# 75th: More RASP grads needed.



## Tropicana98 (Sep 7, 2011)

Didn't see it posted...not sure how groundbreaking any of this info really is.

Article


----------



## TLDR20 (Sep 7, 2011)

Sidenote on the article was interesting though. They are giving NCO's a new identifier for serving in Regiment.


----------



## Ranger Psych (Sep 7, 2011)

Interesting that they're forcing Re-qual for senior NCO's and officers at RASP II now.


----------



## goon175 (Sep 7, 2011)

It's a no-shit re-assesment as well. SSG's and SFC's have not been given the go ahead since this started, so it's not just a check the block type thing. Glad to see the new identifier, as there certainly is a difference between someone in Regiment and someone in a conventional unit with two of the same schools under their belt. I'm curious to see where this transformation in assesment/selection/training ends up, when I left they were talking about adding follow on schools for after RASP, but prior to showing up at Batt., I wonder if that is still in the works.


----------



## Ranger Psych (Sep 7, 2011)

I would assume that would be more along the lines of E-3 to E-5 specifically Ranger and maybe Jumpmaster.  There are great people outside of Regiment, who for one reason or another are not able to do either depending on where they are... and if they choose to try, and make the cut at RASP to have a shot at either prior to assignment within Regiment... it would mean that wherever they ended up, they would be better for it.  Even if it was a stipulation of being assigned to Regiment as hooah high would most definately be.... just having gone and passed RASP would give a good education for them to be able to do things better outside of Regiment.

I personally think the "re-qual" with RASP II is great.


----------



## Brill (Sep 7, 2011)

Is this the same for the intel guys with the RSTB?


----------



## dknob (Sep 7, 2011)

interesting..

50-60 percent graduating from 2005 to 2009?? is that some kind of joke? that's nothing short of lowering the standards.


----------



## Lee175 (Sep 8, 2011)

I don't really understand the pre-RASP idea. Either you can fucking cut it in Regiment or you can't. Don't baby people, it's a selection source, it IS there to weed out turds. Here let's give you a course to help you pass selection. It's 2 months suck it the fuck up. Why have something good then take a dump on it. Shit like this aggravates me. What Regiment needs to do is heighten the standard and get back to a 70% attrition rate and throw in some extra schooling after RASP for more training prior to arriving at your Bat. I guess it costs less when you can have ol' TL/SL train a guy for a several months, versus a formal school for that run by RTD.


----------



## 275ANGER! (Sep 8, 2011)

Lee175 said:


> I don't really understand the pre-RASP idea. Either you can fucking cut it in Regiment or you can't. Don't baby people, it's a selection source, it IS there to weed out turds. Here let's give you a course to help you pass selection. It's 2 months suck it the fuck up. Why have something good then take a dump on it. Shit like this aggravates me. What Regiment needs to do is heighten the standard and get back to a 70% attrition rate and throw in some extra schooling after RASP for more training prior to arriving at your Bat. I guess it costs less when you can have ol' TL/SL train a guy for a several months, versus a formal school for that run by RTD.



Amen Brother.

One thing I believe that should be done is changing the rank structure of Regiment. Bump it up by one, making the TL a SSG, SFC a SL, and MSG a PSG. So Regiment would essentially be filled with a good mix of SGT's instead of SPC4's. They are "kinda" sending guys to Ranger School after RASP which automatically makes them a SPC4 upon graduation. Some time-in-grade and maybe a couple of intermediate skill set courses and a Regiment run WLC in the mix, should bump guys to SGT. This way it opens more opportunities for guys to stay in Regiment longer. They already sort of do it for Officers. Majority of the PL's are CPTs and CO's are Majors. The new SQI should help in accomplishing this.

Expand RTD to house more development courses, something like JFKSWCS. Don't know if they still do it but there was a one week Battalion Leadership Course developed for tabbed SPC4's and cherry SGT's. The classes were taught by E-7s and above, it encompassed a lot of stuff that was specific to Regiment and covered some basic WLC crap. Some of the stuff I learned helped me understand our operations better and made me a better TL.


----------



## goon175 (Sep 8, 2011)

Along with that 50-60 percent grad rate came historically high RFS rates.

275Anger!, the RSM talked about the rank structure a bit, saying they wanted the minimum rank to be spc, but not limit SGT's to just leadership positions, BTL a SGT, ATL a SSG, and SL a SSG. Someone asked about basically the same thing you were proposing above with the SFC's and above, and the answer was basically they don't want to deal with the D. of the Army  on senior NCO promotions. So I think there is some headway being made in that respect. certainly that identifier is a help.

I really like the idea of a JFKSWCS-type school house being started, as this will open up more non-deployable positions from within Regiment, which may keep that SSG with 8 deployments under his belt think twice about getting out.

The main thing that I think needs to happen, is more carefully select the guys graduating RASP, and then our TL's and SL's aren't wasting there time with RFS packets. Anyone who has ever been in Regiment has seen it, if there is a period where they push people through, it just means more RFS packets, not more Rangers who stay for the long run.


----------

