Enhanced IRT

[Spotting Bad Guys]

I heard a story yesterday from a mate of mine currently employed at Honington, regarding something called 'Enhanced IRT'.

This is apparently a mandatory two-week pre-deployment course for those deploying to Iraq. Anyone done it? I'm told it doesn't replace IDT etc...it is yet another add-on. Comments please.

SBG

[StopStart]

I think there's a reduced course for those of us that go there frequently and relatively briefly (weeks rather than months)......

Doesn't stop it all being pretty much a total waste of both ours and the Regt's time though. Nice empire building/job creation scheme for someone too.

[Spotting Bad Guys]

Hmmm. I thought that might be the case. Clearly in these times of overstretch we can afford to keep pulling people from their primary duties to be 'trained'.....

Spoke to my mate again today; one of the 'training scenarios' he related was a vehicle ambush. Picture the scene: a couple of trucks full of your average RAF servicemen/women, no training prior to the event. Bounced by the staff, and choas ensues (unsurprisingly). Right royal bollocking by staff for poor performance....net training value? Zero.

Having been subject to the IDT and IRT 'creep' over the past few years, I can see how the opportunity would have been grabbed by the Regt heirarchy, who seem clearly intent on turning us into gunners! Look at the way the aircrew being rained to perform minefield clearance/mine detection duties was trumpeted in the RAF News...... if there was ever a case of a mususe of expensive, highly trained personnel!!!! Or is it just that the Regt are trying to further justify their existence?

SBG

[JessTheDog]

Hmm...

If the MoD in its infinite wisdom decides to cut the infantry and realises the hard way some time later that this was unwise, where does anyone think that the required bodies for "low intensity" operations are going to come from?

I would not believe for one minute that, just because one wears a blue suit, one is exempt from the Cyprus/Northern Ireland type of tours that capbadges such as the Royal Artillery and Royal Engineers have supported for years.

So in future, hardship tours will be followed by harmony tours from which frequent deployment as augmentees will be the norm.

I'm glad I got my PVR in early!

One further thought:

If you add on this enhanced IRT to the normal pre-deployment kerfuffle - medical checks, the new 4-week PT package, picking up kit, clearing, handing over secondary duties or getting stung for a last shot as guard/guard commander, getting some leave in if possible to say bye bye to spouse and kids, taking earlier-than-required AT to get into theate before the start attachment date etc. then that adds to both the burden on the individual and the burden on the losing unit.

In my last job I would not expect to see any of my lot for at least a month before departing and for at least a month after returning, taking a 4 month det to a 6 month det. Of course I could have turned down or cut back leave, but who in their right mind would do a thing like that?

Finally, do you still have to ensure you are in-date CCS until the end of your det, or have the powers-that-be realised that perhaps IDT/IRT may suffice to extend the CCS expire date?

[BEagle]

How did it all go so horribly wrong?

God, but life was fine in the V-force.....

[DuckDodgers]

Ambush drills, contact drills etc are already covered on the IDT package at my humble location which lasts 3 days, IRT was/is still theatre specific briefs.

Given that we, those in JHC, were recently told by CAS that he no-longer considers us part of the RAF, then one has to ask why do we still do all this?

[Spotting Bad Guys]

So do you do the same training if you deploy to Al Udeid? Slightly lower risk of ambush there. I'd suggest....


SBG

[L J R]

You might find that the enhanced IRT is really designed for those who are going into an enhanced level of danger. Not really applicable to the 3 beers a day camp of AUD (Bx, Pizza Hut swimming pool et al.)

[Dancing Bear]

And there was me thinking IRT was Instrument Rating Test, well, well, well..................

[Vidal]

Just done the IRT + / Enhanced IRT cse. Good value to be honest.

I don't intend to use alot of the skills/knowledge taught to me in theatre and in fact alot of it was previously covered material (always nice to get a refresher though). However, if it does go Pete Tong out there and I'm on the recieving end I'll be alot happier that I have a GREATER (but not necessarily great) chance of sorting it out to the extent that I can come out onto the other side in one piece.

No, alot of us aren't rock apes and this course isn't designed to make you one, but for the guys at higher risk it's well worth the time. As for taking you away from your primary task? Well surely everyones real primary task is more important in theatre - if you need 2 weeks extra training to apply the skills of your specialisation in an op environment safely then surely that isn't such a hardship?

[StopStart]

It is if you have to go thru the same old frigmarole every time you go on det! Having done 5 dets in theatre in the last 18 months (and lots of people have done lots more than that) I can safely IDT/IRT has nothing to offer except giving me one or two less to get sh*t together before going on det again.

Sorry guys, but for those of us who go there frequently it is a hinderance and a pain in the backside. When it reaches the stage that this IRT/IDT nause takes precedence over flying training and quals then someone has truly lost the plot.

Sure, first time out there go do all the trg. You'll only do it all again when you get in theatre but hey it's all good practice. But for the third, fourth and fifth times? Get real. Tail wagging the dog. As is fast becoming the norm these days.

[QuidProQuo]

Speaking to some mates who have just done the enhanced IRT course (aircrew and ground branches) they all said the course was good value and set them up well for their forthcoming dets.

But let's get this into context. The enhanced course is only for those who will routinely operating outside of a "safe" area. So, if you are flying in/out of Basrah/Al Udeid/Bahrain, you don't need to do it. But if you are wandering around outside of Basrah, going to Bagdhad etc, you will do the course. At the end of the day, the insurgents don't care a stuff if you are aircrew - a pair of wings will not stop the bullet - and if you are likely to be "out and about", some extra training may come in handy!

Sure, there are some anomolies to sort out, such as CCS currency but I think you will find that most people believe that we ALL need basic military skills - flying an aircraft does not exempt you.

[StopStart]

QPQ
Indeed, I quite agree, flying does not exempt you from doing it. However someone does need to get a grip of the realities of the situation. The IDT/IRT package is all jolly splendid for those heading out there for the first time. What continues to grip me is the requirement to do it again and again purely because the system can't cope with the fact that some of us goes there so frequently. That "requirement" is a burden we could do without

Out of interest, how do your mates know that it has set them up well for their forthcoming dets? I'd suggest that the only thing it has set them up for is doing it again once they get into theatre

[16 blades]

QPQ,

How on earth are insurgents ever going to get anywhere near aircrew in Basrah, since when we're on det there:

1. We don't go out on patrol

2. We don't go anywhere in convoys

3. In fact, we don't leave the base at all

Come to think of it, when are:

1. Mine clearance drills

2. Barbed wire fence laying

3. Guarding and checkpoint procedures

4. Putting up a 12x12

.....EVER going to be of any use to crews deployed in BSR?

The whole show is a complete waste of time IMHO - an exercise in empire building by an obsolete branch. All the other stuff droned on about at these extravaganzas is simple common sense, which should be endemic to aircrew, and general stuff associated with operating OOA, which we in the AT world do all the time (nature of the job). The useful parts, like theatre-specific briefs, can be taken care of in an afternoon, or even a couple of hours, leaving us time to jump through all the other ever-narrowing hoops we have to in preparation for these dets - oh yes, and the small matter of training in our primary duty, getting the ticks and quals required for the det. Being able to operate the aircraft on ops is obviously secondary to knowing how to put up a 12x12 without scraping a nail.

Complete and utter, premier league, gold-plated bollox. And they wonder why people want to leave......

16B

[Gainesy]

What does IRT stand for? Is it what used to be GDT (Ground Defence Training)?

[Jacks Down]

I'm glad there is some rational debate (even informed comment, heaven help us!) on this thread. However, there is also the usual bleating about empire building, waste of effort blah blah blah. A few thoughts:

EIRT is designed for those people deploying to Iraq who will be routinely operating outside the wire (on the ground that is). In case any of the wingeing brigade haven't noticed, it's effing dangerous in Iraq at the moment. Showing your CCS certificate or brevet to a terrorist isn't going to get you very far. Some practical training in useful survival skills just might make a difference.

The EIRT course is being run with no extra resources or manpower - not much of an empire.

If you still think that this is all still a Regiment inspired way to fk people about then I don't fancy the prospect of serving alonside you, no matter how good you might be at your primary duty.

JD

[StopStart]

Again. I have no problem with an initial qualification nor should anyone else. But for god's sake, CCS, IDT, IRT and WHTs???? Every year?? And then again every time I go on det?? And two weeks of trying to turn everyone in gunners? How utterly, utterly pointless. As you quite rightly say, no insurgent is going to be impressed by my CCS certificate or brevet. Similarly, no IED will be impressed by my section battle drills and no mortar round impressed by my mess tin handling skills. I guess the suicide bomber might note that my webbing was looking tidy before he sent himself to paradise What cobblers. You do make one good point though -

Some practical training in useful survival skills just might make a difference.

Any chance then?

Combine all this crap into one targetted training package. One event per year. Provide a service/product that people will find useful and skills that people can employ whilst on det. Staying out in a tent in the UK is just pointless. Section battle drills are pointless.

Empires aren't always made by manpower chum - just make yourself "invaluable" and your empire will just grow in "importance" if not size.

PS. Thanks for the tip that it's dangerous out there: I thought the whistly bang things at night were just exuberant bats

[Jacks Down]

I accept your point that there are too many seperate packages required on an annual basis, and that this can produce a result which is disjointed, possibly duplicates itself, and is unecessarily time consuming. I therefore tend to agree with your 'one event every year' view.

However, back to the specific issue at hand: EIRT does not fall into this trap. It is a course designed to prepare for a specfic deployment. I would want all the training I could get before I went somewhere tasty, as long as it was reasonably in proportion to the threat I faced. Hopefully I wouldn't need to put any of it into practice, but if one lesson I was taught saved my skin then it would have been worthwhile.

By the way, your webbing should look tidy. You should look the part as a credible military person capable of producing a deterrent effect. The reason? If I am going to take on a bunch of airmen guarding something, I'm going to pick the ones who look ill-disciplined, under confident and ill trained, rather than the ones who look like they know how to handle themselves.

[JessTheDog]

By the way, your webbing should look tidy. You should look the part as a credible military person capable of producing a deterrent effect. The reason? If I am going to take on a bunch of airmen guarding something, I'm going to pick the ones who look ill-disciplined, under confident and ill trained, rather than the ones who look like they know how to handle themselves.

Is it not better tactically to look a bag of sh!t in case "they" decide to take on the ones who look as if they can handle themselves first? Better chance of running away!

On a more serious note, the mere fact that most officers could end up in charge of a location or formation which requires the erection of tents, mounting of sentries, clearing of mines, mounting of patrols etc means that said officers should have at least an inkling of what is involved.

[16 blades]

JD,

I think you've missed the point. Yes, all this training is useful to guys who are ground-based, and spend several months in theatre, are liable for guard / convoy duties, etc. I would even encourage it to a point, since the RAF does little in its day-to-day roles that teach basic military skills, as long as it's joined up and not repetition and overlap. However, I think what we are trying to say here is:

WHY THE F**K ARE AIRCREW BEING FORCED TO DO EIRT, OR EVEN REGULAR IRT IN ITS CURRENT FORM?

The argument about being 'multi-skilled' doesn't wash, as we are not eligible for guard / convoy / mine clearing / patrolling duties, and we already know how to survive - we have initial courses, backed up by annual, and 6-monthly CSAR BTRs which cover everything we need to know, apart from theatre specific briefs which, as I've already said, could be covered in an afternoon. And you will not come across aircrew 'standing around guarding something' or even wearing webbing (it is a flt safety hazard).

Our point is, we now spend our lives tick-chasing and dick-dancing so much in our primary duty that we have precious little time (and money) left over for meaningful training that may be of some use to us. The along comes someone else who makes us dick-dance even more, with largely pointless skills. I will, however, concede on the requirement for WHT as this seems to have a basis in law.

Jess,

NOT aircrew officers! (unless there in a different capacity)Therefore, waste of time.

16B