Posted on Oct 21, 2015
Is 39 training days good enough for the National Guard and Reserves?
82.5K
428
200
34
34
0
So the First Army Boss is stating that the Reserves, to include the National Guard, don't have enough time for training. I think the 39 days a years is not horrible. You really can never get enough training but I don't think that took some of our systems into consideration. If you look at a Armored Brigade Combat Team you have a lot of moving parts. Getting your soldiers from various Armories throughout the state and to then to get them to their vehicles so they can do a gunnery is extremely difficult. Gunneries are usually left to do at an Annual Training when you can have more time but then that takes a lot of resources and that is pretty much all that you will do.
Keep in mind that the First Army is viewing as a means to mobilize and deploy reserve forces quicker. They are focusing on their ability to deploy in a short time frame.
What is your experience with this?
Keep in mind that the First Army is viewing as a means to mobilize and deploy reserve forces quicker. They are focusing on their ability to deploy in a short time frame.
What is your experience with this?
Edited 10 y ago
Posted 10 y ago
Responses: 98
I'm sure that for the Army Guard and Reserve 39 days may not be enough, especially for combat units. For their medical units and Navy Reserve medical units that is probably enough as many personnel have civilian jobs as providers, technicians, medically-related specialists, and administrators.
(0)
(0)
I would love more training time. AT is taken up by doing Bradley gunnery. So there is no combined cps trainings, hell platoon level mounted movement trying is non existent
(0)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
We run into the same issue. You can do a gunnery or combined ops training. You just don't have time to do both.
(1)
(0)
Well, our Armor unit did Gunnery on MUTA 5's we had 3 tank companies and a HQs section and all armories were 115 miles from post to do are TT's 15 day AT we completed most Gunnery the RA officials were impressed as to how fast we could push the units thru.
(0)
(0)
If it was 39 actually training days (full hands on MOS training) then it might squeak us by. The current state of it is most Drills and Battle Assemblies are reserved for mandatory trainings and Soldier readiness (admin, medical, etc). In my experience Soldiers love AT. They make great money, they get some time away from the family that many enjoy and as long as the training event is set up properly they get fantastic experience and get to see how things should be working versus the little bubble they normally see at home station. I wouldn't mind seeing two major AT events every year and go to a Drill/BA schedule of 4 days every 2 months instead of 2 days a month as we have now. There's a lot that can be done but it takes the officers and staff to become functional and plan these events properly. Many don't though...
(0)
(0)
Funny thing is a good lab test can be seen with the Navy Seabees. You know, the "We Build, We Fight" thing? There were many years that I'd wish there'd be a month's worth of military skill work as a unit. With detachments gone everywhere, extended deployments, and the build more quicker mentality, the We Fight piece got some back burner treatment. I think all the services continue to get dinged with lack of training funds, range time, and ammo. I also remember years when the Active side got less military training than the reserve side. It flipped around a bit. I believe there aren't the swings we had in the past, but honing the military skill set is always a struggle.
(0)
(0)
I think that if reserve and guard didn't have to take days out of the year to do all of the mandatory training and mandatory briefings (sharp for example) more time could be committed to The unit's METL to maintain higher readiness and proficiency. Honestly, I doubt that telling service members about sexual harassment and sexual assault every year is only marginally decreasing the number of incidents. Many of the annual briefings do not need to be annual and cut into valuable section training time. Logistically speaking I think 39 days a year just doesn't cut it.
(0)
(0)
Zero experience with the Guard or Reserves (OK, a little with Reserves and I will withhold opinion on Navy Reservists), but that has never stopped me from giving my opinion. We have been in serious combat for nearly 15 years, how has these units performed so far? If the excellence is there on a par with ADs, then it is sufficient, if not more training is needed. I never saw a civilian organization hold training time against their employees.
(0)
(0)
39 days is more than enough time. Time alloted is not a problem, how it is allocated is a disaster! One day our officers will again have a backbone and will set priorities that make sense. We forced to perform annual training online for things that do not change annually. SFC Jones in his BDUs has given us the same here are the keys now go kill yourself speech for 15 years now. Accident avoidance course should be a one time course and DONE!!! Sexual Assault, EEO, suicide prevention, antiterrorism etc.. Dont change yearly and the statistics havent changed despite these programs. The Army throws millions if not billions into these training programs, the end result is we have a paper soldier. Looks good on paper, but cant shoot, cant pt, cant fight and cant spell their MOS. They can tell you everything there is to know about sexual assault. That hasnt stopped it from happening. Discipline is the solution for those without values. Training time is precious, invest it where that time counts
(0)
(0)
Read This Next


Army National Guard
Training
