Frogman
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- May 16, 2013
- Messages
- 2,751
- Reaction score
- 11
- Country
- Location
I remember back in the 80's, Rangers were a big thing. Their units are much smaller and dedicated now but are they still considered Rangers or are the SEALs?
They're still two different things. Rangers are US Army Special Operations Forces while the SEALs are Navy Special Warfare/SF.
The Egyptian Thunderbolt are organised in much the same way, with a "magmo3a" (slightly larger than a section) being the smallest formation than can be put to task instead of a platoon in line infantry.
That's what differentiates the Rangers from Special Forces. They can operate in small groups but still have the ability to work as platoons, companies, and battalions with the associated fire power. Something SF can't and don't do.
Because if you take the US...
Come on Gomes. They're definitely not the same. How many personal pictures do we see here of Thunderbolt soldiers with awful habits (there's one at the top of this page!).
Poor trigger discipline, muzzle flagging, pointing the weapon in jest, one handed firing, and firing while the stock is still folded are not indicative of comprehensive small arms training. Resulting in poor safety practices and marksmanship. All these things would have been ironed out to hell if basic was any good.
The way I see it these are the problems;
- Conscription - 2 to 3 year service hinders the amount of time that can be spent in training and also stops the accumulation of experience in the organisation as conscripts are discharged. NCOs are often very very green as a result and the CoC is filled with people that have limited operational experience.
- Basic Training - Egyptian education institutions lack the requisite knowledge to train competent infantrymen. That includes poor skill at arms training and very little time on any type of range or in the field.
- Selection - Officer selection is three months and includes relevant tasks such as patrolling, navigation, and planning. Conscripts do three weeks (!) mostly involving the physical pass/fail phase and traditional martial arts. The showmanship we see on parades is what they essentially learn for those weeks.
- Continuation - There is very little continuation training other than specialisation (eg anti tank or machine gunner) based on where the conscript is posted.
- Roles - They share many of the same roles as the Paratroopers (who have bigger problems) including air assault. However the Paras have cornered anything that includes jumping to their own and the Thunderbolt's detriment. Rather than Airborne infantry they want to be SOF!
The total is around six months (around the same time it takes to train a British infantryman) but the substance is based on the experience of continuous operation since WWII that focuses on patrols, marksmanship, and planning.
Granted they go through weapons firing and target obstacle courses but these guys in the Saaqa must be doing something similar,
They're only starting to introduce individual and section battle skill ranges to regular soldiers. Doubt it has made its way to training. Either way they won't fire more than a couple dozen rounds in Basic and selection.
10 years ago..
Nothing to do with the Thunderbolt. The Special Forces and Reconnaissance Course is a selection program for...Special Forces.
In 17 years it has only had 8 classes producing near a dozen operators each time. The route to SF is actually far easier than most believe and isn't as comprehensive as our imitation of the US BUD/SEAL course.
Last edited: