Weapon Handling Tests no longer to be Recorded

Everyone Shooting and Marksmanship
21

[quote=“Racing Stick” post=12852]Guys, I’m tired and just come off night duty. So, it maybe I’m not following this fully at present. (Mitigating circumstances :frowning: )

However, I fail to see how big a problem this appears to be. I’m a SAAI RCO in my Sqn. Every one of my cadets is listed on a board next to my desk. That list replicates a database I hold on computer. I know the current state of every cadet regarding shooting on my Sqn. I sign their 3822 and input details on SMS for every WHT they do. This is then entered accordingly on my board and onto my database.

If and when I arrive at a range and am not the RCO for the day, the RCO will generally ask are all cadets up to date on their WHT’s. My answer, as a WI/SAAI/RCO is regarded as confirmation. If it isn’t then my printed off list is, as is the signature in their 3822. If the WHT is longer to be recorded in the 3822 then maybe SAAI’s will have to record it themselves. Not really that difficult??

I’m unsure whether it was the Army who really caused this problem as some have remarked. And, even if they did, what’s the problem? WHT’s test the safety and competence of the shooters and surely that is a very good thing. Yes, we can moan about having to do it if that is what you want to do. but personally, the safety of everyone on my range is paramount and the over-riding precedence in how I conduct it. Shortcuts with shooting is not an option.[/quote]

The issue isn’t whether we should have the WHTs and the assessments. These are necessary to give shooting that safe framework to work in. One of the reasons why the RCO course is now two weekends is due to an incident outside the ACO where someone got shot and problems were found.

The issue comes down to the fact that is that some people take shortcuts and bypasses already, its just the current system allows the RCO oversight and makes it easier to prevent. SMS cannot be relied on as accurate information and declarations by the OC will likely result in the OC not signing the documents. On my Sqn every uniform member of Staff has at least two jobs (if not three) and there is not the capacity for processing the WHTs of 60+ cadets for three weapon types. Is it that difficult? Not on paper but some people refuse point blank to do anything involving Bader. Others just make it up (e.g. everyone expires either 1st April or 1st October and well just retest people at some point in between those dates).

Then take the cadet who is tested on the Saturday for an off Sqn shoot on Sunday - how can you prove they passed? SMS may not have been updated due to lag in processing time (it happens with our pay claims - why would SMS be any different?).

Finally there’s the idea of printing a declaration off for the group of cadets each time the go shooting. If you have one cadet going to several shoots why not issue them an individual declaration that they can use across the shoots? It saves time and paper - but isn’t that the WHT part of the 3822?

You say above that you have a physical list of Cadets, a computer database, the cadets 3822 and SMS - how do you keep all four in snyc especially if other instructors and doing the training or testing? Please don’t take it this as knocking your system - I’m sure it works for you and you’ve got it running the way it needs but its just that I did try something similar several years ago but it fell apart quite quickly if anyone else did the training or testing and so it soon died.

themajor - I’ve stopped emailing OC & Adj’s with the details of WHTs - too often I got given the reply of “what do we do with these?” and “we don’t use bader for that” etc Giving the WIs permission on Bader would be good step in the right direction but there needs to be an easier way to update the cadets on SMS rather than going into them individually.

22

Chief Tech - I agree with many of your points. However, regardless of what the current system allows, the RCO/SAAI probably train in the single most hazardous activity the ACO does. Sadly, we probably have had more fatalities in flying than shooting over the years (don’t quote me, I’m not sure of the facts there)but despite this, shooting still probably causes the most concern for parents when their youngsters go away to a range day for the first time. The fact we carry out the WHT’s as often as we do and that there may be a problem now recording it should be of paramount importance.
Ultimately, if we cannot trust the signature in a 3822 or not be sure if SMS will be updated in time then unless SAAI/RCO’s keep a record themselves, then what is the alternative.
I am quite lucky, I’m the only SAAI/RCO in my Sqn so everything goes through me which makes record keeping easy and I have sympathy (in this scenario) for Sqn’s with two or three qualified instructors who may have differing ways of recording data. But I’m sorry. That’s still not an excuse. Whoever is senior SAAI needs to kick some bottoms and get a mechanism in place at Sqn level if necessary to correct this problem.

23

I agree with all the comments mentioned above by ‘Glass half empty’.
I still have my shooting qualifications but not in the number I used to. I also used to pride myself in knowing exactly what was required for shooting. I can honestly say now I do not. There have been so many changes to policy and admin that I cannot keep track of it all.
It has got worse since the Army got hold of it, a shame really as we are a large enough organisation to be able to govern ourselves.

We are not doing anything new the only things that have changed are the processes we have to follow to allow a cadet to participate. It is all about covering someone’s back higher up the chain of command.

24

In reality, it’s now actually about covering everyone’s back anywhere in the chain.

If there’s an incident people are going to want to know did the RCO know whether the cadet was current and competant? Who trained the cadet; and who last tested them?
Ensuring we have a record is what allows us to legally show that the proper process of training and assessment has taken place.

It may be more work than ‘the good old days’ when a cadet could be shoved through a course at 13 which allowed them access to a potentially leathal firearm, unchecked, for the remainder of their cadet career; but the safe system of training makes much more sense.

This is a better system in my opinion.

25

From Racing Stick:

and

Some thoughts…

You have significant duplication of effort - 4 data-inputs - 3822, board, database + SMS on Bader. For me, the perfect world would be some kind of “linked” database via Bader inputs, so that you could easily get a calendar-related print out of WHTs due to expire, etc. At Adjt level on our sqn, a printout of WHTs can be generated from Bader (but it is cadet-linked, not date-linked, IIRC); I don’t have the admin rights for this.

Also, as the only SAAI/RCO, then agreed, you are on the only person to input the data = simplest & easiest option. For other sqns (no SAAI or RCO), reliance on other “inputters” or external supply of information (WHTs, shooting records, etc, completed at Sector or Wg shooting events by other SAAIs, or WHTs completed by other sqn staff whilst you are not at sqn) = a right muddle at times. Add on shooting returns & completing marksman award claims, & there is a heap of administration to action.

Typically, if I run our indoor air rifle range (I am only RCO on our sqn) for say 2 hrs, with 9 - 12 cadets taking part, the post-shooting admin activities take an hour. No time to do it at sqn, so it will get done at home. I certainly don’t mind this, but you can understand that this might not be the easiest option for some staff.

As for the trg + WHT aspects, well, a looooong time ago, a cadet cpl “trained” me & coached me on the No 8, & subsequently, a cadet sgt did the same for the .303!! I got 3 Cadet 100 badges, so they must have done something right. :wink:

For today’s shooting, I think we have gone over-board for the trg/testing on the No 8 (&/or air rifle); personally, I believe that this could be simplified by basic safety trg by an RCO with coaching by a staff cadet who had a certain level of shooting experience behind them. For the L98A2, etc, then yes, I agree we need a standard level of trg & testing; they are much more complex weapons with associated “danger” points. However, I would suggest that if a cadet is shooting on a regular basis, then the WHT period could be extended to one year. This would retain the safety aspects but lessen the workload on the SAAIs.

26

SMS does run wht reports for all personnel and if they are current on a particular date. But relies on SMS being up to date.

27

I’ll have to look at the reports again.
The last time I ran any they either didn’t work at all; output a lot of garbage; or where just so poorly formatted as to make them pointless and unworkable.

28

For what it’s worth, I’m squarely in the continue with 6 monthly WHT camp; I don’t care where they’re recorded, 3822 or green card (BADER isn’t populated adequately) but they are essential. However, I fully understand GHE2’s argument and I too was one of the cadets who was allowed ‘solo’ on a .303 and an SLR, the former with absolutely no training at all apart from having fired a No 8, because I was big enough to handle it! But, I have seen too many supposedly experienced cadets get their drills wrong, to the extent that they could have been dangerous, to ever be comfortable with reducing the current WHT regime. Even in the opinion of many cadets’, the L98 is complicated.

I absolutely agree with wdimagineer2be and Batfink’s sentiments, we have too many bad WIs, why are there no standards checks? The flying and gliding community have them and as an RCO I have a 4 yearly, but the WIs have nothing and can continue with their bad practices with relative impunity. I see so many variations of what’s gets done with L98 at the moment, ie working parts forward after last shot, load in the standing position, don’t bother with weapon cleaning etc that any lessening of the current standard that could come around if we remove the 6 monthly WHT as has been suggested will be a huge retrograde step. We also have had the recent change to drills and heaven knows how many WIs are still using the old ones as ‘best practice’. I believe that we will run a real risk of our WIs ‘going feral’ if we remove the need for a formal record.

Ultimately, we have a duty of care to everyone, the cadets, the range staff and the public and whilst many might hanker for a return to the ‘god old days’ where we just ‘did things’, society has moved on and for the better in some areas. We would be absolutely taken to the cleaners if it were found that a cadet involved in an accident on a range had received minimal training on a lethal weapon and had no refresher tests to prove current competency.

29

Nothing wrong with loading in the standing position.

30

Agreed, but there are may across the ACO who do not see this to be permissible, despite what the publications may advise.

Perhaps I should have said that some do what I mentioned as examples whilst others do not.

Unfortunately,‘Best Practice’ is often quoted as the reasons for adhering to outdated procedures.

31

“It’s a safe fad…” :ohmy:

32

I know this is old, but does anyone know where the OP’s rumour originated? I’ve not heard anything relating to this, and would expect to have.

33

I’d also be interested to know where the rumour orginated as I’d expect to have heard something.

Although the OC SATTs meeting is soon so perhaps it will be unveiled there?

34

If you don’t know about it mate then I’d hope it’s probably just polldarks.

35

If you don’t know about it mate then I’d hope it’s probably just polldarks.[/quote]

I have looked further into this and unfortunately it appears it was a decision made at the last RTO meeting in October -

[hide] HQ Air Cadets > Training Officers Area > Calendar > RTO Meeting [/hide]

ITEM 11 – 3822 REPLACEMENT UPDATE - paragraph 53

So unfortunately it appears to be more substantive than rumour now.