Using the right amount of force
I am writing out of sheer frustration at the lack of common sense being applied to some pre-deployment force preparation training for Air Force personnel.
 |
THE RIGHT AIM: AVM Quaife says the most inexperienced should have all the skills to perform as part of the ADF team.
Photo by AB Bradley Darvill
|
FIRSTLY, apologies regarding the length of this letter, but I am writing out of sheer frustration at the lack of common sense being applied to some pre-deployment force preparation training for Air Force personnel. I am beginning to think that we must be employing some personnel who’s sole purpose in life is to make this activity as difficult and inane as possible. While I acknowledge that there is a requirement to do much of this training – and to update it if and when necessary – the continual movement of the goalposts is making the pre-deployment training of personnel not only difficult for the individual to maintain, but also a nightmare for the ground training supervisors to manage.
36SQN undertook a period of ‘reconstitution’ in July and August this year so that personnel could undertake, update and renew ground currencies, pre-deployment training and the like. This included (but was not limited to) completing weapons handling tests (WHT) and live firing (where the requirements for both regularly and continually change each time you attend training) which supposedly qualified me for deployment to an AO. Since then, new directives have come out regarding the wearing of Combat Body Armour (CBA) for WHT/live fire along with a couple of other annoying requirements, which mean I have to do yet another live-firing exercise before I deploy in a few weeks time. Throw in a couple of extra ‘new’ pre-deployment lectures and it is all just getting to be a pain in the proverbial to maintain (as is my sense of humour). It was acceptable for me to be deployed on two previous occasions without having to fire a weapon whilst wearing CBA prior to deployment – why will I now be a better airman for achieving this qualification? Incidentally, for C-130 detachment aircrew, this ‘new’ training (with CBA) has been incorporated into indoctrination training at the deployed location since 2004. I will now have to complete this training twice for my next deployment.
Another fine example of this pre-deployment ‘training’ is a ‘death by Powerpoint’ lecture that we have to sit through upon arrival in the AO, which details how to drive in a convoy (perhaps in an APC), what to do should we come under attack and how I might be able to recognise a roadside IED (from the window of an APC no doubt). This is a great thing to know, except that in my job I don’t very often get to drive down the streets or highways of the AO in a convoy of taxiing aircraft. “Oh but you may find yourself under fire in an APC convoy one day” I can hear some readers saying. I’ll tell you what I’ll do in such a situation … exactly whatever it is that the guy in charge of the APC tells me to do, because that is what he is trained to do.
On the other hand – and in comparison with my line of work – think about this for a suggestion then. Every person deployed to an AO should undergo compulsory dinghy drill training and a full currency on aircraft passenger emergency procedures (oxygen, emergency egress, first aid and fire fighting training etc) every twelve months before they are deemed deployable – just in case one day you are put in a situation that requires such knowledge. Furthermore, perhaps no-one should be deployed without having first completed a combat survival training course just in case we have a ‘downed aircraft’ situation (where it might be assumed that “the crew will look after us” – further assuming that at least one of them survives without incapacitation). Sounds a little extreme or ridiculous? You bet.
I expect there will be some who will be thinking “...well that’s what you get paid Service and Flying Allowance for”, and I thank you for your lack of subjectiveness in advance. The point I am trying to convey is that surely we can achieve our individual force preparation requirements in a fashion which best suits the role of our deployed personnel, rather than just catering for the ‘common’ denominator.
WOFF Mick Smith
36SQN
Air Commander Australia AVM John Quaife responds:
WOFF Smith unwittingly hits the nail on the head with his reference to the lowest common denominator in force preparation training. This training is indeed aimed at ensuring that all our people have the preparation that they need to operate effectively and safely in the various theatres and environments that we find ourselves. To meet this aim, the training is under constant review and adjustment, just as the environment is similarly under adjustment – courtesy of our opponents.
The WTT changes that recently occurred have been implemented to stop a process whereby our people were being tested prior to deployment and again during RSO&I training in-theatre. The situation where we have deployed “prepared” people who subsequently failed to meet RSO&I expectations has been addressed by this change.
That said, I share some of WOFF Smith’s concerns about the process of force preparation and especially the unthinking imposition of a ‘square ticking’ approach. My staff is working up a proposal to rationalise and tailor this training. I see no sense in duplicating training or preparing people for situations we know are not relevant and nor do I see any sense in repeating training for people on second, third or more rotations where we could sensibly recognise prior learning.
My staff and I will continue to work on the issue, just as I will continue to ensure that we maintain a conservative approach to keeping all of our people adequately prepared for operations. We must guard against complacency, just as we must ensure that the most inexperienced of our members have all the skills necessary to perform as part of the broader ADF team and return safely to their friends and family.
