Go Back   Professional Soldiers > The Pipeline (Special Forces Training) > 18B

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-26-2015, 06:49   #16
MtnGoat
Quiet Professional
 
MtnGoat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Asscrackistan
Posts: 4,290
Quote:
Originally Posted by WarriorDiplomat View Post
The 18B needs to understand, Leadership, U.S. weapons, Marksmanship principles, tactics, defense, and equally important foreign tactics and weapon capabilities. IMHO a basic understanding of psychology and motivating factors. As a Weapons Sgt you will spend more time with indig than anyone else and will hear atmospherics daily that should end up in the daily sitrep.
Heck for me, I felt all of these were the JOB of everyone on the SFODA. I would argue with 18B and ODA members that "Didn't we all go through Small Unit Tactics (SUT)? So why can't or shouldn't we all know SUT TTPs and be able to teach them?" I argument was that "Are we not a ODA that can break down into 3-4 man Split teams to Command and Control (C2) Indigenous forces?
__________________
"Berg Heil"

History teaches that when you become indifferent and lose the will to fight someone who has the will to fight will take over."

COLONEL BULL SIMONS

Intelligence failures are failures of command [just] as operations failures are command failures.
MtnGoat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2015, 20:37   #17
WarriorDiplomat
Quiet Professional
 
WarriorDiplomat's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: C.S. Colorado
Posts: 1,727
Quote:
Originally Posted by MtnGoat View Post
Heck for me, I felt all of these were the JOB of everyone on the SFODA. I would argue with 18B and ODA members that "Didn't we all go through Small Unit Tactics (SUT)? So why can't or shouldn't we all know SUT TTPs and be able to teach them?" I argument was that "Are we not a ODA that can break down into 3-4 man Split teams to Command and Control (C2) Indigenous forces?
Thats exactly the way of thinking that makes an 18B seem irrelevant if he isn't an SME on these topics then who is? and why train and designate him as the detachment SME responsible for this? Every man should cross train and be familiar on everyone else's MOS of course being taught by the detachment SME. I was a former 12B I knew MDI, Demo Calcs, engineer recon tasks, battlefield shaping etc...as well as an 18C coming into SF but once I trained as an 18B I made sure I was a SME on Bravo expertise IAW the training, expectations, etc....that were my responsibility so that the other SME's could continue to be experts in their areas, being cross trained does not mean you take over someone else's MOS. Everyone should know basic 7-8/10 tactics and basic weapon employment and capabilities but not everyone on the ODA needs to be constantly up and researching the latest and greatest tactical and weapons knowledge when they have their own MOS's to be the experts of.

As far as SUT I can tell you after 3 yrs of teaching everyone from former, RI's, Regiment, Infantry etc....that it is a perishable skill. As simple as an enroute rally point is easily forgotten or how to cross an LDA and the thinking behind it the actual why. Someone should be responsible for the Institutional expertise and it should be that 18B. Should the team be able to teach basic infantry TTP's? yes at a minimum and be prepared to work as a split? yes. Hence the 2 of each MOS as our doctrine calls for split team operations and normally the 18C if split into smaller elements should be the next advisor in that respect in line. And no for you future 18B's Ranger school does not teach you tactics and in fact many Ranger tabbed guys barely know them cadre observation but it does add weight to your opinion with those who recognize it of course those are assumptions and have nothing to do with actual knowledge or capability just a reality of the Army.

Last edited by WarriorDiplomat; 01-27-2015 at 20:50.
WarriorDiplomat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2015, 13:21   #18
MtnGoat
Quiet Professional
 
MtnGoat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Asscrackistan
Posts: 4,290
Quote:
Originally Posted by WarriorDiplomat View Post
Thats exactly the way of thinking that makes an 18B seem irrelevant if he isn't an SME on these topics then who is? and why train and designate him as the detachment SME responsible for this? Every man should cross train and be familiar on everyone else's MOS of course being taught by the detachment SME. I was a former 12B I knew MDI, Demo Calcs, engineer recon tasks, battlefield shaping etc...as well as an 18C coming into SF but once I trained as an 18B I made sure I was a SME on Bravo expertise IAW the training, expectations, etc....that were my responsibility so that the other SME's could continue to be experts in their areas, being cross trained does not mean you take over someone else's MOS. Everyone should know basic 7-8/10 tactics and basic weapon employment and capabilities but not everyone on the ODA needs to be constantly up and researching the latest and greatest tactical and weapons knowledge when they have their own MOS's to be the experts of.

As far as SUT I can tell you after 3 yrs of teaching everyone from former, RI's, Regiment, Infantry etc....that it is a perishable skill. As simple as an enroute rally point is easily forgotten or how to cross an LDA and the thinking behind it the actual why. Someone should be responsible for the Institutional expertise and it should be that 18B. Should the team be able to teach basic infantry TTP's? yes at a minimum and be prepared to work as a split? yes. Hence the 2 of each MOS as our doctrine calls for split team operations and normally the 18C if split into smaller elements should be the next advisor in that respect in line. And no for you future 18B's Ranger school does not teach you tactics and in fact many Ranger tabbed guys barely know them cadre observation but it does add weight to your opinion with those who recognize it of course those are assumptions and have nothing to do with actual knowledge or capability just a reality of the Army.
I think we are saying the same thing. I guess I'm saying everyone on the SFODA needs to be able to teach SUT, know SUT Tactics and TTPs. Like you said, it is a perishable skill. I just felt like ODAs were or had become to MOS centric, were if it wasn't in their job or MOS they didn't care to learn about.
__________________
"Berg Heil"

History teaches that when you become indifferent and lose the will to fight someone who has the will to fight will take over."

COLONEL BULL SIMONS

Intelligence failures are failures of command [just] as operations failures are command failures.
MtnGoat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2015, 16:41   #19
WarriorDiplomat
Quiet Professional
 
WarriorDiplomat's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: C.S. Colorado
Posts: 1,727
Quote:
Originally Posted by MtnGoat View Post
I think we are saying the same thing. I guess I'm saying everyone on the SFODA needs to be able to teach SUT, know SUT Tactics and TTPs. Like you said, it is a perishable skill. I just felt like ODAs were or had become to MOS centric, were if it wasn't in their job or MOS they didn't care to learn about.
Agreed we are definitely saying the same thing MG
WarriorDiplomat is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:41.



Copyright 2004-2019 by Professional Soldiers
Site Designed, Maintained, & Hosted by Hilliker Technologies