Some more thoughts on MVT and the III rifleman...

[Diz]

As we are discussing all these testing protocols, and comparing them to military standards, I wanted to point out that what "max" is doing with his III Rifleman qual is more akin to a "ranger" or "airborne" (or perhaps SF) tab, than it is to a rifleman's qualification, at least in military terms. The rifleman's qualification badges are purely for shooting ability, not field skills. So this patch is an all-encompassing qualification, using the word "rifleman" within the context of an all-around irregular soldier, not just marksmanship ability. While this is commendable, we also have to be careful, lest we just chase these quals for the prestige rather than the required skill sets. In my case, I always wanted to be "dual qual'd" (jump wings and scuba bubble) because of the prestige involved. Never mind all the hard light infantry skills that truly made up the Reconassaince Marine; you wanted those badges on your chest. Everyone says, no, no, no, that's not why I'm doing it, but I'm gonna call bulshit on the play and say, yes, it probably is.

Think about this whole concept of a national organization, where you get a "rifleman's" patch for showing your competence in the field. What is this truly for? Ostensibly to let adjoining cells know they can "depend" on the qualities of one another, should they ever be thrown into battle together. Hmmm. OK. Why not do this sort of thing at a local level, versus some big national wick-up? Not that having some sort of core skill sets wouldn't be a bad idea, but I would also submit that "Robby Redneck" and "Suburban Sam" are gonna have totally different T,T,P's for operating in entirely different terrain. Not everyone is gonna skip out to the boonies and join your light infantry company. So besides all the emphasis on "green ops" skills, you need to consider "black ops" skills for "rattenkrieg" as the Krauts called it. If you are not truly planning on hitting the boonies as an insurgent, then this qual is just an ego stroke for you, and a way for "max" and the III percenters to make a buck.

Another thing that is really important and COULD be coordinated at a national level, although you could also argue this is more for the local, is IFF measures. The III percenter patches need to be made for easy identification, both visual and IR. So I am talking about something fairly hi-viz for day time, and something in IR glint for low light. In a confused, busy battlespace, having a quick way to ID like-minded individuals would help prevent blue-on-blue firefights. So this is something that I think is equally important, along with running challenges and passwords. SO, if I wuz gonna make any kind of patch at all, it would be for this purpose, not to signify battlefield competence. Not that this isn't important, I'd just rather not be shot, than admired. Some kind of easily recognized "flag" patch.

At the end of the day, I would rather have a "tab" that signified my unit. It would be up to the rest of the community to decide what kind of weight that carries. As you train up your group, those that meet the training standards are awarded the tab. Now you could have different colors to signify different levels, or even rank, but at least you would know that person has a certain minimum level of competence. The "core standards" could be coordinated on a national level, with training guidelines and so forth, but the actual training and testing would be done on a local level.

What I would really like to see is a network of trainers, like "max", "Mosby", J.C. Dodge, and our own Dedicated Pro, and Sierra12, who coordinate their training standards through the III percenters and make this available on a regional level for everyone. After the core subjects with these guys, you add in your specific skill sets and then award your own tabs. That's my 2c.

[Patriotic Sheepdog]

Good two cents....well thought out Diz.

[Diz]

I am just as guilty as anyone. I coveted those badges when I was active duty. Even though the guys that wore them would say they don't mean anything, as far as your actual competence in the field goes. While my mind would agree with that, my ego still wanted the recognition they brung.

[Erick]

I'll throw my 2 cents in here:

"Riflemen" is a assigned slot or skill or most armies that doe not necessarily refer just to skill with rifle.
When you look at the Army's TO in the Infantry Squad you see dots designated as "Riflemen".
And it means Infantryman.

He could have just as easily chosen "Infantryman" as the title of course but I feel that "Rifleman" works fine.

One note here. All of us are type A personalities.
or we wouldnt be here right?

Those who are blue chip trainers like mosby, Max and Mason Dixon, are also very much A personalities.

As a result it will always be difficult to achieve perfect coordination among them, thats just the nature of the beast, but as long as all are striving for some kind of standard that is a good thing.

As for me when I am in a situation and I see someone wearing just the basic MVT graduation patch it ups my confidence in that person.
Once this new patch comes out even more. of course.

Folks who dont need these patches such as big mil tabbed folks do not need these patches to be recognized and thats ok.

There are some very very competent .civs out there though who get an opportunity to get some kind of recognition for an Infantry type achievement.

And IMO its a good thing they get the opportunity.

[Diz]

You make a good point here Erick. I don't mean to be pissing in everyone's cheerios here. It's just that I've seen what happens you have "quals" and "non-quals". People being who they are, and egos being what they are, you can get wrapped up in doing these things, all for the wrong reasons. I don't want some young hot-shot with a qual badge beside me, if he's only there for the recognition or whatever, and folds under combat conditions.

But to your point, a civilian who has never had the opportunity to serve and earn anything like this, does get an opportunity from Max and others to earn something similar. And that's fine. As long as you don't go overboard the other way, and get the big head.

[panzer0170]

Nov 26, 2014 9:59:08 GMT -5 Diz said:

You make a good point here Erick. I don't mean to be pissing in everyone's cheerios here. It's just that I've seen what happens you have "quals" and "non-quals". People being who they are, and egos being what they are, you can get wrapped up in doing these things, all for the wrong reasons. I don't want some young hot-shot with a qual badge beside me, if he's only there for the recognition or whatever, and folds under combat conditions.

But to your point, a civilian who has never had the opportunity to serve and earn anything like this, does get an opportunity from Max and others to earn something similar. And that's fine. As long as you don't go overboard the other way, and get the big head.

I sat through some boring stuff the other week for youth organisation that I'm working with (the Air Training Corps - It's similar to an RAF version of the ROTC... ISH) and one of the things they went through in a *yawn* health and safety presentation was 'Do you want experience, or do you want qualifications?' After some discussion, we came to the decision that actually, it needs to be a bit of both. As long as we all remember that, I think this is a good system for getting those qualifications.

It's possible to be in a firefight and not even have a gun, and still survive - does this make you better than the man who has the qualification? well, actually, maybe. If they lack experience and they freeze. The combination at least allows some sort of measure of skills. There are people who serve with semi-elite units that really haven't done much, and there are people who are PURE grunt infantry, no fancy badges or qualifications who've got a whole lot more experience working in a 'war' environment.

[Diz]

Good points. For those of us from a military perspective, we've seen the badges, wings, n things, and know this can mean a lot, or not at all. From a civilian perspective, having some kind of recognition sounds real good, on the face of it, but again, it can mean a lot, or nothing at all.

Panzer is so right. I have met guys with all the badges who were complete nit-wits. Then again I have met those same guys who were the real deal. And then, I have met guys without any wing n things who really knew their shit. It really comes down to the individual.

The problem I have with the concept is this. You get the III percent rifleman qual. But you don't do any of the sustainment training. You could be totally out of shape or forgot half the stuff you learned by the time I see you and we link up. How do I really know if it means anything or not? By the same token, you have a former military guy who supposedly knows his stuff. What if he is also totally out of shape and not ready to dance? This is why I am dubious of any patch or whatever on a national level. I think this kind of thing needs to be on a local level, where you can see for yourself who truly knows what he's doing before the festivities start.

This is a problem I see with the various instructors out there. Unless you've taken a class from them, and they know what you're about, they really don't give much credence to your claims of knowing what you're doing. So you take a class or two from them, and now you're one of the boys. But if there's no sustainment program involved, at a local level, then you may or may not know what you're doing when the time comes.

There is only one instructor I ever saw who actually addressed the sustainment issue (Bill Murray). After you took a class from him, he had monthly "re-qual" days, where you could come back to the range, work on your skill sets, and network with others. He also kept a training log of all this where you could actually document your training time.

So if you worked in a sustainment program along with your initial qual, this would actually mean something. Again up to the individual. Are you truly striving to learn this stuff, or are you just wanting to earn a badge?

[hudson5969]

Good and interesting points.

From a NON-MILITARY perspective: I remember back in the old "militia movement" days when national quals and standardized lists of skills were being made (and let's face it, some of those lists were rather asinine, given that you weren't training for a living). But here you go, you went with a national qual systems, got your "tab".

You move, and want to get in with a local group. "Oh, we use [Y] qual set, because we think [X] qual set that you used is BS, for [W] reason." Your tab means nothing.

A guy moves to town, and wants to join your group. He has tabs from the same qual system you use. Beside the question of maintaining skills or not, there is the question of did this guy earn them, or buy them from the flea market from aguy who did earn them and is disenchanted with the whole "movement"?

While the easy answer is that you will find out quickly when training with them, what if they are joining "the cause" once things are under way? Smart money would be to take him as a raw boot, and hence the tabs really mean nothing. Might as well show up with his Boy Scout tabs he earned 30 years ago.

I don't know that there is a good answer save treat all new people as rookies until proven otherwise, and if you are the new guy, expect to have to earn your respect. Beyond that, your tabs are pretty decorations.

[Erick]

- Sustainment training is certainly a problem.

but at least what a badge does is force you to learn the stuff at least once.

Which also means, while you may not remember the a more complex stuff come SHTF (say a lay-up patrol base or a proper ambush) but if you have a tab (or one like it) I can at least trust you to do fire and movement properly and to generally hit what your aiming at at least some of the time.

And isnt this our minimum standard for basic Infantry at the junior enlisted level in the big .mil?

- Also human psychology being what it is , IMO it will motivate folks to train harder to earn it and thats also a good thing

[Diz]

Erick: see my post in the orig Mosby thread if you haven't already.

[eddiewouldclearhot]

I'm happy to see 'enter a clear a room' on there, as i think rural ops are preferable, i think urban ops are unavoidable. the future of this style of warfare lies in the cities, towns and villages, as you cannot discount centers of gravity.

Mosby's approach is obviously geared toward a rural fight, although it is broadly applicable. You have to start somewhere, and testing is the BEST way to ensure learning and progress.

[panzer0170]

I think enter and clear a room is a damned necessary skill. Be that a shed on a farm or not.

Hell, if there's not many in your 'group', you may find that to patrol, every time you come back it might be WORTH clearing your own Homestead.