons Instruction has not changed between the 2 courses. Doing the SAAI course does not mean Instructor will not take short cuts, not teach the content etc, its down to the individuals integrity to maintain his/her standards and competances
As someone who teaches PTLLS, I can tell you straight away that the SAAI course won’t work with PTLLS. The major reason being is that the PAM is structured in such a way that PTLLS processes won’t fit in with the style of teaching required.
The best way to teach a practical skill is through the EDIP method and I’ve never really understood why you need PTLLS to become a First Aid trainer\assessor. In my Wg, we removed all references to FA and turned the course into a generic one more aligned with presenting classroom-based theory subjects.
Having a recognised teaching qual like PTLLS is one of the prerequisites set by St. John Ambulance in order to teach their AFA course.
I know - what I’m saying is that I don’t understand why all FA organizations require their trainers to have PTLLS as opposed to a dedicated FA trainer\assessor course, more suited to delivering practical skills.
Regarding WI’s cutting corners. I do like like the mutterings I have heard in the past of introducing a 4 yearly assessment, similar to what the RCO’s have to do. Will pick up those who have lost the skills or dont practice them enough and those who cut corners.
I know that on shooting courses and military skills camp, the wing shooting officer “floats” about, watching the lessons being delivered and offering advice to the WI’s and SAAI’s and ways to improve their delivery, almost like a continual assessment.
Major, Congratulations on passing the course. Both I and Perry will put you to use in the near future! 
Hope you’re not calling gramps a “floater” 
Just changing the course will not stop the skill fade etc which may apply to some WIs. Introducing a skill check (a la the RCOs 4/5 yearly) will help - but whoever does the checking needs to be willing to pull out the red pen…
Also, some staff on SATTs may be below par, but does that mean the whole SATT system should be scrapped? Anyone that says yes, on that basis, we know there are below par staff all over the corps, so might as well bin the whole thing eh? Or would it actually be better to address the issues constructively?
Hope you’re not calling gramps a “floater”
Just changing the course will not stop the skill fade etc which may apply to some WIs. Introducing a skill check (a la the RCOs 4/5 yearly) will help - but whoever does the checking needs to be willing to pull out the red pen…
Also, some staff on SATTs may be below par, but does that mean the whole SATT system should be scrapped? Anyone that says yes, on that basis, we know there are below par staff all over the corps, so might as well bin the whole thing eh? Or would it actually be better to address the issues constructively?[/quote]
YES!
And replaced with my ‘Force Development’ instructors who would be responsible for shooting, fieldcraft, First Aid, comms, map reading, etc… and would be spread throughout the Corps in the same way Marine Cadet instructors are spread through the SCC.
See the ‘Fieldcraft Instructors’ thread…
Can we merge these two discussions on the SAAI(CF) Course together please? They’re basically the same thing
Thanks
[quote=“Leeroy” post=6269]Can we merge these two discussions on the SAAI(CF) Course together please? They’re basically the same thing
Thanks[/quote]
Your wish is my command…I think?
In my head I see the following set up working quite well.
All SATTs are scrapped. OC CTT & TG5 are merged together.
A calling notice goes out to create the new local branches of CTT, making the teams open to all and attracting the best individuals, minimum requirements being Range Qualified. CTT select their local teams that will support delivery of all weapons training and quality assurance delivered to staff. This removes the staff that are not up to scratch or don’t involve themselves in the SATT, whilst drawing CS95s.
The local teams will all receive training from a SASC and be presented with course folders for SR/LR/DCCT, and will conduct this training locally within their regions. They will also support the CTT with SAAI courses as required. A minimum of 2 SR, 1 LR & 1 DCCT are to be per year.
DG/ARD/ECC will be arranged locally by Wing Shooting Officers providing training across 1 or 2 wings simultaneously.
SAAI courses are promulgated within CROs, facilities are booked by the local team, applications direct to the CTT Adj. Nominal roll passed to Local Team adj so that messing can be booked in.
4 yearly assessments to be conducted by the following: CTT/Local Teams/Wing Shooting Officers (approved by CTT). Local teams could also offer a weekend of TPs to allow SAAIs to conduct 4 yearly, as well as experience instructional styles of different instructors, to gain ideas for different lessons.
This provides all of the required training, with the trainers at each level maintaining the credibility nationally to produce suitable individuals to conduct weapon training, and range practices.
Too complex.
Bin SATTs and use the budget for FTRS ex-Regiment\Army Infantry instructors to provide centralised training. One point of contact for SASC, no competition for resources and a complete calendar of guns\bullets\fieldcraft\first aid instructor training courses.
Oh wait - I’ve said that before!
Never mind, GHE2 will be along in a minute to tell us all that no matter what we propose, it simply won’t work because it involves, management input\those who have degrees\those who dont’ know what they’re talking about…
Centralised training may be ideal for keeping on top of the standards but it screws the volunteer, especially those from the extremes of the country (S&NI, far SW)
We would need to move to a 1 or 2-week long “gunny” course to give people SAAI/RCO/coaching quals in one course to make the best use of everybody’s time and if they schedule a course they need to run it even if they only have 4 people able to attend.
This is likely to result in a planet destroying black hole of incalculable mass…
[quote=“incubus” post=6297]Centralised training may be ideal for keeping on top of the standards but it screws the volunteer, especially those from the extremes of the country (S&NI, far SW)
We would need to move to a 1 or 2-week long “gunny” course to give people SAAI/RCO/coaching quals in one course to make the best use of everybody’s time and if they schedule a course they need to run it even if they only have 4 people able to attend.[/quote]
Considering that SAAI is 4.5 days, as is SR course, that’s 9 days. Perhaps if courses were run at Cranwell, because that location doesn’t stop the volunteer go for OASC/OIC/SSIC/DI/Rifle Drill. Those with the want to conduct shooting, will attend.
Not a bad idea at all.
I’ve often wondered why the ACO hasn’t just bitten the bullet (no pun intended) and created 1 or 2-week long RCO or WI courses which will give them the job lot of range and wpn trg quals in one go. What we have at present is a patchwork quilt of dipping in and out which results in CFAV’s only getting a SR qual or only entitled to teach the No.8.
Do it all at once and be done with it!
[quote=“Gunner” post=6302] which results in CFAV’s only getting a SR qual or only entitled to teach the No.8.[/quote]…which is perfectly sufficient for a lot of people and ideal for squadron-based shooting.
Do it all and they can offer training on both wpn systems as well as a better range experience on Gallery and ETR with FB shooting.
It’s good for their personal development as well.
Their choice be damned then? All or nothing?