Drill and Military Tradition
- Thread starter Britney Spears
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 33
- Points
- 560
I think the point Brittany was trying to raise was first brought up in a 1981 article in Canadian Defense Quarterly called "No Time for Drill" by then Maj Douglas Bland. (Like bayonets, I think this may have been raised earlier, but this is the first reference I have).
Bland made two points: Drill as taught stresses "unthinking obedience", and takes a great deal of time and effort to do well, as we all should know. Even in 1981, Bland felt that soldiers needed to be trained to think and act independently, to cross the battlefield in loose and open formations. He also felt that the junior commander (MCpl/Sgt) needed more practice and training in doing "battle drill" as opposed to close order drill. He summed up by saying (paraphrase) "after spending time in the field doing section attacks, we graduate the new leaders by ritualistically performing battle drills from the Napoleonic era".
My own heretical take on the subject is Bland is right, and if we really want to develop soldiers to operate in the "Three Block War" or do Urban Ops in places like Khandahar or Fallujiah, then basic training should resemble a very militarized version of "Outward Bound", where developing teamwork and self reliance is the key...
I do understand the purpose of drill, and certainly apprieciate watching a good parade, but perhaps we need to focus our training a bit differently to match the needs of the 21rst century.
Bland made two points: Drill as taught stresses "unthinking obedience", and takes a great deal of time and effort to do well, as we all should know. Even in 1981, Bland felt that soldiers needed to be trained to think and act independently, to cross the battlefield in loose and open formations. He also felt that the junior commander (MCpl/Sgt) needed more practice and training in doing "battle drill" as opposed to close order drill. He summed up by saying (paraphrase) "after spending time in the field doing section attacks, we graduate the new leaders by ritualistically performing battle drills from the Napoleonic era".
My own heretical take on the subject is Bland is right, and if we really want to develop soldiers to operate in the "Three Block War" or do Urban Ops in places like Khandahar or Fallujiah, then basic training should resemble a very militarized version of "Outward Bound", where developing teamwork and self reliance is the key...
I do understand the purpose of drill, and certainly apprieciate watching a good parade, but perhaps we need to focus our training a bit differently to match the needs of the 21rst century.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
We performed a dual freedom of cities parade of 3 VP from Victoria to Esqimault that finished in a fou des jous.. this was a march of over 7mi.
Trooping of the colours, change of command parades and freedom of the city parades are the meeting place of the CF and Civilians.
This one event, in particular, is a high point in my career. Always, 0.02
Trooping of the colours, change of command parades and freedom of the city parades are the meeting place of the CF and Civilians.
This one event, in particular, is a high point in my career. Always, 0.02
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Wow, I'm actually going to agree with the likes of Majoor and Infanteer on another subject. ;D
Drill is important in all of the afore mentioned things. And it need not take a lot of time to maintain. A half hour of it ever day or so is all you need to stay "with it". This practise of not doing any until right before a parade always invites disaster.
And on two small rants.
Our dress uniforms are ugly.
And our drill sucks. Its not as bad when you get a single unit doing it, but when they throw these ad hoc "all branch" honour guards together it is embarrising.
End rant.
As for your idea Majoor of bringing a more outward bound mentality to the training. As a former participant of that org, I think you've hit on something quite interesting. If we could look at the training methods of both Outward bound and the National Outdoor leadership school (NOLS), they have many ideas that would prove very worth while.
Drill is important in all of the afore mentioned things. And it need not take a lot of time to maintain. A half hour of it ever day or so is all you need to stay "with it". This practise of not doing any until right before a parade always invites disaster.
And on two small rants.
Our dress uniforms are ugly.
And our drill sucks. Its not as bad when you get a single unit doing it, but when they throw these ad hoc "all branch" honour guards together it is embarrising.
End rant.
As for your idea Majoor of bringing a more outward bound mentality to the training. As a former participant of that org, I think you've hit on something quite interesting. If we could look at the training methods of both Outward bound and the National Outdoor leadership school (NOLS), they have many ideas that would prove very worth while.
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 430
Too bad yours are, You should check out ours they are just phenomenal to wear, especially in the heat of the May Sun right before Her Majesty does an inspection....
Michael Dorosh
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
Zipper said:
What does this mean? You don't normally agree with intelligent, articulate professional-minded soldiers?
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 430
Oh ok,
As for the dress my point was a cheeky statement about sweating your haggis off, while wearing all that gack, on parade, nervous because the Queen is about to look at at group of melting troops...
tess
As for the dress my point was a cheeky statement about sweating your haggis off, while wearing all that gack, on parade, nervous because the Queen is about to look at at group of melting troops...
tess
Haggis
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 2,690
- Points
- 1,140
NDHQ has something called the "Standing Guard" Every CF member posted or attached posted to NDHQ (Reservists included) who is fit to do drill is liable to be tasked to it. The Standing Guard does most Guards of Honour and military funerals in the National Captial Region.
As the tasker for my directorate, I'm constantly amazed at the number of folks who will go out of their way to avoid even having to perform a Standing Guard task. No wonder our standard of drill is so low. Members are afraid of parades!!! It got so bad a couple of years back that the NDHQ CWO had to lay on mandatory refresher training for MCpls and below. My God!
Parades are the one way that we can show our mettle to the public without scaring the shyte out of them (a public relations suicide act). It is neither cost effective or practical to drag the civvies (many would likely not go because it was inconvenient) out to the field to watch us "strut our stuff". Showing us off in our natural habitiat is, and should remain, the job of the Public Affairs branch. Additionally, visiting heads of state do not want to be received in Petawawa watching Bravo Coy 1 RCR do a company attack from the top of Clement Hill under a mosquito net (or hip deep in snow).. Impressive as that may be, the same effect can be achieved in a much more cost and time effective fashion with a 100 member guard. So, we do parades.
In 2002 I was in the Republic of Georgia for a month on a NATO exercise with 15 different nations. As the RSM, it was my job to set up the parade for the opening of the exercise. It was evident from the get-go which countries took drill and ceremonial seriously and which didn't. Every morning I held a battalion muster simply for no other reason but to have every one start training on time. That in itself was no small feat as some contingents seemed to do time estimates on a calendar rather than a watch.
Once the FTX series began, each contingent switched into "Field Mode" Then something interesting came to light. Despite how "hard" a contingent appeared (in "field" dress, conduct, apparent bravado etc.) as the exercise progressed, those countries who performed well on the parade and routinely met their timings invariably performed well on the FTXs.
Many of my peers tell of similar observations on multinational exercises and deployments. Those who look "switched on" on parade are quite switched on in the field or on ops. The examples are endless: the USMC, British Army, French Foreign Legion and, yes, even the old Soviet Army (although they took "discipline" to a whole other level).
To quote the British Army drill manuall, drill produces "a proud alert and obedient soldier". Say what you will about the Canadian Army of today but one of the reasons we perform so well under duress is that we still produce proud, alert and obedient soldiers.
I will, after 28 years and many multi-national "experiences", state that drill IS the basis of all teamwork.
As the tasker for my directorate, I'm constantly amazed at the number of folks who will go out of their way to avoid even having to perform a Standing Guard task. No wonder our standard of drill is so low. Members are afraid of parades!!! It got so bad a couple of years back that the NDHQ CWO had to lay on mandatory refresher training for MCpls and below. My God!
Parades are the one way that we can show our mettle to the public without scaring the shyte out of them (a public relations suicide act). It is neither cost effective or practical to drag the civvies (many would likely not go because it was inconvenient) out to the field to watch us "strut our stuff". Showing us off in our natural habitiat is, and should remain, the job of the Public Affairs branch. Additionally, visiting heads of state do not want to be received in Petawawa watching Bravo Coy 1 RCR do a company attack from the top of Clement Hill under a mosquito net (or hip deep in snow).. Impressive as that may be, the same effect can be achieved in a much more cost and time effective fashion with a 100 member guard. So, we do parades.
In 2002 I was in the Republic of Georgia for a month on a NATO exercise with 15 different nations. As the RSM, it was my job to set up the parade for the opening of the exercise. It was evident from the get-go which countries took drill and ceremonial seriously and which didn't. Every morning I held a battalion muster simply for no other reason but to have every one start training on time. That in itself was no small feat as some contingents seemed to do time estimates on a calendar rather than a watch.
Once the FTX series began, each contingent switched into "Field Mode" Then something interesting came to light. Despite how "hard" a contingent appeared (in "field" dress, conduct, apparent bravado etc.) as the exercise progressed, those countries who performed well on the parade and routinely met their timings invariably performed well on the FTXs.
Many of my peers tell of similar observations on multinational exercises and deployments. Those who look "switched on" on parade are quite switched on in the field or on ops. The examples are endless: the USMC, British Army, French Foreign Legion and, yes, even the old Soviet Army (although they took "discipline" to a whole other level).
To quote the British Army drill manuall, drill produces "a proud alert and obedient soldier". Say what you will about the Canadian Army of today but one of the reasons we perform so well under duress is that we still produce proud, alert and obedient soldiers.
I will, after 28 years and many multi-national "experiences", state that drill IS the basis of all teamwork.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
I'll second the Haggis! You hit it right on the head. 
I remember the "standing Guard" on TV escorting the 4 members of the PPCLI who died in Afghanistan on their arrival home. I'm sure the US Honour Guard from Arlington would have been cringing.
Why is it in a situation like that, do they not fly 4 - 6 folks out from Edmonton with their regimental number 1's to really put on a proper show? We do not take PR and just "pride in unit" seriously enough.
sigh
I remember the "standing Guard" on TV escorting the 4 members of the PPCLI who died in Afghanistan on their arrival home. I'm sure the US Honour Guard from Arlington would have been cringing.
Why is it in a situation like that, do they not fly 4 - 6 folks out from Edmonton with their regimental number 1's to really put on a proper show? We do not take PR and just "pride in unit" seriously enough.
sigh
- Reaction score
- 5,598
- Points
- 1,360
Quote from Haggis,
No wonder our standard of drill is so low. Members are afraid of parades!!! It got so bad a couple of years back that the NDHQ CWO had to lay on mandatory refresher training for MCpls and below. My God!
...don't want to start a pissin' contest but , from my experience, those are precisely the personall who need refreshers the least.
Sounds like a an easy solution for le CWO, instead of insisting highers do same.
No wonder our standard of drill is so low. Members are afraid of parades!!! It got so bad a couple of years back that the NDHQ CWO had to lay on mandatory refresher training for MCpls and below. My God!
...don't want to start a pissin' contest but , from my experience, those are precisely the personall who need refreshers the least.
Sounds like a an easy solution for le CWO, instead of insisting highers do same.
Haggis
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 2,690
- Points
- 1,140
Bruce Monkhouse said:
I omitted mentioning that the NDHQ CWO did just that. All WO's and Sgts were given parade appointment training during annual Professional Development the same year.
A problem that recurs is that once a member gets posted to NDHQ many "solder skills" begin to erode, drill being among them. Jr ranks are not immune to this once sucked into the NDHQ "lifestyle". Not surprisingly some of the best performers in the Standing Guard tend to be the Combat Arms types, including the Reservists (who still parade with their parent units). They are the ones who seem to have not lost sight of what it takes to be "proud alert and obedient."
On the mean streets of Kabul or up on Parliament Hill, we are the constant embodiment of all that makes Canadiain soldiers great and the personification of Canada. We cannot lose sight of that.
Pee break over. Back to my movie...
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Now what about the officers?
Not only are their drill skills low. but their deportment is usually lousy as well. As one point, for some reason they seem to think that they can wear their berets any way they please.
Just a qualifier. Not ALL officers are like this. I've seen some well put together hardasses, as well as some of my old units officers drilling for an hour a night before a parade just to get their sword drill in shape. ;D
Not only are their drill skills low. but their deportment is usually lousy as well. As one point, for some reason they seem to think that they can wear their berets any way they please.
Just a qualifier. Not ALL officers are like this. I've seen some well put together hardasses, as well as some of my old units officers drilling for an hour a night before a parade just to get their sword drill in shape. ;D
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
I can't buy the argument that we are "spending too much time on drill", and that this is somehow holding back our soldiering skills. I also dispute the Bland article (which, IIRC, he stated that he wrote as a shyte-disturbing piece...)
When I started my life in a RegF Inf battalion in 1983, battalion drill in DEU w/forage cap was done every Friday morning. The RSM and the CO decided what would be done each week-sometimes squad drill, sometimes officers under separate instruction by thhe QMSI, sometimes drill at battalion level. When we did a battalion ceremonial parade, we worked hard to get ready for it-usually over several days or more for a big one. So,drill was FAR more a regular part of our life in RegF Cbt A units than than its has become today.
Now (and here is the point...) those days are the very days that we look back upon fondly now as the times in which we did more and better training, especially collective training. They were the days of lots of live fire, of generous amounts of battle sim, of cowgut dummies in the "enemy" trenches, and of soldiers who were well versed in winter operations including building winter defences. I believe that we did more field training in the battalions then seems to be the case recently.
Now, if increasing the amount of drill we do would (allegedly...) have such a deleterious effect on us as a combat-ready army, how was it that we did all that drill (wow-a whole morning a week!) and yet did all that field training?
The Army we sent to fight in Korea was the product a far more drill-oriented system than we know today (and in this I include the Special Force soldiers who went first...). Where "drill mentality" became a problem was, IMHO, when the replacement Regular battalions took over from the Special Force and started worrying more about spit and polish trenchlines and so on, than about aggressive patrolling (I am obviously following Johnson's interpretation from A War of Patrols...)
Drill forms a very important part of instilling basic skills in soldiers-not to "replace" thinking, but to clear the mental decks for "real" thinking and ensuring that no matter how scared, tired or confused the soldier is, he can still perform the necessary skills without expending precious mental effort. The CO and his Marines who spoke to us at Edmonton recently about their combat experiences in Fallujah stressed the importance of drilling endlessly on skills, before deployment or when out of the line in theatre. (And, by the way, the USMC are no slackers on the square...). IMHO, teaching drill is a very simple and cost-effective way of training the mind and body to react instinctively both as an individual and as part of a group. It also serves in a very visual way to remind the soldier of the larger group that he is a part of, and its power as a collective.
If we were to adopt a Frederickean approach to drill, in which we spent every waking hour on the square and beat any individual thinking out of soldiers, I could see the argument that drill would damage our ability to function effectively in modern warfare. I'm not suggesting such a stupid COA, nor do I think any of the drill advocates are. Rather, we need to redress the balance by integrating drill into what we are doing in garrison. A high standard of drill, in which regular drill for ALL ranks, with everybody working hard and taking pride in collective sharpness, but forming a part of a balanced training routine, is IMHO a very positive thing, and one that we need right now. As a number of posters have observed, we are IMHO increasingly presenting a shambolic, flabby and amateur image when we are on parade or moving about in large groups.
Cheers
When I started my life in a RegF Inf battalion in 1983, battalion drill in DEU w/forage cap was done every Friday morning. The RSM and the CO decided what would be done each week-sometimes squad drill, sometimes officers under separate instruction by thhe QMSI, sometimes drill at battalion level. When we did a battalion ceremonial parade, we worked hard to get ready for it-usually over several days or more for a big one. So,drill was FAR more a regular part of our life in RegF Cbt A units than than its has become today.
Now (and here is the point...) those days are the very days that we look back upon fondly now as the times in which we did more and better training, especially collective training. They were the days of lots of live fire, of generous amounts of battle sim, of cowgut dummies in the "enemy" trenches, and of soldiers who were well versed in winter operations including building winter defences. I believe that we did more field training in the battalions then seems to be the case recently.
Now, if increasing the amount of drill we do would (allegedly...) have such a deleterious effect on us as a combat-ready army, how was it that we did all that drill (wow-a whole morning a week!) and yet did all that field training?
The Army we sent to fight in Korea was the product a far more drill-oriented system than we know today (and in this I include the Special Force soldiers who went first...). Where "drill mentality" became a problem was, IMHO, when the replacement Regular battalions took over from the Special Force and started worrying more about spit and polish trenchlines and so on, than about aggressive patrolling (I am obviously following Johnson's interpretation from A War of Patrols...)
Drill forms a very important part of instilling basic skills in soldiers-not to "replace" thinking, but to clear the mental decks for "real" thinking and ensuring that no matter how scared, tired or confused the soldier is, he can still perform the necessary skills without expending precious mental effort. The CO and his Marines who spoke to us at Edmonton recently about their combat experiences in Fallujah stressed the importance of drilling endlessly on skills, before deployment or when out of the line in theatre. (And, by the way, the USMC are no slackers on the square...). IMHO, teaching drill is a very simple and cost-effective way of training the mind and body to react instinctively both as an individual and as part of a group. It also serves in a very visual way to remind the soldier of the larger group that he is a part of, and its power as a collective.
If we were to adopt a Frederickean approach to drill, in which we spent every waking hour on the square and beat any individual thinking out of soldiers, I could see the argument that drill would damage our ability to function effectively in modern warfare. I'm not suggesting such a stupid COA, nor do I think any of the drill advocates are. Rather, we need to redress the balance by integrating drill into what we are doing in garrison. A high standard of drill, in which regular drill for ALL ranks, with everybody working hard and taking pride in collective sharpness, but forming a part of a balanced training routine, is IMHO a very positive thing, and one that we need right now. As a number of posters have observed, we are IMHO increasingly presenting a shambolic, flabby and amateur image when we are on parade or moving about in large groups.
Cheers
- Reaction score
- 4,395
- Points
- 1,160
It will not surprise anyone to know that I am with pbi on this one.
Let me put the Doug Bland's "No Time for Drillâ ? article in perspective. Bland was joining an intense resource debate which raged inside the Canadian Army. There is no doubt that, in 1981, we wee in pretty rough shape. Money was tight, we had not been doing enough training of any type - too much money was, many thought, being spent on too few troops in Germany, and, starting in about 1975, the powers that be led, in the main, by some armoured officers like Jimmy Fox and Jack Dangerfield, were trying to reinvigorate formation level organization and training: brigades and divisions. Exercise Rendezvous 81 (RV 81) was the outcome,
RV 81 vacuumed up every red cent in the army. Starting in about FY 78/79 almost every discretionary dollar was earmarked for formation level training and for the deployment of the whole bloody army to Gagetown. Suffice it to say that individual, team, sub-unit and even unit training suffered and Doug Bland, along with many others, registered their protests. Bland, being a bright fellow and a good writer used parody. It had the desired effect - generals, like Charlie Belzile who assumed command of the army in Gagetown that summer of '81, listened and, after RV 81, scaled back the combined ambitions of the black hats and the gunners and made more time and money available for sub-unit training.
With specific regard to drill and ceremonial:
"¢ It instils pride in our regimental families and in ourselves, as individual members of our team;
"¢ It allows us to show off, in public, doing something which impresses civilians - and the air force, too, I hasten to add; and
"¢ It (good drill) is something like the secret handshake in would-be exclusive fraternities. It tells us, we who work at it, that we are part of an exclusive club - our regiment, the army, etc, which has high standards to which many might aspire but only a few achieve.
Good drill takes a combination of discipline, attention to detail, cooperation and teamwork, a modicum of fitness, and perseverance - all good soldierly attributes, it seems to me.
Let me put the Doug Bland's "No Time for Drillâ ? article in perspective. Bland was joining an intense resource debate which raged inside the Canadian Army. There is no doubt that, in 1981, we wee in pretty rough shape. Money was tight, we had not been doing enough training of any type - too much money was, many thought, being spent on too few troops in Germany, and, starting in about 1975, the powers that be led, in the main, by some armoured officers like Jimmy Fox and Jack Dangerfield, were trying to reinvigorate formation level organization and training: brigades and divisions. Exercise Rendezvous 81 (RV 81) was the outcome,
RV 81 vacuumed up every red cent in the army. Starting in about FY 78/79 almost every discretionary dollar was earmarked for formation level training and for the deployment of the whole bloody army to Gagetown. Suffice it to say that individual, team, sub-unit and even unit training suffered and Doug Bland, along with many others, registered their protests. Bland, being a bright fellow and a good writer used parody. It had the desired effect - generals, like Charlie Belzile who assumed command of the army in Gagetown that summer of '81, listened and, after RV 81, scaled back the combined ambitions of the black hats and the gunners and made more time and money available for sub-unit training.
With specific regard to drill and ceremonial:
"¢ It instils pride in our regimental families and in ourselves, as individual members of our team;
"¢ It allows us to show off, in public, doing something which impresses civilians - and the air force, too, I hasten to add; and
"¢ It (good drill) is something like the secret handshake in would-be exclusive fraternities. It tells us, we who work at it, that we are part of an exclusive club - our regiment, the army, etc, which has high standards to which many might aspire but only a few achieve.
Good drill takes a combination of discipline, attention to detail, cooperation and teamwork, a modicum of fitness, and perseverance - all good soldierly attributes, it seems to me.
- Reaction score
- 3,104
- Points
- 1,160
Drills are drills are drills. Whether it's 3 hours of square bashing, or 3 hours of PWT, it's the same end result: immediate response to a command or series of commands. ANY kind of drill, weapon or foot, ensures every troop in the loop reacts instinctively and immediately. It's how they got those boys over the top at Vimy, and how Roarkes Drift found its way into legend, rather than a footnote of a slaughter...IMHO, as always..
CHIMO, Kat
CHIMO, Kat
Haggis
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 2,690
- Points
- 1,140
Military custom and tradition is somewhat misunderstood as being archaic. This breeds inflexibility as soldiers perceive anything that's "always been done that way" to be a custom or tradition and, therefore, not to be messed with. Not so.
Customs and traditions should be acts or beliefs that serve to bind units together such as:
- Customs regarding "attention areas" and regimental/base memorials;
- Adding a quote or cypher to your signature block (i.e. VP, Ubique, Pro Patria etc. etc.);
- Battle crys ("Chimo!" "Advance!" et al.);
- Never leaving a comrade behind (either in the field or in a bar);
When combined with drill, certain traditions can bring a unique "flair" to a parade or ceremony BUT we must not allow tradition to make our Regiments/branch/corps standard of drill to become idiosyncratic. There is only one drill manual for the CF, Reg and Reserve, just as there is only one dress manual, one set of CFAOs, QR&O, DAOD etc.
Lastly, there is no time line on tradition. A new tradition can be instituted if circumstances support it. As well an old tradition can be allowed to fall by the wayside as is the case with many customs and traditions (both civilian and military) involving the overconsumption of alcohol. For years it was "customary" to have a few wobbly pop at lunch and head back to work half in the bag. Military and civilian society as a whole no longer supports that type of behaviour so this "custom" has, in most cases, had it's day.
Customs and traditions should be acts or beliefs that serve to bind units together such as:
- Customs regarding "attention areas" and regimental/base memorials;
- Adding a quote or cypher to your signature block (i.e. VP, Ubique, Pro Patria etc. etc.);
- Battle crys ("Chimo!" "Advance!" et al.);
- Never leaving a comrade behind (either in the field or in a bar);
When combined with drill, certain traditions can bring a unique "flair" to a parade or ceremony BUT we must not allow tradition to make our Regiments/branch/corps standard of drill to become idiosyncratic. There is only one drill manual for the CF, Reg and Reserve, just as there is only one dress manual, one set of CFAOs, QR&O, DAOD etc.
Lastly, there is no time line on tradition. A new tradition can be instituted if circumstances support it. As well an old tradition can be allowed to fall by the wayside as is the case with many customs and traditions (both civilian and military) involving the overconsumption of alcohol. For years it was "customary" to have a few wobbly pop at lunch and head back to work half in the bag. Military and civilian society as a whole no longer supports that type of behaviour so this "custom" has, in most cases, had it's day.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
I can see the importance of drill since its a traditions, and instils pride and confidence in the troops. However I always seem to be having trouble with drill, if a soldier for example were to make mistakes when doing drill, would they ever be kicked out of the army or their regiment.
I'm just worrying that when I got to BMQ I might make a mistake and get kicked out for not doing drill properly. I know its a stupid question, but I'm not very knowledgeable on this topic.
I'm just worrying that when I got to BMQ I might make a mistake and get kicked out for not doing drill properly. I know its a stupid question, but I'm not very knowledgeable on this topic.
Similar threads
