Should 915A's go directly to WOAC?

2015-11-09T18:55:34-05:00

I would like to express my concern for the training in WOBC that 915A's specifically are receiving and its need of rework at least as far as USAR and NG WO1's. It is in my experience that we are in dire need of realignment of resident course for occupational training. The training itself is of the highest quality and with the vary cutting edge of technology and is of extreme relevance to our specific job field. Which is precisely why it is so difficult to explain to superiors inside our cohort and army leaders outside our specialty that there is a problem. I am a 915A and I am responsible for the commanders program for maintenance at the unit level. I am aware of other WO1’s that are responsible for Battalion level maintenance programs. Its seems as though we are being trained to be in a position of maybe as much as a senior mechanics level of responsibility and knowledge. Which I consider to be quite a step back from where we came from. Yes, we are the technical expert in the motor pool. Are we ever challenged? Yes, almost every day. It makes my day to get out into the motor pool; get my hands dirty and show mechanics and senior mechanics (E-4 thru E-7) why I’m the Warrant Officer and show them how to do their job and explain procedure and protocols. That’s a great part of our job but what about everything else? What about the Office things? What about writing the SOP, what about managing the SSL and POL, What about briefing the 026 and other maintenance reports, how is it that we are supposed to just “Know” those things after going through a Basic Course that firmly reinforces at best what a senior mechanics job is? This when senior mechanics and motor sergeants work FOR us. What they tell us in school is that we will get that “management” training in advanced course. Why is it that we would need that training after being expected to perform to Army standard in this position for about 5 Years in my case, prior to receiving the required training to do so?

Response by CW3 Stephen Mantie made Nov 9 at 2015 7:05 PM

2015-11-09T19:05:06-05:00

I hear you. When I attended WOBC, I was told that since WO1s won't be going to heavy brigades, we don't need M1, M2 training. My first unit 4/1AD. I was significantly behind because I came up a 63B. I immediately started asking the senior warrants what right looks like when it comes to the world of tanks and bradleys. I got into the TMs and spent a significant amount of time with the LARs. After 17 years of service, my opinion is that NCOES/WOES will never prepare us for every type of unit but it does teach us how to research and that is all we really need.

Response by CW2 Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 9 at 2015 7:18 PM

2015-11-09T19:18:16-05:00

I recently graduated from WOBC in April of this year and the POI was revamped for the AC in the areas expressed. This included training at caterpillar, on all Stryker variants, bradley, abrams, fmtv, Allison doc, cat et, gcss, welding, weapons, etc. So much so those going through WOAC are getting alot of the same training they didn't receive in WOBC. It's a step in the right direction though long and tedious benefited me and all my fellow classmates

Response by CW3 Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 10 at 2015 9:12 AM

2015-11-10T09:12:44-05:00

I feel your pain, but the only thing you could do now is relay on your network and senior warrants, most likely you were a senior NCO before you crossed, the things you will do from now till you go WOAC are not new for you, the difference now is that you are responsible for making then happen, don't relay on WOAC to do your job we are the networking beast that's were you get your knowledge.

Response by CW4 John Beebe, BS, DML made Nov 10 at 2015 12:10 PM

2015-11-10T12:10:27-05:00

Great post, Mr. Winston. I would like to take a moment and put some perspective on your comments. I am the outgoing Lead to the Armament and Track section for WOBC/WOAC 915A. I attended my WOBC over 16 years ago and was both challenged and highly disappointed back then. Several things that we did that challenged me and were developmental are no longer included in the course. These are the exact same things you believe belong in the course today. We culminated a long management phase with an exercise called "mock motorpool". I have had students for the last 3 years asking for that. This is a valid and highly excellent (Bad English) point to be made. I will let you all in on a secret. Money drives the train. Simple as that! The more the social experiment of the politicians takes place in the Military, the more classes to teach people how to like that which they know is morally or ethically wrong, eats up the time (money) required to provide these classes you ask for. We have fought very hard over the last three years to move hours around to modernize much of the training and get it out of a rut that it had been in for over 17 years. You were the recipient of some of that. We can not expand any more as Congress and the President are cutting our budget so much and still requiring us to train with more info, less time, fewer assets, fewer instructors, fewer training hours and increased PC courses that eat up warfighter time. It is more enraging for the instructors than you are feeling as we have our hands tied. Add to this dilemma that the bureaucracy for changing lessons or content is huge and there is massive complaining without a willingness to make change. This lies on both the 915A/E's in service as well as CASCOM/OD School/ALU/TLC and the components (i.e.: AC/RC, USAR, ARNG). I would submit to you in an attempt to correct a big portion of this, PARTICIPATE IN THE CTSSB! That is the Critical Task Site Selection Board. YOU must do this. Anyone that is not satisfied with the content must get involved. Be substantive. You are working for all 915's at this point. What you need is not exactly what others need. It is a generic and limited approach to what is to be trained. This carries enough weight to force the CASCOM to adjust on timelines and show proof of compliance when this board convenes. I personally sat on one and can tell you that from when I sat on one in 2009 (and those results were blown off completely and comprehensively) to now (2012 and future) the results drive the train. Training hours are money and that won't change. Total cost allowed minus mandatory (Congressionally mandated) training leaves the short window we have to teach you a year and half's worth of training required. Add to that over 9 MOS's as feeders and vastly varying skills, you have a serious problem. Are you beginning to see the difficulty?
Now, what do we teach? Traditionally, we taught platforms (M1, M2, M109, Wheels, etc.). This was most ineffective. You need skills, techniques, and understanding at an advanced level that make you cross-platform successful. NICE?! How much time is that gonna take and how much does it cost? Sorry, limited funds! OK, Change the training method and content within the time available, DONE! Now students are more challenged but upset why they have to learn on track equipment when they only have wheels in the USAR/ARNG units. (Frustrated yet?)
We don't have multiple POI's (Programs Of Instruction). RC component won't move into the new updated POI because they don't want to give up the time required. We don't teach museum equipment anymore (old POI) which is what RC says is all they will pay for. HMMMMM!!!!. There are some excellent CW5's working tirelessly on your behalf to correct this but with the wall of resistance they face, is taking much time. You must raise this up to your bosses forcefully or you will be held in an office complaining for time to come. Understand? CTSSB!!!
I have exhausted the reader attention now and will stop. If you would like more information or process for this or to understand what takes so long (as it doesn't have to), you may ask me offline: [login to see] . If there is something to share, we can post it for others to see and read. I will let you all know that I did start out as a cocky 63B (91B) in 1986 and now looking back can see where school was the correct training venue and in other cases, hard knocks was more appropriate. Please forgive the long droning but this is a sore subject with most of the instructors as well as the students in the TLC.

Jack

Response by CW2 Private RallyPoint Member made May 31 at 2017 11:20 PM

2017-05-31T23:20:08-04:00

I see the training Mr Johnson added is here but I will add that the training we are receiving is menial at best. At a school that qualifies us in our MOS I expect a more advanced and challenging curriculum. One example I can use is why am I here doing an alignment on a wheeled vehicle, especially when it is straight out of the manual. I'm not saying I am above doing one, but I believe there are far more issues that we could learn about like advanced troubleshooting techniques. The same goes for the month long "common core" where we sit in a classroom and learn about feeling and LIW, once again I believe those are things you should have a firm grasp on before making it this far.

Response by CW3 Doyle Frost made Jul 14 at 2017 3:43 PM

2017-07-14T15:43:59-04:00

Retired as a CW3 915A. Started off as a "wobbly one" 910A but because of my maintenance background in two other services, CO talked to higher headquarters, (battalion and division,) and I was reassigned. My replacements, later on, all had to go to the academy, regardless of their MOS. I never attended, and neither did my predecessors of peers. Yet, when they changed the rules to give chiefs the option of commision versus just warrant, is where the real difference came about. We, as commissioned maintenance OFFICERS, are expected to have kept ourselves current on all aspects of our positions, to include platoon or higher military leadership knowledge. During Desert Storm, I was second platoon leader, and had four mtor pools to oversee. (I was lucky, had a bunch of very talented NCO's and junior enlisted. They really made me look good to that three star running our area.)

Response by WO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 23 at 2021 7:11 PM

2021-03-23T19:11:28-04:00

This is still an issue, I was hoping to get more maintenance management training with the new POI. But it’s still being taught more as a extended ALC with a little bit of LIS training thrown in.