• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Dress and Deportment

Jarnhamar said:
That sounds pretty awesome but why do we do that? Is is like an infantry section or platoon adopting different formations on the move where the ships are adopting to different formations against threats or protecting different ships?

Yes-ish; there's a tactical element to that (as you said) but also a training element.  There is lots of math involved in those manoeuvres, and some of the "movements" orders (ie. speed changes) do have to be second-nature.  Fun fact:  Any picture you see of ships that are in close-ish proximity (so all photo ops, replenishment at sea, whatever) they're actually doing manoeuvres.

It's been a long time since I've done any of that, but part of the training element is recognizing when something isn't looking right and then correcting.  So say you're supposed to be moving from here to there and another ship is supposed to be ending up 45 degrees from you, so you're supposed to see certain aspects of her during the manoeuvre.  If that isn't what you're seeing, what is going on and what do you do to correct it?
 
Hamish Seggie said:
🤦‍♂️ The best way for a group to move from point A to point B is en masse. Doing drill. Not looking unorganized and like amateurs. I wanted to avoid saying this but if you don’t want to do drill or object to it vehemently then find another line of work.

Oh here we go, the "if you disagree with me then quit" comments. Real classy.

Eye In The Sky said:
I can't speak for the Fighter community, but the LRP community also has many "drill-like" procedures so we can do specific things at specific times in a specific order in the event we are under EMCON, as an example, and have to communicate with an aircraft that is replacing us.  These are extremely important from a tactical AND safety-of-flight perspective.  We have drills (procedures, checklists, CMIs)  on the aircraft for what to do if say, there is smoke in the cabin or flight deck or certain indicators are presenting on the RADAR system...stuff like that.

I don't want to be teaching someone the basics of the importance of why they need to 'react to the word of command' during a cabin fire on flight training.  I want them to have the discipline before they put a flight suit on. 

Skip the "walking around in unison" part and start by teaching them to react to words of command when you start training them to react to in-flight emergencies, and you'll attain the same effect without wasting any time marching up and down the parade square.

We don't need to do this whole coordinated walking thing to pre-train people for the training we're going to give them. They'll pick it up just fine if we just give them the training. And if we spend more time on that actual occupational training and less time on the ceremonial stuff, it'll be more effective.

Although there's another candidate for activities which fill the requirements that everyone's stating they think we need drill for (reacting to commands, performing things in sequence when required, etc). Weapons training. More time with the C7, less time on the parade square and we'll be better off, and weapons handling unlike walking around in sequence is actually relevant to warfare in the 21st century.

Then when people graduate basic, they can move on to their occupational training, and work on other stuff: turning a bunch of LAVs in formation, coordinating ship's movements, whatever else it is. It's not like the skills are transferable; learning a right wheel on the march doesn't actually prepare someone to do any of those things, beyond the fundamental "do something when you're told to", which can be taught in better more useful ways without walking around.
 
And I'll ask you again.  Have you ever, even for a day or a week, actually conducted recruit training?  Yes/No.  I'm seriously asking;  I would say "no" at this point, but I'd like you to confirm.
 
Real classy yes. You ignored the first part. Good job.

It seems you’ve made your mind up.

I beg to differ. Drill is a required skill in any armed force. Disagree if you must.

Good day sir.
 
Speaking only for myself as a wet behind the ears recruit, I believe drill aided in discipline by instilling habits of precision and response to the NCO’s orders.
 
Eye In The Sky said:
And I'll ask you again.  Have you ever, even for a day or a week, actually conducted recruit training?  Yes/No.  I'm seriously asking;  I would say "no" at this point, but I'd like you to confirm.

Recruit training, no. Latter stages of training, yes. And having done some of those latter stages, I think that a large chunk of the stuffthat was done in recruit training was largely useless in prepping people for further training.
 
Drill has been a part of day-to-day life in the military for literally millennia. 

From the Roman Centurion forming ranks with shields up and out, to today's drill decks with marching, saluting and so forth.

Why is it done?

There's been a number of mentions in this thread of the why, however, from my perspective, the instilling of discipline will lead to self discipline.  Doing it right when no-one else is watching is where we want our troops to be.

Lackadaisical drill on a parade deck does not necessarily confer lackadaisical drills in operations or operational tasks, but I will note that the young LS who I sent to be a member of the Cenotaph guard several years ago did a damn fine job up there, and did a damn fine job on the ship following the exacting procedures required to load and maintain the CIWS properly. 

The MS who couldn't follow a clearly laid out procedure for torpedo loading, and then couldn't even safely hoist one, and who walked away from his role as safety supervisor of a CANTASS launch - well...his personal drill was pretty much junk as observed on a parade or two, and his failures to follow procedures ended up with him receiving an IC.

Does good drill on a parade deck directly correlate to correctly following procedures in operational tasks?  Not necessarily, but in those two circumstances, yes.

How did those two sailors do in terms of following the 265 for dress?  Pretty good in both cases. 

In my professional opinion, the difference was personal motivation - the LS had it in spades, and the MS lost his a long time ago.

That LS is now a PO2...and the MS is still a MS. 


My point?  I think I got lost on the way here, but unless you were on the ground at that parade, you don't know the exact reasons why the troops were on parade in CADPAT - should they have been in 1A's?  Arguably, yes.  Why were they in CADPAT?  You'd have to ask the ADJ/RSM of the unit that drove that parade.  Someone made that decision - and it was done long before the photo was taken and posted online. 


Is there value in drill?  Yes.  A 74 step torpedo loading procedure must be followed precisely or you will end up shearing the bridge crane locking pin on the Friday before weapons certs.  Folding a flag over a casket properly takes almost as many steps, and is a damned important thing to get correct as well.  How do you learn to do both of those properly?  It starts with a leader giving an order to be followed...from a drill manual...and ends with the soldier/sailor/zoomie becoming an expert at their role, understanding the whole task, and then eventually becoming that leader giving an order themselves.
NS
 
gcclarke said:
Recruit training, no. Latter stages of training, yes. And having done some of those latter stages, I think that a large chunk of the stuffthat was done in recruit training was largely useless in prepping people for further training.

Recruit training and trades training are 2 different beasts.  You really see the difference when you work on BMQ and BMOQ more so than simply going thru that grinder as a candidate.

The need for basic teaching and assessment tools such as kit, quarters and drill are valid.  They lead to things like weapons handling, training and later, firing *in a controlled environment*.  Inspections are part of the toolkit and process...do you want someone to take live ammo and a weapon to a range, if they can't sort out a bed layout or if you say "lefttttttttttt.....turn!" and they constantly go to the right?  If they can't follow those directions...on a parade square...what makes me confident they will react properly if I say "unload!" on the range? 

Point - Basic is building blocks, that a large majority of people can get thru and learn the points;  discipline, teamwork and "don't quit".  That is the foundation that is being built.  If I tell you "I need to do 3 hours of drill with the course to get them up to speed"....do I need a fin code for that?  Nope.  But...I can make it (the extra drill) fit my main point with my recruits.  You have to perform strong as individuals to perform strong as a team. 

I'm with you on the "we shouldn't invest much time in drill/parades at operational units" etc, but having taught many Basic courses, and seeing the tools being used by staff such as drill and inspections to turn a group of 30 individuals into a team that starts to feed off their own success...well that is invaluable and pays off in dividends down the road during operations...where it REALLY counts.

But...the CAF really needs that foundation;  Basic does it and drill is more about the stuff I'm talking about, than it is the actual "stompy-stomp drill" part.  My  :2c:..

FWIW...the absolute longest parade practice I've ever seen was the Officer's graduation parade at CTC Gagetown.  They'd be on the parade square in front of the Battle Mall in August for a solid week, mounted and dismounted.  And that grad parade was usually extremely impressive. 
 
Eye In The Sky said:
Recruit training and trades training are 2 different beasts.  You really see the difference when you work on BMQ and BMOQ more so than simply going thru that grinder as a candidate.

The need for basic teaching and assessment tools such as kit, quarters and drill are valid.  They lead to things like weapons handling, training and later, firing *in a controlled environment*.  Inspections are part of the toolkit and process...do you want someone to take live ammo and a weapon to a range, if they can't sort out a bed layout or if you say "lefttttttttttt.....turn!" and they constantly go to the right?  If they can't follow those directions...on a parade square...what makes me confident they will react properly if I say "unload!" on the range? 

Point - Basic is building blocks, that a large majority of people can get thru and learn the points;  discipline, teamwork and "don't quit".  That is the foundation that is being built.  If I tell you "I need to do 3 hours of drill with the course to get them up to speed"....do I need a fin code for that?  Nope.  But...I can make it (the extra drill) fit my main point with my recruits.  You have to perform strong as individuals to perform strong as a team. 

I'm with you on the "we shouldn't invest much time in drill/parades at operational units" etc, but having taught many Basic courses, and seeing the tools being used by staff such as drill and inspections to turn a group of 30 individuals into a team that starts to feed off their own success...well that is invaluable and pays off in dividends down the road during operations...where it REALLY counts.

But...the CAF really needs that foundation;  Basic does it and drill is more about the stuff I'm talking about, than it is the actual "stompy-stomp drill" part.  My  :2c:..

FWIW...the absolute longest parade practice I've ever seen was the Officer's graduation parade at CTC Gagetown.  They'd be on the parade square in front of the Battle Mall in August for a solid week, mounted and dismounted.  And that grad parade was usually extremely impressive.

Aye,

And the psychological benefits of drill are well documented, scientifically.  Parade square drill is the basis that everything else is built off of.
 
There are two related, but separate, arguments here. The first is the value of drill, dress and deportment and the characteristics of people with poor drill, dress and deportment.

On the first argument, the argument against it seems to come down to "it's 2019" and its a waste of valuable training time. The value of this stuff in 2019 has been explained by EITS and others very well. As for the wasted time, I have now been a student or staff at schools run by all elements ranging from Basic to journeyman and specialty courses, and units from Esquimalt to Gagetown and in between. On thing I have found to be true is just how much down time there is. Even on basic you will spend at least an hour a day waiting around for something to happen. Outside of the initial drill at basic and learning to teach it on PlQ, we spend so little time on this stuff that it doesn't really take up much time in the long run.

The second argument is more clear cut in my opinion. Regardless of whether or not you think it is useful, everyone knows they need to do it. If some does it poorly it tells me one of two things. Either the person is incapable of doing so (for a variety of reasons) or they don't have the self discipline to do so. I am more concerned with the second group. None of the possible reasons for not doing what you know has to be done result in a better soldier/sailor/airmen or demonstrate strong character. Personally, I don't care if you only do the minimum. Too many people in the CAF don't even do the minimum required for their jobs whether it is IBTS training, FORCE tests, sending a memo up the chain in a timely manner, providing an in depth PDR, etc.

One of the biggest challenges we face is instilling a culture of personal responsibility. It is easier to do that with boots and hair cuts both because it's cheap and the risks are virtually non existent. When people say things like "No one is going to die if I don't get a hair cut", they are 100% correct but they don't see the other side of the equation which is by the time people will die if you don't do something it's too late. We need you to take personal responsibility for yourself, then your teammates and ultimately your subordinates. The further up the chain you go, you become responsible for more and more. It doesn't get easier and if you can't master the level of self-discipline needed to get a haircut or put in some effort on the drill square, why should we trust you with people or equipment?
 
Tcm621 said:
if you can't master the level of self-discipline needed to get a haircut or put in some effort on the drill square, why should we trust you with people or equipment?

Probably the best summary of the thread.
 
Wow, this devolved into a pretty divided arguement.  What's wrong with the majority meeting the required standard and reserving the extra practice/level of effort for the few occasions where a much higher ceremonial guard standard is required? It's not really an all/nothing event horizon.

It's pretty easy and ingrained to do the basics, and doesn't take much effort to maintain your personal standard and put in the basic effort into your own drill movements, but group movements and parades are definitely something that takes time and practice.

Sometimes you specifically get told not to make a big deal of it and get this messed up dogs breakfast of ceremonial drill, but the orders come down from the stratosphere thinking they are doing people a favour.  In my experience those are always a nightmare, as you spend more time figuring out some half assed thing rather then just doing it by the book (which is easier because you've already spent a bunch of training time practicing it for these kind of occasions).

Personally think there is definitely value in learning drill, and it's a great tool on basic to get people used to working with their wingers, rotating people into taking charge of a small group and other really useful skills that are generally useful in any walk of life, but can be critical in military taskings.  Like anything else, builds muscle memory, so grateful that 15 years out of basic, I can still manage to bash out the fundamental movements with no real prep and doesn't take much to do it properly. It would be ugly if I got thrown into a parade position tomorrow morning and had to call out drill movements as that needs practice to maintain, but basic was also good at learning how to cover for you winger and do the movement on the right foot or whatever if they made a mistake.

Think we've generally got a pretty good balance in requiring people to maintain their own dress and deportment to the standard and find it pretty straightforward.  All professional workplaces have a standard and ours isn't particularly onerous. We give people the uniforms, and all they need to do is some basic groooming. There are some who make the arguement that "just meeting the standard" means you are a bag of hammers, which most would agree doesn't make sense. I generally don't trust anyone who consistently is unable to meet a basic dress standard, but also wonder am suspect of anyone that can remain a textbook example at all times during an extended grind where everyone is pitching in to get it done (like that one person who is suspiciously clean and comfortable after the push to get things done so you can secure the ship after coming alongside when you were landing garbage, doing repairs, cleaning stations etc).

As an aside, the argument about neatly trimmed vs daily shaving with a beard makes no sense to me. If you have a moustache, you still shave everyday, so logically follows that if you have a beard, you should still do your cheeks and neck on the daily. Not going to lose sleep over it, but a lot of Philadelphia lawyering on the go there as a result of the imprecise wording and lack of clarity, so they should probably fix that so that all units are following one standard. Enjoy the shaving routine and hate throat stubble anyway, so not a big deal for me, but seems to raise some pretty strong feelings on both sides of the divide.
 
Navy_Pete said:
As an aside, the argument about neatly trimmed vs daily shaving with a beard makes no sense to me.

Nothing new about the Subject of this discussion. At least as far back as when I joined the PRes in 1970. No doubt, long before that.

This is new ( to me at least ),
https://navy.ca/forums/threads/129147.200
 
Navy_Pete said:
I hate the BMI; grew up being told I was dangerously underweight and unhealthy (despite doing track, rugby, heavy physical labour etc), which really helps when you are an already shy teen that lacks self confidence. It's an overly simplistic system based on weak science that is misused all the time. It only applies for a specific body type, doesn't work for anyone that is naturally wiry, heavily muscled, or other similar variations.

I assume the uniform is tailored to fit no one well; usually have to go up a few sizes of pants for it to fit on the legs, so looks wonky even after some tailoring, and the shirts aren't any better. Not sure how they manage to be hugely loose around the waist, big around the arms, but tight on the shoulders and riding up the armpits.  Their virtual models must have some really weird proportions not found in nature. The only thing consistent about them is that they never fit well.  Really weird when I can normally buy off the rack stuff no problem and not need any tailoring (with the exception of non-tapered shirts). How people look in uniform should taken with a grain of salt as they make everyone look terrible.

I picked up a sewing machine and taught myself to use it. I tailor my own shirts now but I still take my pants to a tailor to make sure they fit right around the shoes. Last year I found some Haggar Black pants at Costco and used them as my day to day pants at the office during the winter (I wear TWL exclusively during the summer months). These pants had a permanent front seam, expandable waist, wash and wear capability, and silicon seam around the waist to keep your shirt tucked in. At CANSEC last year I was at the Logistik booth and inquired as to why they haven't updated the DEU pants. Imagine my surprise when the rep said they had the same type of clothing but the CAF had never asked them to change over.
So I drafted and submitted a change to the Navy Clothing and Dress committee for said pants and I see by the latest minutes that the RCN will investigate the possibility of going to these types of pants. 
 
FSTO said:
So I drafted and submitted a change to the Navy Clothing and Dress committee for said pants and I see by the latest minutes that the RCN will investigate the possibility of going to these types of pants.

Are the elemental (and national) clothing and dress committees just for DEU or operational dress as well?  My leading question being if I thought something could be improved with operational clothing, should I submit an UCR or a change to the dress committee? 
 
Dimsum said:
Are the elemental (and national) clothing and dress committees just for DEU or operational dress as well?  My leading question being if I thought something could be improved with operational clothing, should I submit an UCR or a change to the dress committee?

Do both is my recommendation. Whats the worst they can do to you? Mock you?
 
Furniture said:
Your experience of international operations is vastly different from mine. Any time I have worked with NATO/Allied forces we are looked at as consummate professionals, though we are generally the oldest and least fit. I think the lest fit part is in large part because of the oldest part. We are very old as far as militaries go, but that's a topic for a different thread.

As to uniforms, I couldn't order new ones from our system because they were all out of stock.( I ordered new 3s weeks in advance, and still had to wait two weeks to get them after I arrived in Ottawa) I had to go to a Canex three hours away to get a new beret.  I shouldn't have to spend my own money for a silly hat that is supposed to be issued, but to have to go to a different base just to get one is embarrassing. So when the troops have a faded "nondescript" beret maybe they are trying, and our system is failing them. Perhaps after years of the system letting them down with uniforms many people have given up...

For those mentioning orders and fitness, I challenge you to prove that anyone you think it too fat hasn't met the required standard. If your want a "looks good in uniform" standard than that needs to be the standard.
Otherwise to quote a classic:

"What do I think? Let me tell you what I think, Stan. If you want me to wear thirty-seven pieces of flair like your pretty boy Brian over there, then why don't you just make the minimum thirty-seven pieces of flair?"



I have had the flair scene in my head this entire time. All the buttons and bows initiatives (especially the army) remind me of someone wanting more pieces of flair. I am talking about people who don't wear flair  or when they do it is a piece of old shoe they found on the ground.

We have serious issues with our supply process that is completely out of our hands so we have to do what we can with what we have.
 
I used to have to deal with some high end consulting firms, they clearly had a dress code and an expectation. I suspect much was unwritten but if you didn't play along you would very quickly get sidelined. I suspect more than a few members would be a bit shocked at the expectations that can await outside the military, particularly if you want to do something other than manual labour.
 
Back
Top