Har after 3 to 5 years where number go down maybe a 3 years will come by than and sure be it will than that time we will post here again kayOriginally posted by thoreldan:when i was still serving my ns, heard rumours that ns will be extended to 3 years.
now they changing to 2 years instead, really glad for my 2 younger brothers.
anyway, i believe the whole structure would be changed in the SAF now.
eg) an infantry spec take like 6-7months from a recruit to a 3SG, then join an infantry unit for the next 2year for one whole mono-intake. If now they ord 6 months eariler, the unit will need a new batch of specs. it wouldnt be easy for men and spec to gel up quickly and imagine the result of ATEC.
*Shrug* maybe i am thinking too much , hahahaha. Still Cheers for all the new soldiers!!
hmm...maybe saving money now for the later years when they need to have 3 years!Originally posted by Joshua1975:Har after 3 to 5 years where number go down maybe a 3 years will come by than and sure be it will than that time we will post here again kay![]()
No they wont increase. @ least not stated yet.Originally posted by spencer99:Yes, I saw the article....It is true.
I am very surprised..... but will they increase the term of the ICTs??
This is a really a huge policy change. Looks like the SAF is really very serious about 3G. in a high-tech armed force, warm bodies not as important as equipment.
Hope the people going in will appreciate that they are serving 2 years instead of 2.5 years and work harder!
It sure has.Originally posted by dkhoo:This is a very huge change that will be phased in gradually. All current NSFs who need to serve 2 years 6 months (including current disruptees) get an immediate two month reduction in service requirement, to an earliest ORD date of 30 June 2004. (That means that you need to serve only 4 months on your return from your studies, Leo_is_me.) Those enlisting in the July 2004 to November 2004 batches will get a 4 month reduction (i.e. 2 years 2 months). Those enlisting with the December 2004 batch or later will all serve 2 years. There is an 8-week reduction for scoring a silver or better in NAPFA to a minimum of 1 year 10 months.
I am not so sure this is a good idea. This particularly affects the training of officers. The training of specialists and certain difficult vocations (like commandoes) will also be made very hard. There will barely be enough time for these people to gel together with their unit before they ORD, since their training takes so long. This may actually undermine moves toward a 3G force.
Maybe SAF is moving toward a flatter command structure with fewer officers? Or will improved training technology step in to help? Maybe officers, specialists and the tough vocations can be trained on the job (OTJ)?
For example, officer cadets could receive a relatively short 10-15 week primer course at OCS. After this course, they are sent to their eventual unit and shadow a particular officer. This officer will be their mentor and responsible for completing their training. This will be like a correspondence course with CAI technology. These cadets should even go to ATEC as a cadet and lead men there in a section commander or platoon sergeant role. After 6 months or so, they could return to OCS for a few weeks of summary exercises and final prociency tests before receiving their commissions and returning to their unit. Cadets who drop out will still return to their unit, but as specialists. Actually, this form of training might be even better than the current 42-week OCS. At least the new 2LT will be less blur about unit life and will have met the men he is to lead and know what they expect of him. In this way, the officer will be able to gel with his unit earlier, and training in the units might also be improved.
Regardless, this is a huge change. My head is spinning thinking of the connotations. This is the first time both commanders and men have the same length of NS. Before the 2.5 years for corporals and above, it was 3 years for officers and 2 years for WOSEs. The difference in time it takes to train commanders vs men will have many manpower officers tearing their hair out. Let's see what will happen.
This is in anticipation for the 2006 batch which is the Dragon baby batch aka Baby Boom. Thus, I think they may increase after this batchOriginally posted by |-|05|:hmm...maybe saving money now for the later years when they need to have 3 years!
its not 3 years.. they jus start drafting gals.Originally posted by |-|05|:hmm...maybe saving money now for the later years when they need to have 3 years!
Originally posted by Icemoon:I would also like to pardon others' pardons, however, the responsible soldier can never walk away from all of the traditional methods relating to the essence of a soldier. Fundamentally, he must go through the sufferings of the so-called non 3G soldier in order to know what soldiering is all about. This has got nothing to do with his education background at all. It is a sad fact that SAF selectively chooses to ignore this fundamental requirement and aspect of nuturing and training its fighting men.
I'm replying panzerjager's post in another topic which has been closed (it is a duplicate topic).
[b]In no way is the average Singaporean soldier expected to be operationally proficient in 2 years of NS. SAF is really blockheaded and 'yes-manned' enough to be 'forced' into this arrangement. Operationally ready is one thing, operationally proficient is another. And that definitely takes minimum of 30 months, this includes FIBUA, FOFO, mine-setting/laying, booby-trapping, CD, laying ambush, basic jungle survival, skill-at-arms, unarmed combat etc Will the average soldier be proficient in all those above and more in 24 months??? No way!!!
The impression I get from reading his reply is ... pardon me ... it is crap.
He seems to ignore the fact that under the current system, the traditional soldier, the hokkien pengs ONLY serve 2 years. It has been like this for dunno how long. The skills he described are just the traditional soldiering skills, ie. infantry skills. So I'm not wrong in using the hokkien pengs as my counter-example.
The mono-intake is structured to cater for 2 years NS liability. IMHO, he shouldn't curse and swear at the Defense Minister if his problem is actually with the current system.
PS: Sorry, I just have to support the Defense Minister. 'Cos he is also my MP. Maybe I need him to write my deferment letter next time.[/b]
I think we miss the part of 3G army where most of the soldiering will be replaced with machines or robots.......Originally posted by panzerjager:I would also like to pardon others' pardons, however, the responsible soldier can never walk away from all of the traditional methods relating to the essence of a soldier. Fundamentally, he must go through the sufferings of the so-called non 3G soldier in order to know what soldiering is all about. This has got nothing to do with his education background at all. It is a sad fact that SAF selectively chooses to ignore this fundamental requirement and aspect of nuturing and training its fighting men.
To go headlong into this so-called 3G concept just because of the opportunities availed by latest technology and economies of scale of employment of tactics and doctrine is foolhardy at the very least for the commander, into believing that such an approach would present him/her a better chance of winning in combat. Do not expect technology to be an unequivocal and no-holds barred solution as force-multipliers in any battlefield - it still gets the better of the most informed user.
That is why the retention of so-called Hokkien Peng skills, no doubt true blood-and-guts soldiering skills would prepare the average local soldier at least adequately for the psychological and mental pressures of combat. And these skills definitely cannot be imparted and proficiently mastered within 2 and half years, let alone 2 years!!! The expectation should be 3 years, although no-one has to like any of this or what is being said, but these are necessary evils of our times in this part of the world
Originally posted by Icemoon:Then again, the decisions by the minister and his gang eventually make up the system as it is. To put it bluntly, the problem is with the minister and gang themselves - making decisions like that.
I'm replying panzerjager's post in another topic which has been closed (it is a duplicate topic).
[b]In no way is the average Singaporean soldier expected to be operationally proficient in 2 years of NS. SAF is really blockheaded and 'yes-manned' enough to be 'forced' into this arrangement. Operationally ready is one thing, operationally proficient is another. And that definitely takes minimum of 30 months, this includes FIBUA, FOFO, mine-setting/laying, booby-trapping, CD, laying ambush, basic jungle survival, skill-at-arms, unarmed combat etc Will the average soldier be proficient in all those above and more in 24 months??? No way!!!
The impression I get from reading his reply is ... pardon me ... it is crap.
He seems to ignore the fact that under the current system, the traditional soldier, the hokkien pengs ONLY serve 2 years. It has been like this for dunno how long. The skills he described are just the traditional soldiering skills, ie. infantry skills. So I'm not wrong in using the hokkien pengs as my counter-example.
The mono-intake is structured to cater for 2 years NS liability. IMHO, he shouldn't curse and swear at the Defense Minister if his problem is actually with the current system.
PS: Sorry, I just have to support the Defense Minister. 'Cos he is also my MP. Maybe I need him to write my deferment letter next time.[/b]
if u coporal its only lugi 1000 ++Originally posted by the Bear:what i don't understand is all the ranting by some other people about "how they rugi"..
if the liability was increased, they'd be the first idiots to be gloating...
oh well.. it takes all kinds..
kinda glad for a lot of people who have not worn green yet tho'