USA — General Discusses Changes to Initial Army Training

WASHINGTON, Sept. 23, 2010 — Army basic train­ing is where the ser­vice takes a young man or woman straight from civil­ian life and, in 10 weeks, trans­forms that per­son into a sol­dier.
For enlist­ed per­son­nel, basic train­ing is a rite of pas­sage.

But the rite is not sta­t­ic. In America’s ninth straight year of war, Army basic train­ing has changed again to adapt to the con­flicts the coun­try is in and the chang­ing nature of Amer­i­can youth, said Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling, chief of ini­tial entry train­ing at the Army’s Train­ing and Doc­trine Command. 

Hertling, who spoke about the changes at the Defense Writ­ers’ Group here, yes­ter­day, pre­vi­ous­ly com­mand­ed the 1st Armored Divi­sion and Multi­na­tion­al Divi­sion North in Iraq. More than a year ago, Army Gen. Mar­tin Dempsey, com­man­der of Train­ing and Doc­trine Com­mand, tasked Hertling to look at what the Army was doing in train­ing to see if the ser­vice was keep­ing up with oper­a­tions. “He want­ed me to take a look at the ‘dan­ger zones’ for what we’re miss­ing and what we’re doing,” the gen­er­al said. 

He also exam­ined what the ser­vice is doing to address the train­ing needs of this generation. 

The scope of the effort is huge. All sol­diers go through some form of ini­tial train­ing, whether it is basic train­ing for enlist­ed per­son­nel or the basic course for war­rant and com­mis­sioned offi­cers. Hertling’s play­book includes advanced indi­vid­ual train­ing. All told, the Army trains 160,000 sol­diers per year. 

“That is about the amount that the Air Force, Navy and Marines train com­bined,” Hertling said. “The train­ing base cov­ers 37 dif­fer­ent instal­la­tions, and we run the gamut from train­ing an infantry­man to train­ing a plumber.” 

In train­ing, the Army con­cen­trates on three dif­fer­ent areas: skills, val­ues and attrib­ut­es. The skills piece is every­thing a sol­dier needs to do, from “shoot to salute,” the gen­er­al said. Val­ues train­ing, he said, focus­es on every­thing that makes up the Army cul­ture, and the attrib­ut­es area refers to recruits’ phys­i­cal and men­tal capa­bil­i­ties. “What we’ve seen over eight years of war is a lot of peo­ple say­ing, ‘Train this,’ and there has been a con­stant del­uge of things to train,” he said. “But the time is lim­it­ed, and there needs to be a deter­mi­na­tion on what is a com­mon sub­ject that all sol­diers must learn, and what is best taught at the unit.” 

Sol­diers deploy­ing to Iraq or Afghanistan need to con­cen­trate on coun­terin­sur­gency, he said, while those going to Europe or the Kore­an penin­su­la need to con­cen­trate on com­bined arms oper­a­tions. “In either case,” he added, “the unit is the best school.”

When he arrived, Hertling said, the basic train­ing pro­gram of instruc­tion list­ed tasks that took up 785.5 hours. But basic train­ing had only 660 hours avail­able. “So we were try­ing to shove 780 hours of instruc­tion into a 660-hour block, and it’s just phys­i­cal­ly impos­si­ble,” he said. “So I went around to the drill sergeants and asked, ‘What aren’t you teaching?’ 

“As I delved into things,” he con­tin­ued, “I found we weren’t teach­ing some of the things we should have been, and drill sergeants were tak­ing the lessons they per­son­al­ly learned from the check­point in Bagram, or the cor­don-and-search in Diyala or the road guard they were doing in Tikrit, and they were say­ing, ‘This is the most impor­tant thing, because this is what I expe­ri­enced.’ It may not be what the kid expe­ri­ences when he gets to his first unit of assignment.” 

So Hertling and his staff looked at stan­dard­iz­ing what the Army includ­ed in train­ing and refin­ing the pro­gram of instruc­tion. They rammed the revised pro­gram through the train­ing command’s bureau­cra­cy in four and a half months – near record time – and today all basic train­ing posts are using the new program.

The study showed some chal­lenges. Phys­i­cal train­ing of recruits has been made tougher in this gen­er­a­tion, just as many ele­men­tary and high schools in Amer­i­ca have elim­i­nat­ed phys­i­cal edu­ca­tion. Com­put­er games and oth­er seden­tary activ­i­ties have grown in pop­u­lar­i­ty, as youth par­tic­i­pa­tion in sports has declined. The ques­tion, Hertling said, becomes how the Army trains a recruit who grew up in an envi­ron­ment “where we focus more on play­ing with their thumbs than play­ing with a bat, [and] where our nutri­tion stan­dards are get­ting worse on a dai­ly basis. How do you train them to hump a ruck­sack at 9,000 feet in the Hin­du Kush?” 

Phys­i­cal train­ing has changed to take into con­sid­er­a­tion that many of the recruits show up with less-dense bones than those a gen­er­a­tion ago, Hertling said. Val­ues train­ing, he added, also has changed. The idea is more par­tic­i­pa­to­ry and cov­ers hon­or­ing the Army val­ues in com­bat, on post and at home, Hertling said. 

Some changes Hertling insti­tut­ed have been con­tro­ver­sial. The gen­er­al elim­i­nat­ed bay­o­net train­ing, and fir­ing the .50-cal­iber machine gun. He said he heard the blow­back from retirees and oth­ers who charged he did not under­stand the spir­it of the bayonet. 

“The last bay­o­net charge the U.S. Army par­tic­i­pat­ed in was 1951,” he said. “Also, in a coun­terin­sur­gency envi­ron­ment, you car­ry an M‑4 car­bine strapped around your chest. You can’t do much with a bayonet. 

“What’s inter­est­ing though, is if bay­o­net train­ing is that impor­tant and it’s the cen­ter­piece of every­thing we do, why is it the only place it’s taught is at basic train­ing?” he added. “If it’s that impor­tant, you’d think all the oper­a­tional units would have bay­o­net assault cours­es.” Hertling not­ed that in 35 years in the Army, he has nev­er seen a bay­o­net course except in basic training. 

The new pro­gram also elim­i­nates con­voy live-fire oper­a­tions. The exer­cise was pushed into basic train­ing after the ear­ly days in Iraq when a sup­ply con­voy was ambushed. But defend­ing a con­voy is invari­ably a team project. Team­mates need to work togeth­er and train togeth­er to be suc­cess­ful. Hertling argues that this train­ing is best done by the units. Army lead­ers under­stand that today’s gen­er­a­tion learns dif­fer­ent­ly, Hertling said, point­ing out that young recruits are more depen­dent on smart phones and work with the Inter­net almost instinc­tive­ly. The Army, he said, is respond­ing with appli­ca­tions for their hand-held devices. 

An appli­ca­tion called “Apps for the Army” lists every­thing a sol­dier needs to know. While it can be read, oth­er por­tions are spo­ken, and still oth­ers have video. “It’s the way this gen­er­a­tion learns,” he said. “They are a mul­ti-task­ing generation.” 

Over­all, Hertling said, his mis­sion is to send to units “a sol­dier who is dis­ci­plined, under­stands the skills and val­ues and has the phys­i­cal attrib­ut­es, and we’ve only got 10 weeks to do it.” 

Source:
U.S. Depart­ment of Defense
Office of the Assis­tant Sec­re­tary of Defense (Pub­lic Affairs) 

More news and arti­cles can be found on Face­book and Twitter.

Fol­low GlobalDefence.net on Face­book and/or on Twit­ter

Team GlobDef

Team GlobDef

Seit 2001 ist GlobalDefence.net im Internet unterwegs, um mit eigenen Analysen, interessanten Kooperationen und umfassenden Informationen für einen spannenden Überblick der Weltlage zu sorgen. GlobalDefenc.net war dabei die erste deutschsprachige Internetseite, die mit dem Schwerpunkt Sicherheitspolitik außerhalb von Hochschulen oder Instituten aufgetreten ist.

Alle Beiträge ansehen von Team GlobDef →