PART 8
SUPPORT TO TRAINING

Cette page est disponible en anglais seulement actuellement. Désolé pour tout dérangement.

TARGETRY AND SIMULATION

Balancing today's ways of doing things while taking advantage of technology which will benefit tomorrow, is a major challenge in the training business. One must wonder, in perhaps simplistic terms, what training -technology could be bought for one year's worth of training ammunition and what should be the ultimate, long-term benefit?

In George Blackburn's book, “Where The Hell Are The Guns”, he describes the training technologies which they improvised in the 1940's, such as: small-bore inserts for guns, moving tank targets, indoor puff ranges and others, all of which would be familiar to today's Gunners because things haven't changed much. We still have .22 calibre inserts (which are almost never used), we don't have moving targets anymore, and the puff tables are now computerized but not much different from his day. One might wonder how much the army has progressed!

With the revolution in electronic simulation there are great opportunities for vastly improved field training at the lower levels. A higher degree of realism and objectivity in training can be introduced and battlefield tactics and movement can be vastly improved. The Army must keep pushing for improved targetry and improved simulation. The current state of targetry in the CF is extremely poor, causing a great waste a lot of time, money and energy because the soldiers cannot properly measure capability on the ranges nor can they achieve full advantage of pre-live fire training. Efforts must continue to rectify this unsatisfactory situation and Commanders should press their superiors to take action. Concurrently unit COs should do what they can through their branches and various technical and procurement staffs to improve the situation.

In sending soldiers into harm's way with the frequency noted as of late it is essential that high-technology simulation be exploited to prepare them. These are no longer “nice to have,” but are essential training tools.

These problems are compounded in the Militia units because they need the simulation to an even greater extent, and in that context even less is available.

In Appendix 6 Major Laurence O'Neill (retired), gives a detailed explanation of the current state of the art in technology in the Canadian Army today. It is well worth the read. See Appendix 6.

“...he gave up his smaller guns to be melted down and manufactured into better ones. When he began the 1863 campaigns, Lee had a better and newer artillery train. His logistics were reduced and his firepower was increased”22
Sullivan and Harper
Hope Is Not A Method

RANGE DEVELOPMENT

Range development is another area that requires the personal interest, involvement and input of Commanders and COs. Brigade and Base staffs want and need unit inputs and if units can take on self-help or low cost projects then they should be urged to do so. The ideas of junior officers and NCOs should be captured and assembled to ensure continuous development and improvement of the ranges and training areas. Ideas picked up on exchanges and visits should also be considered. We have not been very innovative in this area as can be seen with our rifle ranges employing butts, butt parties, archaic communications, etc. As pointed out, in The Second World War they were more innovative than today - for example, they even had mobile anti-tank targets on ranges, while the best we do today is shoot at old car hulks sitting on the ranges. Developing ranges should be an art, like developing a golf course or planning the landscaping of a Base - but in fact, it tends to be a lower priority effort than these less important activities.

BUSINESS PLANNING

How often have we set up elaborate bivouac camps for stays of three or four weeks at the expense of training? How often have Gunners and tankers prided themselves on how many rounds went down range? How often has the “training” of infantry units consisted of little more than blowing off five million dollars worth of ammunition? Consider our totally inefficient range practices and butt parties. What if we had to account for the hours of our people? Are we are using our resources effectively? I would suggest not - at least not always.

Many still cringe at the phrase “Business Planning,” but it is a necessary component of modern military life. It is not new either. No commander could train without planning for resources properly, just as in operations one cannot conduct campaigns successfully without detailed planning, husbanding of finite resources, sound administration and reliable logistics. Surely this is what business planning, or conducting a training estimate for that matter, is all about. Again most armies of the world use business planning approaches and they remain remarkably successful. Certainly we can and should be able to do as well as them.

If not applied correctly business planning tends, in the extreme to suffocate, common sense. For example, training ammunition should not be considered as just a dollar resource, to be divided up equally to all units in a Brigade. Different natures cost different amounts and different units require different quantities. Commanders must go back to the training aim, standards and requirements, by unit, before they allocate ammunition. Then it should be expended for the proper purpose and not traded off for other purposes. Command decisions based on a sound estimate should be the driving force.

Just remember that the business plan is there to support training, ensuring that training gets more than just the residual resources. This means that the leaders and commanders, not the “bean counters,” should be making the decisions. Ultimately, the business plan is nothing more than an enabler that helps leaders make informed decisions supported by relevant information and analysis.

ACCOUNTABILITY FOR WEAPONS AND EQUIPMENTS

Weapons and equipments must be handled with due respect, maintained properly and be accounted for when units. are training, as well as on operations. There is no vehicle, weapon or equipment in a unit, which is not signed for by an individual. Further, every soldier works for and reports to an NCO. Accordingly, NCOs should be expected to check, inspect and account for vehicles, weapons and equipment within their areas of responsibility. Further, they should be held accountable if these items are needlessly damaged, misused or lost. If there is a rash of such incidents in a unit, then an officer must be held accountable. Note that the same policy is equally applicable in operations and is not merely peacetime consideration. Prepare for operations through training.

The old business of the officers staying until the last weapons were cleaned, accounted for, inspected and secured, served many a purpose. It wasn't that the soldiers were not to be trusted, but instead symbolized the importance of weapons to a fighting unit and the responsibility of officers to the men. Besides, it ensured the officers remained in touch with their troops and they probably learned a thing or two in the informal discussions around the weapons, like: “Sir, you sure blew it today, didn't you!” or, “Come on over here sir, and I'll show you how to do it.”

ADMINISTRATION AND DISCIPLINE

Administration and discipline in training should be at the same high standards as in garrison or on operations. The deployability of soldiers and their administrative fitness (e.g. wills, next of kin, medical pay arrangements, etc.) must be confirmed before exercises, for accidents and casualties are every bit as possible as when on operational service. Unsoldierly behaviour, unsafe practices, negligent discharges, AWOL, incompetence, alcohol misuse and other offences may well occur and these must be dealt with expeditiously and firmly. Train in peace as you would conduct yourself in war.

Part 9 - Creating a Learning Organization