RAP week is over. The two LTs and one MAJ have passed it for a second time. RAP week includes all the events that weed out the completely unprepared: PT test, a minimal swim test, various water events, a laughable land nav course that still produces over 10% failures, Ranger runs and a rucksack march. The women, like most of their male peers, passed these tests to standard.
Off to Darby again, where these three officers have performed well enough in the past that Brigade Commander COL David Fivecoat (an avid supporter of the women in Ranger School initiative) expects them to finally pass some patrols.
These officers have received generally positive peer reports, but none of them has passed a single graded patrol.
Ranger students must pass one patrol in each phase, at least four patrols overall, and at least half of their assigned graded patrol leadership positions. Recycles get their counter reset to zero.
An interesting thing is happening. The attrition of the men serving alongside these women is higher than it is usually in all-male classes. Higher enough to be noticeable, but not completely out of range of Ranger School experience (which is decently well documented over a longitudinal span of some 65 years). There’s not enough data yet to suggest whether this result was a one-class anomaly or whether it will be the norm with women students on board.
We may have some observations on the psychological and behavioral differences that instructors have observed, later this week.
COL Fivecoat “expects” them to pass some patrols or it will be reflected on somebody’s NCOER?
Is that what he means by “expects”
I figured they would make it through RAP week. Three weeks of lots of food and sufficient sleep and they knew what PT to concentrate on beforehand. The ‘mindset’ is already taken care of.
As I understand it, a failed student is informed what they did wrong, but are they instructed on how to do it correctly?
I don’t think they were treated differently that a male Day 1 recycle would have been, too many eyes on them. COL F offered the day 1 recycle to two men (at least) who opted not to take it.
While recycles are waiting to re inject they are retrained and coached a little in the Gulag, but mostly just PT.
I didn’t think they were treated ‘differently’ either. My point was they knew they could probably make it through RAP again because they already had and were certainly being motivated to not just up and quit.
Is there any feedback on how they’re failing the patrols?
Is it a something that they are personally doing wrong, or is it something like “one of your sentries fell asleep (which, or course, is something the patrol leader is not doing correctly by not checking on the sentries) – buzzzzzz – you’re a No Go at this station” deal?
Yeah, I’ve seen some RI feedback but it’s not entirely for publication at this time. Don’t want to burn anybody. The bottom line is they are failing for the same kinds of things guys fail for, sometimes their fault, sometimes their hard luck. They’re performing about like the lower end of service support guys who wangle a Ragnar slot. (Technically, I was an MI guy when I went, but I was coming out of Group, so I could patrol. I think it was easier for guys who had dismounted Infantry time, but I think a mech guy or artillery guy would be a lot more dislocated than I was, and a QM or Finance Corps soldier even more so. Funny, they granted me 11B after Ranger school as a secondary).
Two things that made an impression is that none of the women seem to react well to surprises during the patrols, whether it’s just “$#!+ happens” or the stuff the RI’s throw in to mix it up. “What’chu gonna do PL?” And ALL of the women bitch, whine, wheedle and claim bias when they get a NO-GO, but, and I quote, “That’s not as big a deal as it sounds because more’n half of the men snivel the exact same way when they earn a NO-GO.”
They are all worried about how the women will hold up in the later phases, if they get through Darby. The suck is cumulative at what has been up to now the Benning School for Boys. But that’s nothing compared to the worry about what happens if none of them pass. There are suits in the E Ring (not to mention the media, NOW, DACOWITS, all of Northampton MA, etc.) who will see no possible explanation for women failing but Cismale Heteronormative Patriarchy, and their response will be to smash Ranger to the unchallenging level that Airborne sank to post-74.
Christ on a crutch.
I’m not military or ex military but I have a kid. And the security of my country and MY KID depend on the competence of the US Military and especially the elite units.
It’s not a game and it’s not a joke. It’s life or death.
Fuck the entire pentagon and both houses of congress bareback with Nancy Pelosi’s dick.
Understand the OPSEC. I pity what the RIs are having to endure.
I know people at Dahlonega. Tried contact but no joy (maybe because the women haven’t made it there yet).
Mountain phase could wind up with out amazons getting killed or worse really injured.
Remembering from re-searching and reading your previous posts, the article by Tom Kratman popped back up that I had been paraphrasing from faulty memory. Maybe the RIs might do an American version of the “Erxleben rule” with the major, then a few months after she graduates and has to go to a medical evaluation board because of her permanent profiles, everyone will let this die a quiet death when they can’t get any more women to volunteer.
We shall see.
Another interesting statistic would be to follow the further careers and the medical conditions of the 5 who didn’t make it, and these 3 as well.
Ranger will come to mean what Marine does, nothing but a paper stamp and ticket punch. Now there are Elite Super Marine Raiders!
Once all Marines would have been Raiders.
There will one day be Elite Rangers as there are now Elite Marines.
The word elite will apply to just normal Rangers and Marines.
Ranger and Marine will be nothing more than a title with no actual meaning.
watch and see.
I wish someone would pay Ronda Rousey to go through Ranger school just to see what happens. At least then we would know if it was actually possible for a woman to graduate. And if she failed, then we could forget about this stupid idea forever.
Too bad it won’t happen.
ISTR that she has said it would not be possible for her to do it.
When you say that there’s an increase in the attrition rates for males in this class, how large an increase are we talking?
Is it above average but within recorded extremes? Is it beyond recorded extremes? If the latter, how far beyond?
To what do you attribute the apparent increase? Men feeling pressured to pick up a greater share of the load (i.e. trying to pick up the slack)? Men not wanting to show weakness in front of the opposite sex, and therefore being less inclined to complain about minor injuries/ailments before they become incapacitating? A level of training that is more intense than normal to make it harder for women to pass? A lesser-than-normal grade of male inductee in order to make the female inductees look better by comparison? Some thing else? Some combination of the above?
I don’t have any fundamental opposition to women serving in combat-arms roles, but I do have a problem with lowering standards so as to make those roles easier for women to fill, and for our enemies to defeat. The military should always be about finding the best people for the job, and providing them with the best training and equipment that we can; It’s not the place for coddling SJWs.
Lots of questions.
A: above average but within recorded extremes. Almost double the mean, but that’s well within the normal variance.
A: Speculating, it is due to a general corrosion of team bonds and unity, not any specific single mechanism. Also, it is probably very demoralizing for a struggling man to see a woman appear to outperform him, and if that happens, it may cause some males to attrit at the margins. I do not believe any games were played with the males in the class.
Well, every highly demanding training program has seen standards drop, fall, slide or plunge when “adjustments” have been made to accommodate women. The women who seek these jobs (like the officers who pursue combat aviation, for example) are generally careerists, not warriors. There are so few of them they’re still outnumbered by the toxic male careerists… google Holly Graf, then google Marcus Arnheiter. (I feel like beating up the Navy tonight, but all services can be fertile ground for toxic leaders).
“Unfortunately, existing Army policy appears to be no longer a reliable guide for chaplains because it seems that commanders like Colonel Fivecoat can ignore policy for chaplains at will, and without consequence. How can chaplains function effectively and with confidence in such an unpredictable
COL Fivecoat has quite a reputation of oppressing those who disagree or don’t comply with his agenda. He pushed out the last chaplain and this was on a precedent of similar treatment of the previous chaplain.
Curious to find out if there is even a chaplain stationed at the RTB. It certainly is much easier to compromise the conscience without such a presence of someone to challenge right or wrong at such a rudimentary level.
Chaplains are TDA’d to each of the three Ranger Training Battalions. I assume there’s one at Brigade, but I’m not sure where he physically works now that it’s the ARTB.
Hey Weaponsman, I’m not sure that Rangerette is the right term to use for these soldiers who are trying to accomplish what 50% of the men of each class, and 30% odd percent total fail to accomplish. I’m not an apologist for women, but they’re in the arena, striving to succeed. We’re in the bleachers. Your use of the term Rangerette strikes me as derogatory, and minimizes their efforts to succeed.
In the Regiment that I grew up in, Rangerette had a very specific meaning, about a very specific type of woman, who acted in a specific manner. these’s women aren’t them. These are professional soldiers striving to better themselves at great cost. check out Urban Dictionary for a more accurate definition. To use the term here diminishes what these soldiers, and Rangerettes in good standing are.
I’m glad I got my Tab back when (10-94). It was harder then, when factoring in meals and sleep cycles. Much less, ridiculous levels of oversight and micromanagement.
Any updates on the three zero-day recycle women?
Also, any scuttlebutt on COL Vanek’s relief? Was he ushered out because no women made it through Ranger School? Have we installed an appropriate “command climate” now, that may ensure our three remaining females graduate?
COL Christopher Vanek was the Regimental commander and had everything to do with the operational Ranger Regiment and nothing to do with the Ranger School (sure, the Regiment sends its potential NCOs there and expects its officers to have been there already, but the rest of the Army provides most of the Ranger School students). The Regimental commander would have no official say or position on women in Ranger school, and nobody in their right mind suggests that they will be welcoming women to the Regiment shortly. I’m not sure he received a relief for cause, only a GOMOR.
SOFREP (which seems to have deteriorated since its launch, unfortunately) suggested that it may have been travel voucher irregularities.
Havok Journal notes that Vanek received a GOMOR back in June and was scheduled to change command anyway by end of month. It seems unquestionable that the guy who replaced Vanek as Regimental Commander would have been nominated months ago.
The officer who signed the GOMOR, LTG Charles Cleveland, also changed command last week. It is not impossible to get a decent command after getting a GOMOR, if the GOMOR is thought to be bogus, and the General Officer in question is a d-bag. (I have a friend who did it). But promotion beyond O-6 isn’t happening with that in your records.
Cleveland isn’t a d-bag. He is a stickler for the Academy version of the Code of Conduct, and he thinks that not tolerating anyone who “lies, cheats or steals” is not something you need to go to an Academy to do. I have no opinion on the content of a GOMOR I haven’t seen. Lack of an emergency relief before the GOMOR suggests that Vanek’s transgressions, whatever they were, weren’t very serious ones. Serious ones and he’s have been spot relieved. (Seen that one, too).