Written Evidence from the Ministry of Defence

The Sub-Committee of the HCDC announced a new inquiry titled Beyond Endurance? Military Exercises and the Duty of Care on 19 October 2015.  This paper is designed to provide a further response to one of the supplementary questions, on training ratios, raised by the Sub-Committee during the oral evidence session held on 25 November 2015.  This builds on the Department’s initial response to the supplementary questions sent on 29 January 2016.

This response focuses on the supervision of individual training events and activities rather than supervisory care.

1a.              What is the instructor to student ratio for each of the selection events run for Tier One and Tier Two Specialist Military Units, both Regular and Reserve?

In interpreting the question the Department has assumed that the Joint Selection for the Lead Regular Units (Hereford Garrison and Royal Marines Poole) is Tier One and Selection for Reserve Army and Regular Communicator candidates is Tier Two. 

Regular Selection.  Training commences with two Instructors per group of approximately 30 candidates on the hills. Prior to this, students must complete the mandatory Specialist Military Units’ (SMU) swimming test, a conventional Army map reading test and have successfully completed a timed eight mile march to ensure that they are safe to go on the hills.  All students are pre-briefed on the expectation for these initial activities on the compulsory SMU briefing course prior to their attendance on the more demanding Selection. Group activities with instructors are completed in week one and the students then move to individual marches and navigation tests on the hills for two weeks with the additional mitigation of the individual tracking system.

The Tracker. Even when students use the tracker, instructors are present on the hill at all Checkpoints as well as acting in a ‘sweeper’ role to ensure students are completing the designated legs safely and on course.  The tracker acts as a mitigation for the candidate undertaking an activity as a solo runner.  It is not considered as a reason to reduce the instructor to student ratio.  The new tracker has recently proved extremely effective when a student pressed his tracker alert button after sustaining a broken fibular and tibia in a fall.  All response times will vary depending on the terrain and the distances involved for each incident.  In this case, the time from the student’s alarm being set off to medics being alongside and treating the casualty was 19 minutes.

Further Training.  When Tier One students move to the jungle they are in patrols of 5 or 6 with one member of Directing Staff per patrol.  On ranges, training SMU conform to Pamphlet 21 range procedures for discipline and supervision (further details of Pamphlet 21 is provided in the answer to Question 3).

Reserve and Regular Communicator Selection.  Reserve candidates for Selection do the same safety tests as the Regulars at the start; they then do a ‘walkabout’ week (as per Regulars but with their Permanent Staff Instructors).  The supervision ratio varies but for the 2016 Winter Selection course there were 12 Reserve candidates supervised by two Permanent Staff Instructors.  Students then move on to a phase requiring the use of tracker, a day in pairs, and then on their own, moving between Directing Staff manned checkpoints leading to the challenge of Test Week.

1b.              How does this ratio compare with other arduous selection events such as those for P Company, Special Observation Parties, and Commando selection?

The details are provided below for individual Selection activities.

Royal Air Force (RAF) Regiment Gunners.  For RAF Regiment Gunner Phase 1 training, the ratio for normal physical activity (runs, circuits, swimming (with competent swimmers)) is 1:20.  For non-swimmers and beginners it is 1:12.  For the obstacle course it is 1:10.  The ratios are the same during Phase 2.

Pre-Parachute Selection Course.  This is the RAF’s only arduous training event and the Physical Training Instructor (PTI) ratio is 1:9, with additional support from Training Wing Parachute qualified personnel at a ratio of 1:4. 

Surveillance and Target Acquisition (STA) Patrol Course (referred to as Special Observation Parties by the Sub-Committee).  The ratio for this is a minimum of 1 Instructor to 6 students.

P Company.  Soldiers joining the Parachute Regiment will undertake training as combined Phase 1 and Phase 2 training.  However, there is also an All Arms P Company undertaken as Phase 3 training by personnel who will be serving with the airborne forces (eg 7 (Parachute) Regiment Royal Horse Artillery).  The ratios for this are:           

Physical Training (PT) Sessions.  These are conducted at a gym or externally:

1)              External PT Sessions, including squadded marches.   1 PTI to 15 or 16 recruits/students. 

2)              Internal PT Sessions.  1 PTI to 24 recruits/students. 

Tactical Exercises.  1 x Qualified Instructor to a maximum of 12 students/recruits.  

A training team that gives cover over and above that mandated will support all activities.  For example, the Platoon Commander and Platoon Sergeant will be on exercise and will have access to a safety vehicle.  Additional support will also be provided according to the individual risk assessments for particular events, so for example, during P Company milling there will be a Medical Officer in attendance as well as many more additional supervising staff.

Commando.  The Commando Training Centre for Royal Marines (CTCRM) operates an instructor/trainee ratio of at least 1:10 for the Commando Tests (this includes All Arms).  They can run at 1:12 with mitigation and a sound risk analysis but this seldom happens.  For the 30 Mile Commando Test there are always a minimum of 2 instructors per syndicate (a syndicate consists of 10 trainees) which equates to a 1:5 ratio.  However, generally the level of supervision is even better as there are additional training staff shadowing instructors and learning the routes.

1c.              How does this ratio compare with those employed in both Phase One and Phase Two training in each of the Services?

The details are provided below for each Service separately.  

RAF.  The instructor to student ratio for Phase 1 training (both Officer and Airmen) varies significantly depending on the activity.  For example, Regiment Range Safety has a ratio of 1:2 whereas the ratio for Officer Cadet lectures is 1:120.  For physical activities such as drilling and circuits the ratio is 1:30. 

Phase 2 training is specific to individuals’ trade or specialism.  As such, the ratios involved vary significantly depending on the specific activity and course size.

Ratios are the maximum number of trainees that could be supervised by one instructor.  Training establishments will consider the dynamics of the group and will assign additional instructor support when needed.  

Royal Navy (including Royal Marines).  In general, Naval training establishments and organisations operate a minimum instructor/trainee ratio of 1:10 for military training and better for more arduous training, plus lower ratios for Adventurous Training (AT).  Each training serial will be subject to a risk assessment which will include a review of instructor ratios.

HMS RALEIGH use the minimum 1:10 ratio as a matter of course but in the normal risk assessment process would amend it as necessary.

The Royal Navy Leadership Academy (RNLA) also work to a minimum ratio of 1:10 except for output involving AT for which there are different (usually lower) ratios depending on the Adventurous Training activity being undertaken.  As with CTCRM and HMS Raleigh, where there are arduous tasks, PTIs, who are trained in physical risk assessments, are involved in the process

Army.  Details of the ratios for Army Phase 1 training is provided at Annex A.  Details of the ratios for Army Adventurous Training is provided at Annex B. 

Army Phase 2 training ratios are the same as those provided for P Company at question 1b.

Although the Sub-Committee has not specifically asked about Army Phase 3 training, many of the courses identified as arduous are Phase 3 career courses completed by trained and often very experienced soldiers who consequently require less direct supervision.  These courses include the Platoon Sergeant’s Battle Course, Section Commander’s Battle Course, Jungle Warfare Instructor’s Course, Light Reconnaissance Role Course and STA Patrol Course.  The training ratios for these are the same as those detailed for P Company at question 1b. The exception is the STA Patrol Course, the detail for which is also provided at question 1b.

2a.              How are the instructor to student ratios determined for arduous training events and how do these compare with Phase One and Phase Two training?

In accordance with the Defence Systems Approach to Training process detailed in Joint Service Publication (JSP) 822 an early training analysis and a training needs analysis would be undertaken which would specify the requirement for the particular training activity.

To provide specific examples of how this works in practice:

RAF.  Ratios for Phase 1 and 2 training are the maximum number of trainees that could be supervised by one instructor.  Training establishments will consider the dynamics of the group and will assign additional instructor support when needed.  

The ratios provided for RAF Regiment Gunners and Pre-Parachute Selection Course are determined by the accumulative experience of personnel responsible for conducting this course over many years.  Each activity is subject to a risk assessment which will review the task, terrain, climate, and, student numbers/condition/experience.

Royal Navy (including Royal Marines).  During the training design process the designers would consult with experts at the Institute of Naval Medicine (INM) where the pass criteria and safety conditions, including Instructor ratios, would be calculated.  The training is normally reviewed on a 3 year cycle.

The INM also provide up-to-date data to the on-site medical staff who input into the Unit Training Standing Instructions.  These Instructions are briefed to new instructors during their induction process.  Before each training serial the senior Instructor will carry out a risk assessment based on the Standing Instructions and make an appropriate decision based on factors including weather, dry bulb readings, and his knowledge of the group.

SMU.   It is difficult to compare what are fundamentally different training events. SMU do not conduct conventional Phase 1 or 2 training which has completely different controls on the level of arduous activity conducted. The vast majority of the students coming forward for Selection at the entry level are already Regular or Reserve Phase 1 and Phase 2 trained Service personnel, known in the Regular and Reserve Army as ‘trained soldiers’. A limited number of the Reserve candidates are recruited ‘off the street’ but receive Phase 1 and 2 training integrated with their preparation for Selection through training nights and weekends and are not put forward for Selection unless they show the maturity and skill to be able to cope with the strenuous activity

2b.              Have there been any significant changes to the ratios in the last 10 years?

The details are provided below for each Service.  

RAF.  There have been no significant changes to the ratios in the last 10 years.

Royal Navy (including Royal Marines).  Naval training establishment staff have been unable to locate documentation relating to Instructor/trainee ratios ten years ago.  However, it is believed that there have been no significant changes except for the RNLA, which has changed its ratios for military training from 1:8 to 1:10 in the last six months.  This was to bring them in line with other Commander Core Training establishments.

Army.  In almost all cases the regulations on ratios have not changed. However, there are two exceptions.  The first was the introduction (in 2010) of guidance for Mission Specific Training, which encouraged the reduction of safety staff as a progressive step before deploying on operations.  The second was the addition that at night safety supervisors must be increased as appropriate to maintain safety.  It should be noted that in both cases there were no prescribed ratios and the number of additional safety staff was to be driven by the outcome of the risk assessment.

Similarly, policies relating to the Royal Engineer and Royal Artillery have been relatively stable over the last 10 years.  Where there have been changes, these have generally been in response to a significant event and where it has been necessary to mitigate perceived risks whilst they are investigated.  For example, following a training incident, an additional Sergeant Major Instructor in Gunnery was added to the strength for live artillery practises for a period.

SMU.  The basic ratios on selection today are the same as those employed 10 years ago, however, SMU continue to examine all training events, including those of an arduous nature, to ensure that any risk that might exist is As Low As Reasonably Possible. Training staffs are required to assess all training events against the risk and if it is felt circumstances require additional Instructors to monitor students then this is put in place.  Over the week of Selection the supervision ratio necessarily improves as two thirds of all candidates are generally selected out.

3.               What guidance exists on instructor to student ratios and how is this promulgated to the chain of command?  

The ratio for students to instructors varies dependent on the nature of the training but training design should determine what maximum and minimum class sizes should be for various elements of training. Factors will include the nature of the learning and the health and safety aspects of the training involved. 

Force Development (FD) and AT are governed separately.  AT instructor to student ratios for each approved AT activity are laid out in JSP 419 (Joint Services Adventurous Training), which can be found at the following website:

www.raf.mod.uk/rafhpa/rafcms/mediafiles/3033F0D5_5056_A318_A81B12353A721C24.pdf

FD is a term predominantly utilised by the RAF and is made up of many delivery mechanisms, including AT, collective training and military exercises.  The instructor to student ratio varies according to the activity risk assessment, which is carried out for each activity.  Where AT is used as a delivery mechanism for FD, instructor to student ratios within JSP419 will be used.

The policy for AT student to instructor ratios is regularly reviewed and updated.

To provide an example of how guidance is promulgated, within the Army there is a tiered approach to promulgating this information throughout the Army training organisation. In their roles as the Training Requirements Authorities for the various combat and combat support arms, Heads of Capability, will sponsor pamphlets relevant to the particular type of training.  For example, Pamphlet Number 21 - Training Regulations for Armoured Fighting Vehicles, Infantry Weapon Systems and Pyrotechnics. This is the authoritative policy for all forms of live and blank (dry) firing undertaken by the Army up to 120mm calibre on Armoured Fighting Vehicles or when using Infantry Weapons systems (such as rifles, machine guns, mortars etc). There are similar pamphlets for offensive support (artillery guns and Multiple Rocket Launcher Systems), air defence, demolitions or bridging/gap crossing etc.  These pamphlets are the authority for ratios between safety staff and exercising troops and apply equally to training in Phase 1 and Phase 2.  In addition, the various Training Groups and Schools within the Army, such as the Initial Training Group or the School of Infantry, have manuals that refine the requirements, which are then further refined into Commanding Officer Directives and Standard Operating Instructions at the training unit level.

A further example is for SMU.  Although practice and experience requires a set number of Instructors for activities in squads and a standard mix of Directing Staff and medical personnel at checkpoints, when candidates are running on their own even with the mitigation of the tracker, there is no mandated requirement or guidance for instructor to student ratios. The ratio is decided on as part of the consideration undertaken during the risk assessment and medical plan. Consideration of ratios has a significant and material impact on both disciplines as well as the dynamic assessment that takes place as the activity and environmental factors unfold.  

Annex A – Instructor to Trainee Ratios for Army Phase 1 Training

Annex B – Instructor to Trainee Ratios for Army Adventurous Training

Annex A

Instructor to Trainee Ratios - Army Phase 1

1.              Instructor to recruit ratios for Army Phase 1 training are included below.  These are extracted from the Common Military Syllabus 2014 (Standard Entry) Course Folder produced by Headquarters Initial Training Group.

2.              The figure shown in the Ratio column is the maximum amount of Recruits per Instructor and is not to be exceeded.  It is also important to note that ratios for assessments are often much smaller.  For example, ratios for assessing Battle Casualty Drills are set at 1:2 within the Infantry Training School.

Annex B

Instructor to Trainee Ratios – ADVENTURE TRAINING

Adventurous Training Group (Army) run a number of Joint Service adventure training courses.  The table below provides instructor to trainee ratios for them.

Notes:

* New Joint Service Adventure Training scheme. Army lead from 1 April 2015 (Policy) & 1 April 2016 (delivery).

** Other courses are available but are not provided by Adventurous Training Group (Army).

23 February 2016