Ugh this is going to be one of 'those' theads...
Xort Xort:
Guy_Fawkes Guy_Fawkes:
Im guessing you weren't in that long...
Long enough to know a good number of officers, and they were trained on all the weapons that I was using. Maybe that was a unit thing? Maybe reserve units don't have as deep a training mentality (and budget) that reg force units do? Sure the new officers came in without any 'extra' training, but once we had an range or an ex we trained the officers in all the weapons the troops used or were training with.
Again, showing up to a range and training with the weapon once doesnt make one proficient for very long. This summer I ran 4 Lt's through the CarlG, if I tossed one to any of the officers tomorrow they wouldnt be able to carry out the drills properly.
Could they fire it?
Sure.
Could they do it safely?
I wouldnt bet my life one it.
This is why before every range you run all participants through TOET's.
$1:
$1:
Firstly Officers are not given extensive training on weapons systems, mostly for the fact that you will rarely ever see a officer planting claymores. That's what privates are for.
I would hope that in work up training everyone that would be part of the battle group would get training on every weapon system they might use. I know that in this case they were not trained in work up training on claymores, that seems like an oversight. But saying
I'm an officer I don't need to learn how to use this weapon I have privates for that is a very stupid mindset.
I never said that, if you read it clearly I said Officers are not put through the same training because they are not required to do the same job as a private. It's nice that we can run officers on section and troop level weapons, but the ranges are for the junior NCMs not the officers. Officers dont carry the C6 on patrols so being an expert on the C6 is not required.
$1:
$1:
Secondly 2 I/C take over is never an excuse. You are an officer, one of your main duties is to the safety of your men. If you dont understand what is expected of you or what is going on it is your fucking job to find out.
I don't know how this works, no one told me we would be using it, I have never trained on this, I told my superior officer and he said your WO is an expert do what he says.
That's what when down.
And it makes sense, do you say, my platoon can't train on this weapon because I don't have any experince on it? No you let the proper safety messures keep people safe, like RSOs, ARSOs and trained people looking out for each other.
You cant just let the WO run the show and sit in the CP with your thumb up your ass. Like I said, if you dont know the weapon you pick the RSO's brain about it until you are confident you know what is safe and what is not. If the WO is a moron, then you get the publication on the weapon. If you dont know the weapon, If your WO is a moron and you do not have a Pub then you shut the range down.
$1:
$1:
Lastly, I have been on MANY ranges with explosives, you always have a Range OIC (Officer) RSO (Sgt or higher) and several ARSOs (MCpls or higher). I have also been told to run ranges on weapons systems I have not touched in years and couldn't remember anything about, you know what I fucking did I asked where the instruction manual was on the wpns system in question. Also every range I have run the people had were run through the range had refresher training on the weapon no less than 24 hours before the range.
Ever run a range in Afghanistan in a combat zone?
I've assisted on ranges as staff, and everything you said is correct, for Canada.
I was qualified my practical on a RWS before I got my theory training, during a Afghan range. It was my CC saying run over to that 113 and tell the WO you are there to shoot the gun. I didn't even know what gun I was going to shoot, but in that case it was a C6 on a RWS mount. I got the lesson on how to use the RWS a few days later.
Lets say you are a reserve officer and your troops are getting a training cycle with a regular force unit. The reg unit says we today we are going to cover the C6, C9 and the .50 cal. You have never seen the .50 cal. Do you say my troops will not train on the 50 until I have been trained? Or do you say, well it's a good as time as any to learn, and pick up the qualification beside your troops to match the training schedule?
Again at that point you sit in on the TOETs, read the Pubs and talk to the WO about how the range is expected to run.
$1:
Then lets say during the training while following a proper misfire drill on the 50, the round cooks off just before the #2 threw it away. That blows his hand off, but also sends a shard of the case into someone's eye killing that person. That person was in the waiting area that the range staff had set up. Are you saying that as the officer it's your fault that you didn't tell the range staff their safety messures are insufficent and move your troops farther away?
Yes. It is the officers job to make sure the training is done in a safe manner. If an accident does happen he must prove that he did all that he could (within reason) to prevent the accident, and that he did everything in his power to make sure that any injured pers were attended to quickly.
$1:
That's sorta what happened here. Although in the case of the claymore that weapon system was faulty and acted unexpectedly, and in my example the weapon function in an expected way and was only a feak chance that something went wrong.
How do you know it was faulty? Where is the evidence in that? I see 3 possible reasons why this accident happened:
1) The claymore was pointed the wrong way
2) The safety distances were not respected
3) A claymore low ordered and instead of cleaning it up they carried on with training and the fragments went off through sympathetic detonation.
All three of these could have been prevented if:
A) All firers were in shellscrapes in a safe distance away with PPE on.
B) All pers were in vehicles.
Now this isnt some arm chair general or monday quarterback talking, this is shit that is done by people who take range safety seriously.
$1:
To the point do you think the officer when presented with something unexpected like having his troops train on the claymore, he should have said no, do not train them I haven't been trained on it and I don't trust the RSO, ARSOs, or my WO who is trained on it to train my troops in a safe manner? Do not let my troops get some first hand experince using this, it will be safer if they don't practice because I don't have personal experince.
Again No.
If he is commanded to train on something he is unfamiliar with he is obligated to become familiar with the subject matter. If that is not possible then he is obligated to cease training because he cannot ensure the training will be done safely.
Lastly so you dont come back like a fucking moron and say "But but but that's what the WO is for!" Yes the WO is there to advise the officer, but the key word is
advise. The officer still must make an informed decision, and if he wants to put all his faith in the WO not fucking up he has to wear the consequences when someone dies when the WO fucks up.
Lastly I can see by your posts you didnt make it very high up in the ranks, so please think before you make retarded comments like. "Officers are not responsible for decisions made by their subordinates."
![[B-o]](./images/smilies/drinkup.gif "Drink up")
CKA Super Elite 
