No you automatically become a E-4 when you graduate Ranger School regardless of TIS or TIG requirements though he would be lat promoted to Corporal. I already touched on part of the stigma above. 1. Import NCOs were not Privates and did not go through the hardships of being a Private. This is a selection in itself, so they basically cheated the system. If everybody goes to Ranger School as part of the pipeline than nobody was a Private. 2. Import NCOs take up a leadership slot and often don't know what they are doing. It's a steep learning curve. If a E-5 can come to Battalion and just be a Joe than he can be mentored like how Privates use to be. Under this system E-4 and E-5s could just be shooters while a senior E-5 would be a BTL and your ATL would be a E-6. I think they actually wanted E-8 PSGs and such as well, but didn't want to fight the DA on promoting guys that didn't have PSG time ie E-7s would only have SL time. It would effectively destroy the stigma imports have, have more mature, better payed soldiers, and more experience leaders at every level. I really can't see why anybody would not see this as a good thing.
Army Times: SOF unleashed on the world
- Thread starter goon175
- Start date
I imagine ATL is Assistant Team Leader, but what does BTL mean?
Alpha Team Leader and Bravo Team Leader...
Thanks, this clears it up. But is it not a little unusual to have a Squad with such an official grade structure?
I can undestand it randomly happenin in practice, but making a Table of Organisation where the 2 (fire?) teams have leaders of different rank is kind of odd isnt it?
I dare say that maybe part of the problem is attempting to keep the oprganisational nomenclature ( in lack of a better term) of an infantry unit, while actually this is no longer the main purpose of the unit?
I can undestand it randomly happenin in practice, but making a Table of Organisation where the 2 (fire?) teams have leaders of different rank is kind of odd isnt it?
I dare say that maybe part of the problem is attempting to keep the oprganisational nomenclature ( in lack of a better term) of an infantry unit, while actually this is no longer the main purpose of the unit?
I may be even more confused now...
So someone could join the Army fresh off of Easy Street, go through boot camp and Ranger School (do you mean the TRADOC "Ranger School" or RASP?) and be promoted to E-4? If that's the case, I don't see how it would provide a better and more experienced soldier to the Regiment. It seems like all it would do is increase the rank held by members of that unit. And would everyone that completes Ranger School be promoted, even guys from big Army? It seems like it would create an atmosphere of "instant NCOs" without the experience and credibility to back it up. There would still be those NCOs that came in from big Army that would appear with experiences and habits (both good and bad) that would still influence the unit.
So someone could join the Army fresh off of Easy Street, go through boot camp and Ranger School (do you mean the TRADOC "Ranger School" or RASP?) and be promoted to E-4? If that's the case, I don't see how it would provide a better and more experienced soldier to the Regiment. It seems like all it would do is increase the rank held by members of that unit. And would everyone that completes Ranger School be promoted, even guys from big Army? It seems like it would create an atmosphere of "instant NCOs" without the experience and credibility to back it up. There would still be those NCOs that came in from big Army that would appear with experiences and habits (both good and bad) that would still influence the unit.
Yes, he means TRADOC's Ranger School. In Regiment, you are automatically promoted to E-4 after completion, in the big army you are eligible for E-5 immediately, as long as you meet TIS requirements.
Brill
SOF Support
Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't Ranger school actually a leadership school?
https://www.benning.army.mil/infantry/rtb/WBAR.html
https://www.benning.army.mil/infantry/rtb/WBAR.html
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2010
- Messages
- 2,186
That's one of the saving graces for non-combat arms guys coming into SF, and for 18Xs. They have awhile to go before they are actually in a leadership position within the team. Hell, I was a team leader when I started the Q-Course. I got promoted to E-6 in the course, but I was at the bottom all over again when I got to my team- both in rank and in title.
Well to be serious, 18x's come off the street and almost instantaneously make E-5, and with little team time make E-6. SEALs come off the street and complete BUD/S and SQT within a year and are automatically promoted to Petty Officer. Yes, guys would make Corporal quickly. And hell they'd make E-5 probably around the rate they do now. Difference being is they would be a shooter all that time, but be held to a higher standard of responsibility. There would be no hey you're a Private. It'd be you're a fucking NCO act like it or get RFSed. Quite frankly, being a Corporal has more to do with putting a guy on equal footing as a E-5 shooter. Having E-5 shooters means having lots of experience and having a bigger recruiting pool as Etype talked about. You're talking about guys that we're team leaders in the regular Army that now will go back to being a Joe. Or even non-combat arms that can now integrate into a team. You're a 76LO2 and want to come to Battalion? Cool, go through RASP and Ranger School and we'll put you on a fireteam as an E-5 and you'll have nothing to worry about. As far as experience for new guys, you're talking about nearly a year of schooling just to be operational. The e-4 deal is a regular Army thing. If you're in 82nd and go to Ranger School immediately you will be automatically promoted to E-4 and highly likely be a TL as soon as possible.
Likewise, I made E5 at the beginning of the 18D course and E6 about 1/2 through my first rotation - which occurred right after graduation. Despite being an E5/6 I was the junior medic and told to sit down and STFU and learn.
It takes time to become a leader.
Crip
I apologize for this thread going completely off track.
But to clarify CSM Merrits comments, his proposed pipeline in order to justify the higher rank from the get-go was as follows:
-BCT/AIT
-Airborne School
-Pre RASP
-RASP
-SURT
-Ranger School
-WLC
-One additional skill set (such as one of the following: master breacher, EMT-I, SERE, master driver, Ranger Language Program, etc.)
-Go to battalion.
This would be the pipeline for those that go out on target (11 series, 13F, 68W, 25C/U). The 13F, 68W, and 25 series would not have the additional skill set requirement at the end, as they already have additional training after RASP.
This creates an environment where the Ranger can go to the unit and learn and train with his unit, and become proficient as a unit, without having to spend large amounts of time away from the unit for things like Ranger School. The way he explained his "vision" was that even though the baseline rank was higher, you still answered to someone. I think his specific wording was "just because you are both the same rank, doesn't mean you are both wearing that green leader tab on your shoulder". So, the hallmark discipline that Regiment is known for would still be there. Retention would increase. Morale would increase. RFS packets would dramatically drop. I really think it is a win-win-win situation. As I said before, Regiment has undergone some huge changes in the past few years, and I think for those who know about and have seen these changes, this idea is really not that far-fetched, and was brought up by the CSM for good reason. Of course there will always be resistance to change, but hey, there was resistance to guys getting SDAP and demo pay, but that is in place now as well.
But to clarify CSM Merrits comments, his proposed pipeline in order to justify the higher rank from the get-go was as follows:
-BCT/AIT
-Airborne School
-Pre RASP
-RASP
-SURT
-Ranger School
-WLC
-One additional skill set (such as one of the following: master breacher, EMT-I, SERE, master driver, Ranger Language Program, etc.)
-Go to battalion.
This would be the pipeline for those that go out on target (11 series, 13F, 68W, 25C/U). The 13F, 68W, and 25 series would not have the additional skill set requirement at the end, as they already have additional training after RASP.
This creates an environment where the Ranger can go to the unit and learn and train with his unit, and become proficient as a unit, without having to spend large amounts of time away from the unit for things like Ranger School. The way he explained his "vision" was that even though the baseline rank was higher, you still answered to someone. I think his specific wording was "just because you are both the same rank, doesn't mean you are both wearing that green leader tab on your shoulder". So, the hallmark discipline that Regiment is known for would still be there. Retention would increase. Morale would increase. RFS packets would dramatically drop. I really think it is a win-win-win situation. As I said before, Regiment has undergone some huge changes in the past few years, and I think for those who know about and have seen these changes, this idea is really not that far-fetched, and was brought up by the CSM for good reason. Of course there will always be resistance to change, but hey, there was resistance to guys getting SDAP and demo pay, but that is in place now as well.
J
JJ sloan
Guest
Ok, this makes much more sense to me. I thought the intention was to recruit from the ranks of the existing Army, which I think would seriously degrade the Regiment. To send Rangers through a pipeline like the rest of SOF is a much more credible proposal. The year I spent in Batallion prior to going to Ranger School was pure hell but I was ready. The only problem I see with this proposal is that the graduation rate for batt boys will likely take a turn for the worst. However, shitbags will be weeded out in the pipeline rather than burdening NCOs in the battalions with that job.
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2010
- Messages
- 2,186
They usually make E-5 at the end of the Q-Course, which is about 2 years into their military service.
Ah ok, I should have lead with that! I can definately see what were concerned with now, I agreee that recruiting solely from the ranks of the army vs. homegrown would be a serious degredation of the force. I think it would allow for those exceptional performers to get in, but would still like to see the majority start their career in batt. Yeah, the graduation rate will go down, but everyone will know that they aren't in batt. yet, so I don't think it will reflect badly on the Regiment. Having to deal with less RFS packets not only makes for better continuity in the squad and platoon, but it also makes for less personal time being used up by that TL or SL who has to stay after work getting everything ready to make his case. Everyone is still pretty damn busy these days, and the more time the guys can spend at home with their families, the better.
Interesting I've heard stories of guys getting promoted in the Q and arriving at their teams and getting promoted again soon after. Still quite quick.
This kind of goes into the topic I was writing about at an earlier thread. About the US Army not having a "middle ground" Direct action unit between 75th and CAG. If we had a unit more along the lines of SASR, the Army would retain some of its best shooters who just don't have what it takes to be in CAG (which is like 90% + of us).
The smokings will continue until morale improves!
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2010
- Messages
- 2,186
They still have to meet the TIS requirements that big army imposes, 18Xs with non-D MOS spend a couple years on a team as an E-5.
Brill
SOF Support
Total thread derailment but it went JUST like this:
USAF MSgt stops by my desk this morning: "Hey man, the IG folks will be stopping by here but they're going to set up times to talk to individuals later today."
Me: "Ok cool."
They stop by get a brief about my desk (not by me of course) and I wait...wait...wait...wait...
1530..."Hey, what's the deal with the IG?" "Oh, they're done and they left."
F me very much.
The icing on the cake...my supervisor denied my Military Leave for some Guard training in Feb. So now I'm going to be AWOL. Sweet!!!
Back to your regularly scheduled thread.
I was not aware of that. Learned something new; I'll take the rest of the week off.
This makes a little more sense to me. I had heard that the 18 series of MOSs results in promotions upon completions, but I didn't know 1) that other schools had the same thing and 2) Rangers went through as much training before they went their battalions.
The Corps has nothing like this that I've ever heard of. There was a "contract corporal" system back in the 80s where if you joined for 6 years in certain high-need MOSs, you'd be guaranteed automatic promotion to Corporal at the 18 month mark, but it died (thankfully) a pretty quick death.
Similar threads
