Basic Traing going down.

Colonel

Pax Nostra est Professionis
Joined
May 18, 2004
Messages
4,254
Location
USA
I can't give you the actual link because this story is from the pay superscription part of the Wall Street Journal from back in February

Marching Orders: To Keep Recruits, Boot Camp Gets A Gentle Revamp --- Army Offers More Support, Sleep, Second Helpings; Drill Sergeants' Worries --- `It Would Look So Much Nicer'
By Greg Jaffe
2791 words
15 February 2006
The Wall Street Journal
A1
English
(Copyright (c) 2006, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)
FORT LEONARD WOOD, Mo. -- New recruits used to be welcomed to boot camp here with the "shark attack." For decades, drill sergeants in wide-brim hats would swarm around the fresh-off-the-bus privates, shouting orders. Some rattled recruits would make mistakes. A few would cry.

Today, the Army is opting for a quieter approach. "I told my drill sergeants to stop the nonsense," says Col. Edward Daly, whose basic-training brigade graduates about 11,000 soldiers a year. Last fall, Col. Daly began meeting with all new recruits shortly after they arrive at boot camp to thank them. "We sincerely appreciate the fact that you swore an oath and got on a bus and did it in a time of war," he recently told an incoming class. "That's a big, big deal." He usually is accompanied by two male and two female soldiers, who can answer questions the recruits may have.

"The idea is to get rid of the anxiety and worry," Col. Daly says.

The new welcome is a window on the big changes sweeping boot camp, the Army's nine-week basic training. For most of its existence, boot camp was a place where drill sergeants would weed out the weak and turn psychologically soft civilians into hardened soldiers. But the Army, fighting through one of its biggest recruiting droughts, now is shifting tactics. Boot camp -- that iconic American experience -- may never be the same.

Once-feared drill sergeants have been ordered to yell less and mentor more. "Before, our drill sergeants' attitude was `you better meet my standard or else.' Now it's `I am going to do all I can to assist you in meeting the Army standard,'" says Command Sgt. Maj. William McDaniel, the senior enlisted soldier here.

New privates are getting more sleep and personal time. Even the way soldiers eat has changed. Drill sergeants long ordered overweight soldiers to stay away from soda and desserts. Today, soldiers at Fort Leonard Wood fill out a survey about their boot-camp experience that asks, among other questions, if they liked the food, whether they were "allowed to eat everything on the menu, including dessert," and whether there was enough for seconds.

Recruits still must meet the same basic standards and pass the same tests for physical fitness and marksmanship to graduate, say Army officials. But more variable criteria that in the past might get a recruit expelled -- such as whether a drill sergeant thinks a recruit has the discipline and moral values to be a soldier -- have been jettisoned. "Now it doesn't matter what the drill sergeant thinks. We work off of the written standard," says Capt. Christopher Meng, who oversees a company of 11 drill sergeants and about 200 recruits at the base.

The new approach is helping the Army graduate more of its recruits. Last month, only 23 recruits failed to make the cut at Fort Leonard Wood's largest basic-training brigade, compared with 183 in January 2004. Army-wide, about 11% of recruits currently flunk out in their first six months of training, down from 18% last May.

Senior Army officials say attrition has fallen because the new techniques are helping more soldiers reach their full potential. "This generation responds to a more positive leadership approach. They want to serve and they want people to show respect for that decision," says Maj. Gen. Randal Castro, the commanding general at Fort Leonard Wood. Smarter training also is preventing injuries, Army doctors say.

Some drill sergeants worry that the "kinder and gentler approach" -- as drill sergeants have dubbed the changes -- is producing softer soldiers. "If the privates can't handle the stress of a drill sergeant yelling at them, how will they handle the stress of bullets flying over their head?" asked Staff Sgt. Clayton Nagel as he watched his recruits file past him in the Fort Leonard Wood dining hall. "War is stressful. I think we overcorrected."

The Army's decision to overhaul basic training came last spring. The service was having a hard time bringing in new recruits. It ultimately missed its 2005 recruiting goals for active-duty troops by 7,000 soldiers, or 8%, and National Guard soldiers by 13,000 or 20%.

Meanwhile, boot-camp attrition was climbing. New soldiers brought in to replace those who were tossed out weren't much better. "We realized that the further you go into the barrel, the lower the quality," says Col. Kevin Shwedo, a senior officer in the Army's Training and Doctrine Command in Virginia.

A team of 20 officers from the Army's training command was formed to figure out how the service could help more soldiers survive the first six months. They consulted sociologists and psychiatrists and even flew in MTV's senior vice president of strategy and planning, in search of fresh ideas for motivating today's youth.

The changes, put in place this fall at all five of the Army's basic-training camps, are apparent the moment recruits step off the bus at Fort Leonard Wood. On a chilly Tuesday in January, about 200 new recruits in white Army sweat suits filed into a big auditorium on the base for one of Col. Daly's welcome-to-the-Army talks. Staff Sgt. Mike Gilmore grabbed a microphone and told the recruits what was going to happen: "The brigade commander is going to talk to you. He is a colonel. He is way up here. You are way down here," Sgt. Gilmore explained.

He then coached the recruits on how to spring to attention when Col. Daly entered the room. "When I say `attention,' you stand up. That's it. You don't say nothing. You do it quietly as possible."

"Attention!" Sgt. Gilmore ordered. The recruits rose slowly and unevenly.

"Could we all just stand up together?" Sgt. Gilmore said, sounding more let down than angry. "It would look so much nicer."

A few minutes later, Col. Daly, a Special Forces soldier who served in Afghanistan and was awarded a Purple Heart after being wounded in the U.S. invasion of Panama, strode into the room. He told the recruits to take a deep breath and a swig from their canteens. "There is no problem that you might have that in last 230 years the Army hasn't already heard," he said.

The recruits then got 40 minutes to fire questions at the four privates accompanying Col. Daly. One recruit asked if any of the privates had failed the Army's physical-fitness test. (Two struggled with it, but eventually passed). Others wanted to know how often they got to talk on the phone (once a week), how long they got for showers (five minutes) and how many hours of sleep they got a night (8 hours). A few asked if they had any regrets about enlisting. All four said no.

After the session, Pvt. Angela Holmquest, one of the privates brought in to answer questions, said she worried that basic training had become too easy. "The drill sergeants tell us we are in the low-stress Army. I'd rather be in the old Army. When we need to lock it up and work together as a team we can. But we should be more disciplined than we are," she said.

In recent months, the Army has told drill sergeants to back off the recruits in the dining halls as well. A few months ago, sergeants would hover over new recruits, rushing them through meals, quizzing them about Army regulations and chastising them for minor infractions like carrying their drinking glass with one hand instead of two.

The dining hall still is far from relaxing. But drill sergeants no longer shout at recruits. They aren't allowed to order overweight privates to skip dessert. At first, some drill sergeants refused to embrace the new directive. "There was a lot of balking on the dessert rule," says Capt. Meng, who oversees 11 drill sergeants. "I have had to say, `Don't even mention it.'"

The Army also has cut the amount of running troops do in boot camp by more than 60% in the past three years. "A lot of these kids have never done P.E. or sports. We were injuring too many by running too much," says Col. Greg Jolissaint, an Army physician with the command that sets baseline standards for boot camp.

Instead of running, privates do more calisthenics and stretching. They also are spending more time learning the basic combat tasks they will need in Iraq or Afghanistan, such as how to spot a roadside bomb. Last month, Sgt. First Class Kevin Staddie, who spent a year in Iraq, was teaching soldiers how to move through a city under enemy fire. Suddenly he called a halt to the exercise. A private who was slithering on his belly lost his only canteen. Sgt. Staddie asked the private if he knew the temperature in Baghdad in August.

"It is 115 degrees," the sergeant said in an even voice. "Will you give me a solemn promise that you'll do a better job securing your canteen? You'll get a whole lot further."

The private nodded and rushed to continue the exercise.

Soldiers also get a few more chances to succeed, say drill sergeants. Not long after she arrived at boot camp, Pvt. Starr Mosley was accused by another soldier of writing letters home when she was supposed to be training. Her drill sergeant ordered the 18-year-old private to crawl on her belly through the barracks and chant: "I will not write letters in the war room."

Pvt. Mosley, who said she wasn't writing letters, refused. The Army offered her a fresh start in a new platoon. There she struggled to meet the service's marksmanship standards, her drill sergeant says. Sgt. Darren Baker, her new drill sergeant, spent hours coaching her. "Without him I would have quit," Pvt. Mosley says. "He was down there in the dirt helping me."

A year ago, a drill sergeant wouldn't have taken as much time working with one struggling soldier. Today it is part of the job. "We're all working more one-on-one with the privates," Sgt. Baker says.

Soldiers with certain medical conditions get more help as well. Recruits with mild asthma now are allowed to carry inhalers with them. Privates who come to the Army with a history of mild depression now can take Paxil or Zoloft. Both changes, pushed through last fall, are "contributing to the lower attrition overall," says Col. Jolissaint, the physician.

Some basic-training facilities also are setting up special units for soldiers who are hurt or out of shape. In August, Col. Daly created a "Warrior Rehab" unit for injured recruits. Before the unit's creation, soldiers hurt during training often would go home to heal. The vast majority never came back.

Soldiers in Warrior Rehab practice marksmanship, take classes on map reading and do low-impact workouts in the base's indoor pool. So far, 170 soldiers have passed through the program. Only 30 have quit basic training.

Last month, about 40 members of the unit gathered in their barracks for a class on how to ambush the enemy with an M-18 Claymore antipersonnel mine. The troops included Pvt. Matthew Brent, a 29-year-old former hotel manager, who enlisted because he "wanted a personal challenge." He came to boot camp overweight at 5-foot-10, 220 pounds and quickly went down with tendinitis in his ankle. In his five months in Warrior Rehab, Pvt. Brent has lost 57 pounds.

Next to him was Pvt. Richard Hodgson, who has been with the rehab unit since it started in August, trying to recover from stress fractures. He was having doubts about his ability to stick it out. "I've just lost my motivation. I was supposed to have graduated in September and I am still stuck here," he said. The sergeants in Warrior Rehab have been working hard to convince him to stay. "I've had a few mother-son type conversations with him," says Staff Sgt. Nicole Waters, one of the drill sergeants. "We talk about his goals in life. This job is a lot more mental than the typical drill sergeant job."

Not all Army commanders have embraced the new approach to basic training. Col. Daly says one of the 14 company commanders he oversees is a "gung-ho combat arms officer, who right now is just killing me."

Recently, one of that commander's recruits brought a round of live ammunition back from the rifle range, which isn't allowed. The bullet was found by a drill sergeant in the barracks common room. As punishment, the commander ordered the entire unit, which numbers 60 soldiers, to don their helmets when eating in the dining facility. He then threatened to send all the privates, who were just two weeks from graduation, back to the beginning of basic training.

Col. Daly bristled when he heard about the threat. "I am not going to keep 60 soldiers back because one guy made a mistake," the colonel says he told the commander.

Instead, Col. Daly ordered the commander to have his drill sergeants do a better job of searching the recruits' pockets for extra ammunition when they leave the range.

"The commander's leadership style has got to change," says Col. Daly, noting that the commander's recruits have gone absent without leave at more than twice the rate of any other unit in the past two months.

Even among those units that have embraced the new approach, there is debate about whether the changes have been too much, too fast. "It's a hot topic," says Capt. Meng, another one of Col. Daly's company commanders.

Like many of his fellow commanders, Capt. Meng spent a year in Iraq, in a tour that ended in 2004. He was second in command of a 100-soldier armor company. In the past six months, the West Point graduate has been in the forefront in reducing attrition, overseeing drill sergeants and recruits.

Last month, a few dozen of Capt. Meng's privates clambered onto olive-green trucks for one of their final boot-camp exercises. The troops, traveling in an Iraq-style convoy, were "hit" by a series of smoke-spewing roadside bombs. Enemy fighters, represented by pop-up targets, sprung from nearby prairie grass. A broad-shouldered drill sergeant ordered a counterattack.

Instead of leaping off the back of the truck, as they would in a typical exercise, or in actual combat, the privates waited about 10 seconds for someone to walk to the back of the truck and place a ladder on its rear bumper. They then climbed down the 5-foot drop, one at a time.

Capt. Meng conceded it wasn't realistic. He said the Army couldn't afford to have privates twist ankles and wrench knees just a few days before their final physical fitness test. "A few months ago attrition was seen as a good thing," he says. "It meant we were sending higher quality troops to the Army."

Now he says he is racking his brain for new ways to motivate more soldiers who are falling short of the Army's standards. He recently petitioned Col. Daly to let his troops have an extra half-hour of sleep on top of the 30 minutes of additional shuteye all recruits were granted last fall. Standard boot camp sleeping hours are now 9 p.m. to 5 a.m. His troops rise at 5:30 a.m.

"It has been great for morale," Capt. Meng says. "A soldier's happiness is directly proportional to the amount of sleep he gets."

The Iraq veteran says his boot-camp troops are in many ways better prepared for combat than their predecessors were. They spend far more time working with their M-16 rifles and more time in the field training on critical combat tasks like defending a base camp from insurgent attacks.

Asked if his soldiers are as disciplined and tough as their predecessors, Capt. Meng pauses. "There are some who feel we are not sending as high a quality soldier to the Army. . . . I am not smart enough to tell you," he says.

In the near term, he has other worries. "The commanding general's No. 1 priority here is to support the war," he says. "In order to do that right now we have to graduate more privates."

I can however give you a link about Fort Lenord Wood Missouri

http://hackworth.com/article04032002c.html

So what do you guys think? Would of course be interesting to get the perspective of any Army personnel or recruits.
 
I think this is a big mistake. Being a soldier is no joke, and I think using boot camp as a way to weed out psychologically unstable people was a good thing. Now I'm afraid that recruits will be pampered through boot camp and collapse in the most dangerous times - in real combat.
 
It's about time. Complex situations in todays mission areas requires a different kind of soldiers, with different kind of training. Soldiers who can think for themselves, and who aren't affraid of their superiors.

Denmark went through the same fase some years back, and it greatly improved our army. Only problem is that 9 weeks in way too little. If you lower the pace, you have to expand your training period. I went through 4 months of basic training, but I think it had a slower pace than than the American one. I would never have stayed in the Army if some drill sergent had embarassed me in front of my whole platoon, because of something I didn't do. Now Im making a career in the army, so for people like me, these new regulations are definitly a good thing.
 
If I weighed enough to enlist the not-eating-constantly part would do me in.

However, ironically, I had a dream last night that I was recruited. I enjoyed it.

Get your head out of the gutter.
 
It's about time. Complex situations in todays mission areas requires a different kind of soldiers, with different kind of training. Soldiers who can think for themselves, and who aren't affraid of their superiors.

Denmark went through the same fase some years back, and it greatly improved our army. Only problem is that 9 weeks in way too little. If you lower the pace, you have to expand your training period. I went through 4 months of basic training, but I think it had a slower pace than than the American one. I would never have stayed in the Army if some drill sergent had embarassed me in front of my whole platoon, because of something I didn't do. Now Im making a career in the army, so for people like me, these new regulations are definitly a good thing.

Ah. Interesting, and the complete opposite of my stance :)

So do you think that hardcore boot camp is inefficient at judging the psychological strength of a soldier, or that nowadays it does not matter as much as it once did, or a combination of both perhaps?
 
My view on it: I agree with the guy that says we have overcorrected it. While they may be experiencing fewer recruits dropping out of basic, that doesnt mean they succeed once they are out of basic. I see more young troops with discipline problems today than every before. They are far more prone to just say 'screw it' and get out of the service than try to stick it out.

In my opinion, by the 'wussy-fication" of basic we are just delaying the problem soldiers will face later on. Basic used to be learning how to deal with stress and how to perform soldier tasks under pressure and gaining the confidence in that. Not anymore. This is part of the reason we see such a huge increase in things like PTSD and falling retention rates. Sure...they make it through basic...but then they cant cope with real military life.

It's about time. Complex situations in todays mission areas requires a different kind of soldiers, with different kind of training. Soldiers who can think for themselves, and who aren't affraid of their superiors.

I went through a more traditional training regimen with DIs yelling at us 24/7. We sure as hell were not afraid of our DIs, and if anything, basic taught us NOT to be afraid in tough circumstances.
 
It's about time. Complex situations in todays mission areas requires a different kind of soldiers, with different kind of training. Soldiers who can think for themselves, and who aren't affraid of their superiors.

Denmark went through the same fase some years back, and it greatly improved our army. Only problem is that 9 weeks in way too little. If you lower the pace, you have to expand your training period. I went through 4 months of basic training, but I think it had a slower pace than than the American one. I would never have stayed in the Army if some drill sergent had embarassed me in front of my whole platoon, because of something I didn't do. Now Im making a career in the army, so for people like me, these new regulations are definitly a good thing.

I think they do more on top of that basic, though :)

I know in Canada (when I joined) we did 10 weeks of basic training and then 16 weeks of infantry battle school. Now they do basic training, army training and then infantry specific training. I think it all equals about the same amount of time as the old system.

I don't know how I feel about the way it is changing. I agree with some of what you said but it also let through some people who should have never been in the army to begin with.

There was some differences with my training and the American one, though. From what I read in the article my training was somewhere between the old American system and the new one.

You do need some way of testing someones psychological levels before going over seas aswell. I know when I went there were a few guys who couldn't really handle it. But hey, for all I know that's normal. Then again, most the guys who no one thought should have made it through battle school never ended up going overseas. So... Who knows. Time will tell.
 
My view on it: I agree with the guy that says we have overcorrected it. While they may be experiencing fewer recruits dropping out of basic, that doesnt mean they succeed once they are out of basic. I see more young troops with discipline problems today than every before. They are far more prone to just say 'screw it' and get out of the service than try to stick it out.

In my opinion, by the 'wussy-fication" of basic we are just delaying the problem soldiers will face later on. Basic used to be learning how to deal with stress and how to perform soldier tasks under pressure and gaining the confidence in that. Not anymore. This is part of the reason we see such a huge increase in things like PTSD and falling retention rates. Sure...they make it through basic...but then they cant cope with real military life.



I went through a more traditional training regimen with DIs yelling at us 24/7. We sure as hell were not afraid of our DIs, and if anything, basic taught us NOT to be afraid in tough circumstances.

A lot of what I was trying to say - said better. And then some. :lol:
 
It sounds like a good change to me.

I have no doubt that any effective soldier needs to be psychologically strong and have a great ability to handle stress. That's obvious. I also understand that discipline is key in the military. I don't believe, though, that having drill sergeants constantly yell provides the proper psychological effects. People don't like being yelled at, fact. Privates have to suck it up. It's something that most people probably can suck up - but the problem is, people still really hate it. Which means that it builds up inside them. And I believe such training methods create soldiers who are excessively violent and so on. And that's not what soldiers need to be.

Spending more time with individual soldiers to help them also sounds good. In a professional army, soldiers are there because they want to be. They have motivation. When an instructor works with them personally to help their problems, the soldier's motivation will only rise. So overall, my opinion is that such changes would probably result in soldiers with slightly better skills and notably better morale / behaviour.
 
It sounds like a good change to me.

I have no doubt that any effective soldier needs to be psychologically strong and have a great ability to handle stress. That's obvious. I also understand that discipline is key in the military. I don't believe, though, that having drill sergeants constantly yell provides the proper psychological effects. People don't like being yelled at, fact. Privates have to suck it up. It's something that most people probably can suck up - but the problem is, people still really hate it. Which means that it builds up inside them. And I believe such training methods create soldiers who are excessively violent and so on. And that's not what soldiers need to be.

Spending more time with individual soldiers to help them also sounds good. In a professional army, soldiers are there because they want to be. They have motivation. When an instructor works with them personally to help their problems, the soldier's motivation will only rise. So overall, my opinion is that such changes would probably result in soldiers with slightly better skills and notably better morale / behaviour.

If you go and talk about your problems to a shrink you have your security clearance taken away. This isn't the boyscouts, you have people yelling at you all the time in the field
 
I do not mean psychological problems, I mean performance problems, such as the example from the article where the female private was getting help from an instructor with her marksmanship.
 
I do not mean psychological problems, I mean performance problems, such as the example from the article where the female private was getting help from an instructor with her marksmanship.

If you can't shoot a gun straight you don't belong in a job whose main requirement is being able to shoot a gun correctly.
And yeah, I took what you said the wrong way.
But this is like when the US Army started giving all the recruits a beret, its for the stupid new age touchy feely reason to make everyone feel included and worthwhile.
 
Maybe some people are born with the ability to hit 29 out of 30 targets on a firing range. I'm sure most aren't. I have never had any such target practice, but I am sure that shooting a gun is a skill that can, like most things, be taught and learnt to some degree. If you can't shoot a gun, chances are you can still learn to do so.

I may be getting this totally wrong, but I believe that "making everyone feel included and worthwhile" is the way to go. Well, the ones who are included to worthwhile. Sure, kick out the ones who are physically unfit to serve, have psychological problems incompatible with serving and whatever. But those who make it should have good morale. Look at, say, the Russian army. Horrendous morale stemming from horrible treatment and leading to all sorts of problems.

If you feel included, you'll feel better about your squadmates, have more desire to help them in combat and have more confidence in them covering you.
 
as long it doesn't have any negative effect on our soldiers' competence on the battlefield, I'm fine with it
 
Maybe some people are born with the ability to hit 29 out of 30 targets on a firing range. I'm sure most aren't. I have never had any such target practice, but I am sure that shooting a gun is a skill that can, like most things, be taught and learnt to some degree. If you can't shoot a gun, chances are you can still learn to do so.

I may be getting this totally wrong, but I believe that "making everyone feel included and worthwhile" is the way to go. Well, the ones who are included to worthwhile. Sure, kick out the ones who are physically unfit to serve, have psychological problems incompatible with serving and whatever. But those who make it should have good morale. Look at, say, the Russian army. Horrendous morale stemming from horrible treatment and leading to all sorts of problems.

If you feel included, you'll feel better about your squadmates, have more desire to help them in combat and have more confidence in them covering you.

If everybody is already included when they start what is there to work for? I'm not for treating recruits like the russians, but I'm not for pampering them either.
 
I have no doubt that any effective soldier needs to be psychologically strong and have a great ability to handle stress. That's obvious. I also understand that discipline is key in the military. I don't believe, though, that having drill sergeants constantly yell provides the proper psychological effects. People don't like being yelled at, fact. Privates have to suck it up. It's something that most people probably can suck up - but the problem is, people still really hate it. Which means that it builds up inside them. And I believe such training methods create soldiers who are excessively violent and so on. And that's not what soldiers need to be.

You have been watching too much "Full Metal Jacket" and apparently never went to boot camp. The entire point of the yelling and such is to teach people to NOT hold it inside...after about the 2nd week of basic training, it was almost viewed as a game between the Drills and the recruits as to how much we could make a drill yell. It gave us confidence in knowing a drill couldnt get to you....not hate.

If someone expresses excessive violence, such as striking out for being yelled at...it was an instant ticket out of boot.

I may be getting this totally wrong, but I believe that "making everyone feel included and worthwhile" is the way to go.

I dont...for the sole reason the military isnt for everyone even if they really want to be in it.
 
If you can't shoot a gun straight you don't belong in a job whose main requirement is being able to shoot a gun correctly.
So you don't think it's worth training people to make sure they are good at and improve their abilities of what their job is supposed to be about? Okay.

I'm a programmer, but if we have difficulties we try to get help. Obviously it's better that we just struggle on regardless, or perhaps kick us out and waste all the money spent training us up.
 
Meh in the UK we are currently looking at the harshness of bootcamp as the dethtoll is becoming unacceptable.
 
I don't think it will hurt anything. I for one don't like being yelled at, and think it's counter productive. Plus I think the idea of mentoring to help people improve their skills is a pretty good one.

Really I'm waiting for the day when we abandoned the soldier and start using robots anyway so I can be a programmer working for the military-industrial complex.
 
Top Bottom