PDA

View Full Version : OFFICER TRAINING (USMA at West Point)



F. L. Villarreal
07-22-2017, 12:37 PM
http://www.warofrightsforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=6783&d=1500723259


Mission Statement

"To educate, train, and inspire the Corps of Cadets so that each graduate is a commissioned leader of character committed to the values of Duty, Honor, Country and prepared for a career of professional excellence and service to the Nation as an officer in the United States Army."

History

"West Point's role in our nation's history dates back to the Revolutionary War, when both sides realized the strategic importance of the commanding plateau on the west bank of the Hudson River. General George Washington considered West Point to be the most important strategic position in America. Washington personally selected Thaddeus Kosciuszko, one of the heroes of Saratoga, to design the fortifications for West Point in 1778, and Washington transferred his headquarters to West Point in 1779. Continental soldiers built forts, batteries and redoubts and extended a 150-ton iron chain across the Hudson to control river traffic. After gaining experience and national recognition during the Mexican and Indian wars, West Point graduates dominated the highest ranks on both sides during the Civil War. Academy graduates, headed by generals such as Grant, Lee, Sherman and Jackson, set high standards of military leadership for both the North and South.

How Officer Training is beneficial to War of Rights

Whenever a soldier starts his own company or is recruited into his or her own company, in some cases they have no military background or its limited. What this aims to do is have real leaders in charge of the soldiers who will interacting on the forums and in game. Properly trained leaders who will demand nothing but the best out of their men by way of example and character. There are a few modules/posts that will contain informationals on topics such as CUSTOMS AND COURTESIES, MILITARY HISTORY, DRILL, and COMBAT TACTICS. There will also be a link to an OPTIONAL test that will have a few variations. Upon completion of this test the cadet will receive a special badge for optional use on the forum.

(The optional test has not yet been uploaded)

ALL TRAINING WILL BE SELF DRIVEN BUT THERE WILL BE A SECTION FOR QUESTIONS

Send your officers over to if there is information there you feel will be beneficial, this is 100% voluntary obviously:
http://www.warofrightsforum.com/group.php?groupid=163

Lance Rawlings
07-22-2017, 02:48 PM
Will there be practical training in a WoR server to apply what Cadet's learn in their readings into the field?

Bravescot
07-22-2017, 02:50 PM
So is this RP or are you serious?

F. L. Villarreal
07-22-2017, 03:53 PM
So is this RP or are you serious?

I am serious. It will give some degree of pretige to those who do it and will improve the quality of the battles. I saw earlier you are a Cadet. Is this university or high school? I feel like this sort of thing will he very beneficial and i am very much open to prudent suggestions.


Will there be practical training in a WoR server to apply what Cadet's learn in their readings into the field?

The academic part will be self driven by an optional test once its ready. Yes there will also be a practical aspect on servers once its fully Developed. Thats why i made a post the other day asking for players with military experience.

ItalianMonk
07-22-2017, 09:27 PM
This is amazing. Basically if you're too lazy to train your Officers yourself, you can just send them to this hahaha. :cool:

yoyo8346
07-22-2017, 10:50 PM
Just curious as to what accredits you to run an officer school?

SouthCarolina
07-22-2017, 11:19 PM
Just curious as to what accredits you to run an officer school?

What accredits you to run a brigade?
Having said that..

This idea.... like the other dude said... If you start a company you should be solid enough to lead and drill them. And not sent them to your school.

yoyo8346
07-22-2017, 11:27 PM
Well there is quite a difference between being an officer and teaching officers. Anyway, it was just a question, not hostility.

SouthCarolina
07-22-2017, 11:31 PM
Well there is quite a difference between being an officer and teaching officers.

Not in this game it shouldn't. Should be so that you and your men in your company figure this stuff out together. Construct your company together with your 1st Sgt figure out what suits you best. The beauty of this game for me lays in this very point the building aspect of your company the training with your company.

F. L. Villarreal
07-23-2017, 01:42 AM
Well there is quite a difference between being an officer and teaching officers. Anyway, it was just a question, not hostility.

Good evening,

I did not take it as hostility. You're asking a legitimate question. I was training cadre in the Marine Corps in real life, I gave periods of instruction by way of power point and lecture...I have briefed high ranking generals in real life while an augment with CJTF-76. I am a training technician now at my actual job, I served in real combat. Would you like more information?


This is amazing. Basically if you're too lazy to train your Officers yourself, you can just send them to this hahaha. :cool:

Its optional lol...

Just like in real life. Some officers go through ROTC, other through OCS after obtaining their education, and some through the service academies. My intent is to create a certain level of prestige online. No different than representing a specific unit/company in game. There is a certain degree of pride in that no?

My other thought would be to have different officers from different units contribute in the practical portions. Confederate and Federal alike.


What accredits you to run a brigade?
Having said that..

This idea.... like the other dude said... If you start a company you should be solid enough to lead and drill them. And not sent them to your school.

Emphasis on optional. This would just create a bond between some of the officers from both sides just like in the real civil war who had to fight each other.

The biggest question to you all is "Why not?" many pros...and so far no cons. tactics are tactics...and the US drill manual is the US drill manual.

yoyo8346
07-23-2017, 02:55 AM
I did not take it as hostility. You're asking a legitimate question. I was training cadre in the Marine Corps in real life, I gave periods of instruction by way of power point and lecture...I have briefed high ranking generals in real life while an augment with CJTF-76. I am a training technician now at my actual job, I served in real combat. Would you like more information?

Thanks for the answer. Good luck to you. :)

michaelsmithern
07-23-2017, 03:29 PM
I think i can trust my Captain to "encourage" me to learn how to properly lead, also i don't think leading as a whole is that hard, the ability to make tactical decisions during your leadership would be more concerning to me.

But I suppose if you are starting an Officer Candidate School of a sort by all means go for it

thomas aagaard
07-23-2017, 04:36 PM
.and the US drill manual is the US drill manual.

Actually it was not that simple. ;-)
By September 1862 a number of drill books was in use north and south.
(Gilham, Hardee 1855, Hardee's revised, Chandler, US infantry tactics 1861, with two manuals of arms... and a few more)


The union did end up standardizing with Casey's version, but this didn't happen until after the campaign.
(and even then some units like the Wisconsin regiments in the Iron brigade ended up still mixing in a few bits from Chandler's manual of arms)

In Lee's army Gilhams and Hardee's revised was the two most common drill books by this time.
By later in the war, most units had changed to Hardee's revised. (so did VMI in 1864)

Obvious the changes was mostly in the manual of arms, since both books are based on Hardee's 1855 book, when to come to all the manĉuvre stuff... (and that was just a translation of a french 1845 drill book.)

F. L. Villarreal
07-23-2017, 07:57 PM
Actually it was not that simple. ;-)
By September 1862 a number of drill books was in use north and south.
(Gilham, Hardee 1855, Hardee's revised, Chandler, US infantry tactics 1861, with two manuals of arms... and a few more)


The union did end up standardizing with Casey's version, but this didn't happen until after the campaign.
(and even then some units like the Wisconsin regiments in the Iron brigade ended up still mixing in a few bits from Chandler's manual of arms)

In Lee's army Gilhams and Hardee's revised was the two most common drill books by this time.
By later in the war, most units had changed to Hardee's revised. (so did VMI in 1864)

Obvious the changes was mostly in the manual of arms, since both books are based on Hardee's 1855 book, when to come to all the manĉuvre stuff... (and that was just a translation of a french 1845 drill book.)

The point being that if companies are going to cooperate why not be on the same page? Feel like im getting a lot of flak on something that can be nothing byt helpful. Its simple, if people want to do it then do it, if not then dont.

thomas aagaard
07-23-2017, 10:04 PM
I think it is a fine idea.

Just making a comment about how it was not as simply historical.

F. L. Villarreal
07-23-2017, 11:03 PM
I think it is a fine idea.

Just making a comment about how it was not as simply historical.

Feel free to take a look at the group, let me know what you think.

If Officers and NCOs from all units are involved I think this could be a great thing.

ItalianMonk
07-23-2017, 11:44 PM
Its optional lol...

Just like in real life. Some officers go through ROTC, other through OCS after obtaining their education, and some through the service academies. My intent is to create a certain level of prestige online. No different than representing a specific unit/company in game. There is a certain degree of pride in that no?

My other thought would be to have different officers from different units contribute in the practical portions. Confederate and Federal alike.

Well, thanks for the reply and good luck with it! :)

MadWolf
07-25-2017, 10:35 AM
I like this idea.

PS: I did the Final Exam
Your score is 73%

You've completed the exam. You scored 11.00 out of 15.00 points.
Passed

Hairywarhero
07-25-2017, 11:03 AM
Your score is 87%

You've completed the exam. You scored 13.00 out of 15.00 points.
Passed

LBoland
07-25-2017, 11:15 AM
Got a 2%, probably for writing in MLA format and with my name.

Bravescot
07-25-2017, 12:23 PM
Your score is 93%

You've completed the exam. You scored 14.00 out of 15.00 points.
Passed.

Engagement distance wrong xD I said 100- 200 feet instead of yards like a plonker

F. L. Villarreal
07-25-2017, 12:43 PM
Your score is 87%

You've completed the exam. You scored 13.00 out of 15.00 points.
Passed


I like this idea.

PS: I did the Final Exam
Your score is 73%

You've completed the exam. You scored 11.00 out of 15.00 points.
Passed


Your score is 93%

You've completed the exam. You scored 14.00 out of 15.00 points.
Passed.

Engagement distance wrong xD I said 100- 200 feet instead of yards like a plonker



Outstanding. I will log onto quiz abd verify info. I also am requesting your feedback.

Bravescot
07-25-2017, 01:01 PM
Outstanding. I will log onto quiz abd verify info. I also am requesting your feedback.

I didn't know you could check questions until I was told by someone else, so I blasted through it a second time to see what I got wrong. You'll see a 33% after the 93% xD.

F. L. Villarreal
07-25-2017, 01:27 PM
This is a pilot program that will need tweaking and input from all. What kind of information you would like to see included, which areas need work, etc.

DanielG453
07-25-2017, 06:41 PM
Your score is 100%

You've completed the exam. You scored 15.00 out of 15.00 points.

F. L. Villarreal
07-25-2017, 06:45 PM
Your score is 100%

You've completed the exam. You scored 15.00 out of 15.00 points.

Do you have any feedback?

MadWolf
07-25-2017, 07:02 PM
Maybe make more than one Exame Like:
1: Conduct and behavior of a officer.
2: Wapon knowledge.
3: Movement orders.
4: Army structure.

And maybe later on a In-game Exame.

F. L. Villarreal
07-25-2017, 07:08 PM
Maybe make more than one Exame Like:
1: Conduct and behavior of a officer.
2: Wapon knowledge.
3: Movement orders.
4: Army structure.

And maybe later on a In-game Exame.

Great suggestion. I think this pilot test that people took should maybe be an entry exam. Then we can up the questions into topics like the ones you mentioned. It would be awesome to see some input from all over and maybe even have some of the members actually develop tests.

DanielG453
07-25-2017, 07:10 PM
Do you have any feedback?

Perhaps a larger section on the conduct of Officers and NCO's. Otherwise, it was rather fun and interesting.

MadWolf
07-25-2017, 07:14 PM
Great suggestion. I think this pilot test that people took should maybe be an entry exam. Then we can up the questions into topics like the ones you mentioned. It would be awesome to see some input from all over and maybe even have some of the members actually develop tests.

Thats a good idea to make this pilot test a entry exam.

F. L. Villarreal
07-25-2017, 07:23 PM
I am requesting you take this back to your commanders and ask what they think. If they feel there is something missing they should most certainly (when they have time) help develop information and evaluations. This will add more depth and knowledge to the environment in the game. I think this could be a fun thing.

Does anyone have any sort of issue with this group or its intent? There is someone here who claims that is the case, he wont be named but based off of what I've seen in past posts he is a trouble maker. I want to clear the air if there are any issues and hopefully answer questions or come to a resolution. It is my intent to get a long with everyone here.

Maximus Decimus Meridius
07-26-2017, 09:10 PM
Your score is 87%

You've completed the exam. You scored 13.00 out of 15.00 points.
Passed

ha my English and the leck of skill to transfer yards into meters cost me 2 points ^^


Interesting test. Didn't expect a test like that.

F. L. Villarreal
07-26-2017, 10:03 PM
Your score is 87%

You've completed the exam. You scored 13.00 out of 15.00 points.
Passed

ha my English and the leck of skill to transfer yards into meters cost me 2 points ^^


Interesting test. Didn't expect a test like that.

Please do elaborate. What should be on it and what do you believe should not be in it? Thank you in advance for your input.

Leifr
07-27-2017, 09:02 AM
Does anyone have any sort of issue with this group or its intent? There is someone here who claims that is the case, he wont be named but based off of what I've seen in past posts he is a trouble maker. I want to clear the air if there are any issues and hopefully answer questions or come to a resolution. It is my intent to get a long with everyone here.

Continue ahead Mr Villarreal, you are more than welcome to run this sort of training group. :)

Lance Rawlings
07-27-2017, 05:06 PM
I have no qualms to this school being attempted.

And while you were in the USMC (thank you so much for your service), I think people would be more interested in getting a better idea of what you're running. Are you going for historical accuracy? Just sharing your Corps experience with the rest? Because there is quite a bit of difference between the two. That sort of thing.

I'd be interested in giving it a shot when I'm available to see what you have going on.

In my opinion, people get offended (not myself, I'm always simply skeptical) when someone try's to start these sort of groups. People feel as though the creator of the group is trying to hover over the community or just get attention, usually with NO valid credentials or experience. Along those lines is also the fact that people want to train their own guys however they want to, whether that's to historical standards or Call of Duty chaos. Most people aren't humble enough to take a rank and admit they need training themselves, thus getting offended when officer schools pop out.

I'm not that "troublemaker" am I? ;)

F. L. Villarreal
07-27-2017, 05:37 PM
I have no qualms to this school being attempted.

And while you were in the USMC (thank you so much for your service), I think people would be more interested in getting a better idea of what you're running. Are you going for historical accuracy? Just sharing your Corps experience with the rest? Because there is quite a bit of difference between the two. That sort of thing.

I'd be interested in giving it a shot when I'm available to see what you have going on.

In my opinion, people get offended (not myself, I'm always simply skeptical) when someone try's to start these sort of groups. People feel as though the creator of the group is trying to hover over the community or just get attention, usually with NO valid credentials or experience. Along those lines is also the fact that people want to train their own guys however they want to, whether that's to historical standards or Call of Duty chaos. Most people aren't humble enough to take a rank and admit they need training themselves, thus getting offended when officer schools pop out.

I'm not that "troublemaker" am I? ;)

Not at all Captain Rawlings! You have been nothing short of a gentleman.

I most certainly do not want to hover or impose anything on anyone. What I would like is to see people educating each other and learning from each other...including myself. There is so much to knowledge on these forums and this is an avenue for those people to share this priceless information in a way that can be fun as well as beneficial to the community as a whole.

Think of it like this. You serve under the 38th NC, there is a reason behind it and even pride. There is also a degree of pride with having more information and labeling it USMA for fun. Especially when you consider how many classmates of USMA* (corrected from USMC typo) and VMI had to draw their swords on each other during those years. This is a cool way for the Union and Confederate players to come together outside of the servers and share even more camaraderie. What do you think?

A. P. Hill
07-27-2017, 11:21 PM
Your score is 93%
You've completed the exam. You scored 14.00 out of 15.00 points.
Passed

Hunh, not as smart as I thought I was. ;)

Lance Rawlings
07-28-2017, 05:38 AM
Not at all Captain Rawlings! You have been nothing short of a gentleman.

I most certainly do not want to hover or impose anything on anyone. What I would like is to see people educating each other and learning from each other...including myself. There is so much to knowledge on these forums and this is an avenue for those people to share this priceless information in a way that can be fun as well as beneficial to the community as a whole.

Think of it like this. You serve under the 38th NC, there is a reason behind it and even pride. There is also a degree of pride with having more information and labeling it USMA for fun. Especially when you consider how many classmates of USMC and VMI had to draw their swords on each other during those years. This is a cool way for the Union and Confederate players to come together outside of the servers and share even more camaraderie. What do you think?

Understood! I think this may be the first Officer School/Exam that I don't look down on ;) Now where is this exam? Did I miss a link or something?

Edit: Wanted to add this link that NCO's and really anybody can find useful if you're shooting for historical accuracy http://www.explicitlyclear.com/wp/corporal-test-interactive/

2nd Edit: Found the link ;)

https://i.gyazo.com/54cf39483f2ca9574b9d0ced7ebbf1b5.png

F. L. Villarreal
07-28-2017, 12:16 PM
Understood! I think this may be the first Officer School/Exam that I don't look down on ;) Now where is this exam? Did I miss a link or something?

Edit: Wanted to add this link that NCO's and really anybody can find useful if you're shooting for historical accuracy http://www.explicitlyclear.com/wp/corporal-test-interactive/


2nd Edit: Found the link ;)

https://i.gyazo.com/54cf39483f2ca9574b9d0ced7ebbf1b5.png

Thank you for the kind words! I will most certainly take down this information. :-)

DomDowg
07-28-2017, 10:15 PM
The results are in 14.00 out of 15.00 points. You scored a 93%.


https://i.gyazo.com/38c0d017694648fe442911e98c4bd54f.png

Feedback:
I ask that you change the How long did the Battle of Antietam last for, to "How long did the Maryland Campaign last for," because those are the dates you were putting in as answers. Honestly it is less confusing and if the Battle of Antietam lasted that long it would be one of the longest battles of the civil war and would no be coined the "SINGLE Bloodiest Day in American History."

A. P. Hill
07-29-2017, 03:24 AM
Of the West Pointers to graduate between 1830 - 1861, 30 percent of the officers went with the Confederacy. Of the 239 cadets at West Point when secession hit, 88 cadets or 37 percent also drew lots with the Confederacy. (https://www.amazon.com/Rebels-West-Point-Graduates-Confederacy/dp/B011MFABXC)

6883


6884

Lance Rawlings
07-29-2017, 04:58 AM
The results are in 14.00 out of 15.00 points. You scored a 93%.


https://i.gyazo.com/38c0d017694648fe442911e98c4bd54f.png

Feedback:
I ask that you change the How long did the Battle of Antietam last for, to "How long did the Maryland Campaign last for," because those are the dates you were putting in as answers. Honestly it is less confusing and if the Battle of Antietam lasted that long it would be one of the longest battles of the civil war and would no be coined the "SINGLE Bloodiest Day in American History."

The date's were somewhat confusing, I agree.

Id also say, for the platoon question, I've only ever heard of having a standard two platoons from Civil War manuals. Theres not a minimum or maximum, just a set number of 2.

thomas aagaard
07-29-2017, 10:42 AM
When talking to an officer of superior rank you do what?
Do you have a period source on this?

What is the suggested minimal distance between two infantry companies advancing towards enemy lines?

question make little sense
Are we taking two companies in the same battalion?
Are they in line? column of companies? or what?

Or companies that are part of different brigades?


Calvary is best used to?
It is spelled cavalry.

When dismissed by an officer you do what?
source for the answer?


question 11 - Are you in command of your unit?

question 12 - it lasted one day. I guess you meen the Maryland campaign.

question 14 - it got exactly two.

question 15 - source? are we talking their adds? the military's rule? in the game? or?



And "what is your source go for just about all questions. Some look to me to be based on modern military thinking... and not period sources.


But I think this is a fine idea.

TheRegulator
07-29-2017, 11:46 AM
I can tell if an officer is any good, in a few min's, just on his first commands. His attitude and seriousity. West Point or not :rolleyes:

Lance Rawlings
07-29-2017, 02:43 PM
I can tell if an officer is any good, in a few min's, just on his first commands. His attitude and seriousity. West Point or not :rolleyes:

Well aren't you special ;)

A. P. Hill
07-29-2017, 04:34 PM
When talking to an officer of superior rank you do what?
Do you have a period source on this? ...

Always such a "strict by the book" person you are Aagaard, it must be hell living like that.

However, in answer to this above quoted question ... Read Article XXIX (http://www.storymindmedia.com/angryalien/books/general-services/1861%20%20Revised%20regulations%20for%20the%20Army %20of%20the%20United%20States.pdf), just the part about "Honors paid". The following sub article is titled "Salutes" but the section deals with gun salutes rather than honorary saluting.


What is the suggested minimal distance between two infantry companies advancing towards enemy lines?

question make little sense
Are we taking two companies in the same battalion?
Are they in line? column of companies? or what?

Or companies that are part of different brigades?

Maybe to you it made little sense, but I automatically understood him to mean, two separate companies, in parallel ranks advancing in line formation toward an enemy position. In which case, the distance between ranks attacking are to be 250 - 300 yards. (See See page 24 of this book for a pictorial reference of the question. (https://www.amazon.com/Arms-Equipment-Civil-Jack-Coggins/dp/0486433951))


When dismissed by an officer you do what?
source for the answer? ...

Apparently you're not familiar with U.S. Military protocol. Again see my first link in reply. It's in the same Article XXIX you'll have to read to find it.

Just a friendly word of advice, try lightening up a bit ... your presence as a strict "if it isn't in period writings, it's no good." is a bit dry. :)

TheRegulator
07-29-2017, 06:23 PM
Well aren't you special ;)


Most people are able to that . . . Its not a special gift for me :rolleyes:

thomas aagaard
07-29-2017, 07:48 PM
Always such a "strict by the book" person you are Aagaard, it must be hell living like that.

Not at all and Iam way less by the books about everything else., but when it come to historical work I do need sources on things to trust it... sort of a professional habit.


And Iam familiar with U.S. Military protocol... just not the exact article in the regulations... and I have seen way, way to many reenactores do things that are not part of period practices. (but from later periods or simply things they invented) That is why I asked for the period source.


Thanks for pointing me to the correct article... been too long since I read the regulations.

F. L. Villarreal
08-02-2017, 03:17 PM
Not at all and Iam way less by the books about everything else., but when it come to historical work I do need sources on things to trust it... sort of a professional habit.


And Iam familiar with U.S. Military protocol... just not the exact article in the regulations... and I have seen way, way to many reenactores do things that are not part of period practices. (but from later periods or simply things they invented) That is why I asked for the period source.


Thanks for pointing me to the correct article... been too long since I read the regulations.

Just curious. How is it you became familiar with US Military protocol? I know that the naval branches things are done a bit different than in the Army and Air Force.

thomas aagaard
08-03-2017, 09:41 AM
There was no airforce in 1860 ;-)

It was Hill that used "US Military protocol"... writing "US army" would properly be more correct... I really don't know much about the federal navy.


By reading regulation, the OR and other sources...

F. L. Villarreal
08-03-2017, 01:06 PM
There was no airforce in 1860 ;-)

It was Hill that used "US Military protocol"... writing "US army" would properly be more correct... I really don't know much about the federal navy.


By reading regulation, the OR and other sources...

Here in the states...where its our military, we call it the Army. or Marines or which ever branch it is. We don't always add US in front of it. US Military protocol is different for each individual branch. Right down to when you salute and when you don't.

Leifr
08-03-2017, 02:12 PM
Here in the states...where its our military, we call it the Army. or Marines or which ever branch it is. We don't always add US in front of it. US Military protocol is different for each individual branch. Right down to when you salute and when you don't.

I believe Mr Aagaard is writing with reference to the 1860s.

F. L. Villarreal
08-03-2017, 02:16 PM
I believe Mr Aagaard is writing with reference to the 1860s.

A lot of the protocol the Naval services uses from back then up until now has not changed much with a few exceptions that are prudent due to advancements in technology.

Leifr
08-03-2017, 02:35 PM
A lot of the protocol the Naval services uses from back then up until now has not changed much with a few exceptions that are prudent due to advancements in technology.

I defer to those with the greater knowledge on this subject - very good.

Ezra Baldwin
05-05-2018, 02:40 AM
Your score is 87%
You've completed the exam. You scored 13.00 out of 15.00 points.Passed

Oxy556
10-16-2018, 02:23 AM
Is this Academy still active?

Johnny Clement
10-16-2018, 05:29 AM
Is this Academy still active?

I'm assuming no. Latest post was in may.

RhettVito
10-16-2018, 06:58 AM
no it's dead

A. P. Hill
10-16-2018, 01:53 PM
Thanks for necroing this thread, it caused me to re-read some of it.

This part in particular :


There was no airforce in 1860 ;-) ...

This would be an incorrect statement. All of the American Air Forces were actually branches of the Army til after (or during,) ww2. And since Dr. Thaddeus Lowe was experimenting with his balloons during the course of the American Civil War, one could say that the Army Air Corps got its initial start, and recognition.

So much so, that as difficult as it was to acquire the chemicals, the Confederate Military replicated Lowe's balloons, (albiet, I've only heard of one CSA balloon.)

Oxy556
10-16-2018, 05:01 PM
Well that's a shame, sad to see this died.