At what point do we revamp "basic Soldier skills"?

SSG V. Michelle Woods — Wed, 30 Apr 2014 16:18:57 -0400

I'm certainly not saying to completely eradicate the traditional basic skills.
I'm saying at what point do we update and modernize things like land nav and comms etc.?

I ask because I thought we trained with the intent to fight so why am I teaching troops how to use a compass if I've never been issued a compass in garrison or down range? So even if I do get lost, I won't have a compass to help me.

Why aren't we training on Blue Force Tracker just as much as radios?

Why do we consider rucking a basic training event for all Soldiers when the majority of us are mechanized? If you know you're not rucking anywhere, why do it?

Cavalrymen don't train on horses anymore because they don't fight the enemy on horseback so why do we conduct antiquated training? Why don't we revamp basic Soldier skills so we actually train as we fight?

I've only been in five years so I sincerely ask these questions humbly. My perspective is limited to what I've experienced so I'd really like to hear from those with more experience and a broader perspective.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 30 at 2014 4:22 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 30 Apr 2014 16:22:28 -0400

Probably the same reason we're still using PDA devices and blackberries vs iphones and androids. Probably the same reason that we can't digitally transfer medical records (I can't count how many times I had to carry 30 lbs of paper medical records from the hospital). The Army waits for war to update, and then we're 10 years behind. Like the saying goes, "the army is a slow moving beast".

Response by SFC Michael Hasbun made Apr 30 at 2014 4:28 PM

SFC Michael Hasbun — Wed, 30 Apr 2014 16:28:10 -0400

I'm afraid doctrine and training are updated and revised at the speed of smell...

On behalf of myself ( since I can't speak for a whole organization the size of TRADOC), I sincerely apologize for any irrelevant training you may have recieved or time of yours that you'll never get back..

Just know that it's all being worked on, and you should see some results by approximately May 7th, 2072.

*Quick update* Due to a recent FRAGO that mandates all Powerpoint presentations be reformatted with a new font, I'm afraid all progress has been halted until we hire 82,000 more civilians.

Response by CPT Zachary Brooks made Apr 30 at 2014 4:30 PM

CPT Zachary Brooks — Wed, 30 Apr 2014 16:30:38 -0400

What happens when your GPS breaks down? What happens when your truck breaks down and you have to hoof it back? etc?

While I do agree that we need to update our skills, we should never remove the "low tech" skills from our knowledge base.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 30 at 2014 4:33 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 30 Apr 2014 16:33:48 -0400

I can say from my current position, it is a budget issue. It takes a long time, a lot of money and higher approval to change the POI for a course that is being taught in the Army. For the Field Artillery, we have started implementing these changes slowly, but will never be fully caught up with technology due to time and budget constraints. I do agree with you though.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 30 at 2014 4:34 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 30 Apr 2014 16:34:56 -0400

Best question ever....

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 30 at 2014 4:35 PM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 30 Apr 2014 16:35:27 -0400

Some of it is just good training...like ruck marching. Some of it is just because it's what we've always done. From my perspective it's good to learn how to do things the old fashioned way so you appreciate the modern way. When I was in Wheeled Vechical recovery school we had to pull a HMMV out of a ditch by hand using rope and pullies. Not because we didn't have a vechicle that could do it....but in case we had to we could.

Response by LTJG Robert M. made Apr 30 at 2014 5:00 PM

LTJG Robert M. — Wed, 30 Apr 2014 17:00:17 -0400

Ultimately, its why we still teach celestial navigation and horizontal sextant positioning in the seagoing services, Because Technology WILL FAIL! The back up system to a Hospital Electronic record is the paper file, Back up to GPS is compass and topo-map, All electrical components are susceptible to EMP, whether natural from sun spots or man-made through NucDet, Very few systems are TEMPEST hardened, so we train on lowest common denominator which is our failsafe.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_hardening

Radiation hardening - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Radiation hardening is the act of making electronic components and systems resistant to damage or malfunctions caused by ionizing radiation (particle radiation and high-energy electromagnetic radiation),[1] such as those encountered in outer space and high-altitude flight, around nuclear reactors and particle accelerators, or during nuclear accidents or nuclear warfare.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 30 at 2014 6:02 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 30 Apr 2014 18:02:59 -0400

I use a compass to orient my Satcom antenna.....

Response by SSG Todd Halverson made Apr 30 at 2014 6:43 PM

SSG Todd Halverson — Wed, 30 Apr 2014 18:43:42 -0400

I agree that there does need some updating to the common core skills that Soldiers are training on. But, at the same time they still need to learn the low tech ones. Many times while down range I had to use a compass to adjust my SATCOM and other equipment. While at the same time we had to learn "new" technology while down range, even though it had been around for a few years. I think that a lot of it comes down to the logistics of supplying everyone with all the tools that they need.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made May 1 at 2014 12:31 AM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 01 May 2014 00:31:42 -0400

From what I have been reading, the training being given seems to ultimately be determined by MOS. Being a Scout, I was issued a compass as a brand new private and have never been to the field without one. When we train on land nav, we start with a compas and map and do that until it is second nature. Once task is complete, you can introduce a GPS and see how well technology can benifit you. But at no time does that mean you do not have a back up plan. As stated by others, technology WILL fail and we must be proficent with our fundamentals.

As for ruck marching, it is all mission depentant for us. My unit is based on strykers, but certain situations call for the vehicles to be placed in hides and the dismount teams to ruck up and move out to complete the mission. As for the BFT, we have very few people who have even been to a class on how to use it. Pretty much everything I know about them has come from trial and error. They can be a great tool but normally only about 75% of our troop has them operational. That doesn't mean we don't train our Soldiers on them, but you must constantly remind yourself that it is only an extra tool to make the basics easier.

So everything that you deem to be useless and haven't trained on in your time, I have personally used and trained hours upon hours on in my 3 years so far. If you want your Soldiers to be trained on these things, read some FM's or find someone who can teach you and then pass along that knowledge. Too many people today are too focused on what has been done the past 10 years in an unconventional war and need to retrain on the traditional skills of our jobs. With that being said, yes I expect all of my Soldiers to be proficent with a map and compas because it is crucial for my job. At the same time, I wouldn't expect my units S1 clerk to have the same proficiency as my men. So going back to my original statement, it seems to be mostly MOS dependant on the type of training being taught to Soldiers.

Response by SFC Stephen Hester made May 1 at 2014 7:32 AM

SFC Stephen Hester — Thu, 01 May 2014 07:32:00 -0400

Soldier skills are like Algebra: the teacher can always tell you that you need to know it and why but isn't sure exactly when and where you'll use it. Ruck marching is like that because even though few units actually move like this "you may have to do it someday". I think rucking has become more of a fitness activity than a tactical necessity and that's okay as long as we're not breaking people in the process.

Don't be afraid to color outside the lines. Your experience as an NCO is one of the best training tools you have. If you identify a training need (skills, knowledge, ability) that the Army hasn't don't be afraid to incorporate that into your training. Your Soldiers will appreciate it.

Response by 1LT Private RallyPoint Member made May 1 at 2014 7:50 AM

1LT Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 01 May 2014 07:50:37 -0400

SSG Woods,

You just got me fired up! Is revamping basic Soldier skills important? YES, but I lean the other way. As an Infantry leader, I lean heavily on basic Soldier skills every day! I navigate outside the wire with a plain old map and compass all the time! Of course I have a GPS to assist, but that doesn't cut it when you're directing CCA/CAS/or indirect fires. Sure non-combat MOSs don't need the same level of proficiency, but my fear is when we get into a real conventional fight, there won’t be FOBs to hide on, everyone must be ready to fight and defend themselves and their buddies. IMTs, old school land nav, radios and marksmanship ETC are life savers.

Great discussion!

-Justin

Response by SFC Douglas Eshenbaugh made May 1 at 2014 11:01 AM

SFC Douglas Eshenbaugh — Thu, 01 May 2014 11:01:36 -0400

My question is why are you doing training that doesn't relate to your job? I have to justify all my training as related to my mission if it isn't in one of my collective tasks. Even then if I'm not in a particular cycle I have to justify that training even if it's a task. If you can't see the need then why train it?

For the record I can justify map reading and land nav for my guys but we do a lot of varied tasks that we can't rely on electronic navigation to be effective. Try using a Garmin during a disaster when all the roads are blocked.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made May 1 at 2014 1:53 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 01 May 2014 13:53:43 -0400

You make some great points. However, I think basic navigation skills are important and although you may not have a compass the rest of the land nav training can be used, like terrain association, knowing how far you have walked and how to keep track of your direction while navigating obstacles. It also teaches them to trust their equipment, no matter what it is... you won't be rappelling much in the army either, but it's good at teaching troops to overcome fear and trust in the knowledge they have picked up over the past week.

But, I agree, new Soldiers should get more than they get on the new basics of the army.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made May 1 at 2014 1:56 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 01 May 2014 13:56:07 -0400

I would contend that we do not do this enough. I used my compass in combat and I had to navigate with a map also. I don't think we focus on this enough. I also did have a GPS but I would use it seldom as a means of confirming my location or giving up a solid grid.

Power will go out. You may need to do a follow up mission or your GPS may get jammed. If you rely on only one way to complete the mission you are going to have a mighty small kit bag of resources. I just would like to point to the Marines as they do a great job ensuring that all Marines know these skills.

I see this as a breakdown of the military. We don't train our soldiers to be soldiers anymore. We teach followers. We follow GPS or just ride in a vehicle paying no mind to where they are at. The only one that really knows where they are is the leader. At that point the leader has had no experience performing such tasks due to having no expectation as a solider to perform such a task. And situations like Jessica Lynch happen. I know that it was a tragic event but it was an epic failure of soldiering. Not one officer or NCO knew what to do because they were used to using a GPS and just followed it.

I would also charge the NCO Corps for training younger soldier. The squad leader is the chief trainer of his/her squad, the PSG is the chief trainer of their platoon, the 1SG is the chief trainer of the company. Is it your responsibility to tailor the training to the needs of the unit and not just follow some book.

I was a OC for the first Army training units deploying to Iraq. It scared me to see some of these units. I really questioned their NCO's on how do they think their lack of preparedness will result in theater. The train up to deploy should be a refresher and not the first time soldiers are getting trained on combat operations.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made May 1 at 2014 2:04 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 01 May 2014 14:04:30 -0400

Excellent question SSG Woods.

It's my opinion from the last 15 years that we have changed our focus from a "we're soldiers first", to a "we're our occupational specialty first" mentality. By that I mean some specialties learn some of the basics in IET and then flush all of that down the drain when they get to their duty station. When I was in a combat service support unit we trained on all of the basics all the time because at the end of the day our element would have to defend itself, or get tasked with defending another unit. That would happen a lot during rotations to JRTC. Nowadays I need land-nav and map reading skills to do my job in a launcher.

There's nothing antiquated about ruck-marching and dismounted/mounted land nav with a compass and map, even in this modern age of wiz-bang gadgetry. And while the BFT can be an excellent tool, a little bit of moisture in the transceiver turns it into a useless hunk of plastic. A radio on the other hand is absolutely necessary for me to drop warheads on foreheads... No radios, no fire-missions, no fire support for the guys on the ground.

No doubt we need to make some changes to IET, but I feel the whole organization would benefit from ALL occupational specialties knowing how to better shoot, move, and communicate. For example, if a 68E ever has to pick up a rifle at least they'll know what to do with it until QRF shows up.

Response by SSG V. Michelle Woods made May 1 at 2014 3:13 PM

SSG V. Michelle Woods — Thu, 01 May 2014 15:13:30 -0400

Maybe I'm not communicating this very well but please let me try again because I am getting a lot of great feedback, but I can see there is a misunderstanding.

My point in this discussion is that I believe we should receive extensive training on MORE than one source, not solely on the traditional basics.

For example, if I know my team will be riding in an MRAP when they go outside the wire, isn't it just as important to train them on how to operate an MRAP as it is to ruck 10 miles in case their MRAP breaks down?

Response by SSG Trevor S. made May 2 at 2014 12:40 AM

SSG Trevor S. — Fri, 02 May 2014 00:40:53 -0400

If you have never been issued a compass, fire your supply NCOIC. It should be part of your basic load. Think about this, if that day comes when something goes wrong. an Analog compass will not get fried by an EMP. A set of LPC's won't get fried by an EMP but a HMMWV will. Basic should mean, the lowest common denominator of skills to be effective. It is the same reason aviators train land navigation with a compass, sometimes our metal horses take a crap on us.
Edit for LPC's = Leather Personnel Carriers = boots.

Response by Cpl James McCoy-Flowers made May 2 at 2014 3:00 AM

Cpl James McCoy-Flowers — Fri, 02 May 2014 03:00:43 -0400

Interesting topic...

This has probably been stated, but training to tradition (I call it being brilliant at the basics) means that if your soldiers technology fails, they still have the basic skills to fall back on in order to complete the mission.

I understand you feel that modern technology should be emphasized but remember this, one EMP weapon or faulty equipment will kill all of your technology. Not know what to do in that situation or how to properly pace yourself in a ruck patrol will lead to mission failure.

Response by COL Private RallyPoint Member made May 2 at 2014 12:08 PM

COL Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 02 May 2014 12:08:21 -0400

To maximize the use of technology requires understanding the basic fundamentals it relies on. Others have already mentioned that technology fails, that seems obvious. Less obvious is the cognitive conditioning that occurs by repeatedly placing a demand on the brain. In the case of map and compass you are developing over time an innate understanding of topography, time, and distance. It speeds decision making under stress. The same can be said of ruck marching. There is a mental discipline as well as physical as you develop the knowledge of moving by foot under load in various terrain over various distances. It develops your mental model of "how the world works" which allows for more accurate intuitive decision making, particularly under stress. Training on BFT and radios is important, particularly in developing the fine motor skills of placing them into operation, loading COMSEC, and troubleshooting. Much like training malfunction drills with your weapon.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made May 2 at 2015 10:23 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 02 May 2015 22:23:43 -0400

I understand your point. However if you should ever get lost the basic land nav skills from the old doctrine will save your life. Such as intersection and resection will come in handy when the blue force tracker fails or runs out of power. The tasks that are laid out in doctrine are essential and should be taught no matter how advance we get with technology because at the rate that technology is going we are soon able to speak with our minds.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made May 2 at 2015 10:41 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 02 May 2015 22:41:57 -0400

As an ait instructor, I think we focus too much on technology. We need to train on basics. Technology fails. If you don't know how to read a map and use a compass, and perform resection and intersection, what will you do when your dagr batteries go dead???

Technogy should be the icing on the cake.... Not the dough it's made of.

Response by SPC Angel Guma made May 2 at 2015 11:17 PM

SPC Angel Guma — Sat, 02 May 2015 23:17:25 -0400

Boot camp (at least for me) is about as much of taking a civilian and turning the civilian into a soldier. It's much implied all that 'up to date' training comes after basic training, when the soldier goes to AIT. Those initial months should be totally focused on putting military values into a non-military body and soul.

That being said, I think the reason why they don't touch all that sacrosanct stuff is because there's a lot of tradition that goes behind it. Rucking is definitely an old-school army tradition that never dies. I don't think rucking well ever go away for as long as the Army exists. Every ruck I was ever in kicked my ass.

But I also see it from your point of view. Sometimes, they just get caught up in all that traditional "basics" stuff and don't realize the real common-denominator basics has shifted. Exactly what you said, compass and land nav. Even the Iraqi insurgents we fought at times showed more technological savvy than what some people gave them credit for, and I highly doubt even they were wrapped up with compasses and maps when they had map-apps and digital compasses for their smart phones. Not all of them were as technologically behind as folks painted them as. So yes, it behooves people to dig in and really hone and refine the tools we have and explore the tools we are developing. I would never trade an MRAP for a horse and expect horseback soldiers to take on MRAPs. What you are observing is the mind-numbing fog of 'check the box' nonsense. Its easier to check the box to say we are refining basic soldiering skills than to say we are helping rank and file soldiers refine newer tools.

Not exactly an answer to your post but that's my .02 cents.

Response by SGT Chip Hutchings made May 3 at 2015 2:14 AM

SGT Chip Hutchings — Sun, 03 May 2015 02:14:00 -0400

I don't think of my self as old since I am only 42, but hearing a soldier ask why we should train soldiers to use a compass and carry a ruck is just basic soldiering. Maybe the
Issue is more of a question on why did they stop issuing compasses. Next thing I am going to hear is why should I learn to shoot when I work in PAC! Suck it up and drive on there hero.

Response by SGT Anthony Rossi made May 3 at 2015 2:19 AM

SGT Anthony Rossi — Sun, 03 May 2015 02:19:54 -0400

Great point SGT, I would also like to mention.
I do believe in building physical & mental fortitude.
However, just breaking down someone's body so they have a larger Disability claim when the ETS makes no sense. Especially when the training doesn't help combat efficiency or mission success.