Posted on Nov 12, 2015
1
1
0
I've been asked to do an analysis on the training benefits of AC units/personnel training at USAR/ARNG (ie RC) locations. For the AC people, did you ever train at a Guard or Reserve installation to complete a training requirement? Camps Roberts and Shelby and Forts McCoy and Hunter Ligget, just to name a few) Did you find it beatifically (eg. saved money, time, resources? partnership integration? shared TTPs?) or was it not worth the effort and you'd rather stay on base? I do realize that AC units are not funded to conduct travel away from their home station locations except for CTCs. RC units are funded for travel through their AT funding. If you want to contact me up on the NIPR side to give me your thoughts, it would be appreciated too. Looking for replies from battalion and above leaders in Command, 3 or 8 shops.
Posted in these groups: 
Training
Training
Posted 9 y ago
Responses: 2
0
0
0
ARNG/USAR units utilize training areas and ranges mostly during summer months and Fri-Sun the remainder of the year. Often times availability is limited due to the large amount of ARNG/USAR units vying for space. Availability would definitely be limited.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
A few thoughts:
- Define terms to include but not limited to: training benefits, AC units/personnel, RC locations. Hard to solve a problem if you don't know what the terms mean.
- Scope your problem (what is part of problem and what is outside your problem). I recommend you include both institutional (RTI/TASS formations) and operational training domain (deployable units/locations) within your problem.
- Determine how you are going to obtain your data. I recommend subjective and objective data. Institutional start points would be TRADOC, NGB, and USARC. Operational start points would be FORSCOM, 1A, NGB, and USARC. Subjective data could come from individual observations. Other data points could come from the various CoEs and Schools. Hit me up direct if you want Engineer Regiment and School data points.
- TRADOC has already issued guidance concerning OASS (One Army School System) in order to better leverage scarce resources across components. Don't know if FORSCOM has issued guidance but the technical regiments (MP, CBRN, Engineer, other) are majority Compo 2 and 3 so we have to think all three compos when we train.
- Define terms to include but not limited to: training benefits, AC units/personnel, RC locations. Hard to solve a problem if you don't know what the terms mean.
- Scope your problem (what is part of problem and what is outside your problem). I recommend you include both institutional (RTI/TASS formations) and operational training domain (deployable units/locations) within your problem.
- Determine how you are going to obtain your data. I recommend subjective and objective data. Institutional start points would be TRADOC, NGB, and USARC. Operational start points would be FORSCOM, 1A, NGB, and USARC. Subjective data could come from individual observations. Other data points could come from the various CoEs and Schools. Hit me up direct if you want Engineer Regiment and School data points.
- TRADOC has already issued guidance concerning OASS (One Army School System) in order to better leverage scarce resources across components. Don't know if FORSCOM has issued guidance but the technical regiments (MP, CBRN, Engineer, other) are majority Compo 2 and 3 so we have to think all three compos when we train.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google