TC Tuesday

TC Tuesday

I want to talk about the System involved in updating a manual. Many will talk about how the doctrine is outdated and from the last war. The system for good and bad reasons is why that holds true.

Each book goes up for updating every third year after publishing. There are meetings about each manual and if nothing has changed or been requested to change the manual is left alone. If it does come up for revision, it gets assigned to someone and they start the revisions.

Now here is where it gets slow. There are many people in between the writer and the signature authority plus a 45 day "staffing" process that sends a draft of the manual to everyone expected to apply it in training. In the case TC 3-22.9 it had to go to the entire US Army and every command had the ability to comment and concur. It also had to go all the way to the Chief of Staff for signature. That means every commander, their Sergeant Major and their staff can delay the process.

One commander in that entire line can delay or even kill the manual as written.

In 2015, timing was perfect for change. The Infantry School CSM at the time Wil Engram and the Commandant Peter Jones both were the first to sign off on it and in my opinion assumed the most risk. The other name that is vital to the story is Melody Venable . She is THE reason all this happened. Her tenacity in the face of opposition is legendary.

General Scott Miller was the next step at the Maneuver Center and wanted to improve Soldier marksmanship and lethality.

The above pushed the book despite a lot, I mean a lot, of push back from many places. I was done writing by August of 2015 and the names above and those mentioned last week carried the ball until May of 2016. At any point they could have smashed it and let the old book ride for another 5 years.

Tune in next week when I lay out the Record qualification process.

David Martin

Wind Turbine Technician at Enel Green Power

1y

Times have changed, the army would never let me shoot without gloves and an ACH… PPE was a must

Like
Reply
Ken Caruthers , CPS

Operational Analysis lll/ Technical Advisor Project Manager Soldier Lethality

1y

If Marksmanship and doctrine is not shared in NCOES all of this is moot

Alex Roysden

First Sergeant @ Army Marksmanship Unit | Leadership, Training, Management

1y

The revision to the TC was absolutely needed. What I find is that it still comes down to the indivual team leader, squad leader, PSG etc. the TC can’t be anymore “dummy proof” but it’s more common than not, to find combat arms NCO’s who lack the sufficient knowledge to ensure we have lethal soldiers. Unfortunately, in my experiance, the qualification continues to be a “check the block” to move onto the next higher collective level training event. Luckily people, like @Will are continuing to assist with driving that change.

Gregory L. Jones

G-Code Tactical Chief Operating Officer | Colonel, USMC (Retired) | Infantry Officer and Combat Leader

1y

Similar processes in the USMC. Gotta have a lot of help to make service change!

Melody Venable

Instructional Systems Designer/Doctrine Developer at US Army Infantry School

1y

What a long strange trip it has been.

To view or add a comment, sign in

Insights from the community

Others also viewed

Explore topics