Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Infantry Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Attrition in Special Forces Selection
Comet    8/25/2003 6:40:18 PM
Does anyone know what the attrition is now for SF Selection? Now that they are taking new recruits as 18x, I'm interested in knowing how well they're doing.
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5   NEXT
soccadude    RE:Special Forces Selection 18 Xray program   2/24/2004 8:43:05 AM
Qualifications of SF: To Qualify For SF, you need to be a male between the ages of 18 and 30. Get a 110 GT score or higher and an 85 or higher on the DLAB. As well as a clean background to qualify for a SECRET clearance.
 
Quote    Reply

Worcester    RE:Special Forces Selection 18 Xray program   2/24/2004 11:04:05 AM
Are you saying we're taking SF operators at 18 years old with 6-9 months training? And these kids are going out at 19+ to advise the Northern Alliance how to beat the Taliban - oh great! Damn, they must have lowered the SF pass bar!
 
Quote    Reply

joe6pack    RE:Special Forces Selection 18 Xray program   2/24/2004 11:38:40 AM
Well, it used to be had to be at least an E-4 and the below mentioned requirements. Even so, they are probably still looking at a few years before joining a team. Language course is 6 months, specialty training (particularly for the SF medic) is long, getting worked into a team, etc. I can't imagine there are too many 18 year olds walking in off the street capable of making it through without some time in the army before hand.
 
Quote    Reply

soccadude    RE:Special Forces Selection 18 Xray program   2/24/2004 12:38:13 PM
Actually the initial training process takes about 24 months. 2 years. Basic Training Infantry School 16 weeks Jump School 7 weeks Pre-SFAS 4 weeks SFAS 3 weeks (Atleast that's what my contract says) -----------
 
Quote    Reply

smitty237    RE:Special Forces Selection 18 Xray program   2/24/2004 7:14:56 PM
I just recently talked to a kid who enlisted as an 18 series MOS. A good kid, but young. He got bounced on a medical because his recruiter played a little fast and loose with his paperwork. The kid has to wait two years before he is reportedly elgible to get back into the program. He told me that he has already completed OSUT and Airborne School. It goes without saying that the Army has relaxed its standards for selection to Special Forces. A nineteen year old kid simply lacks the maturity or the skills to be an effective Special Forces trooper. What troubles me almost as much is the fact that some recruiters are trying to convince these teenagers that they have the right stuff to be "Green Berets". Maybe under the new standards some do, but most will fail and end up in regular grunt units. The end result will be soldiers who are demoralised and convinced that they didn't have what it took. I have a hard time seeing how this whole program is good for the Army. What the Army should do is see what it can do to retain its current Special Forces troopers. These guys are an invaluable resource who rose through the enlisted and NCO ranks and earned the right to be among the world's elite. We need to keep them, not replace them with teenagers.
 
Quote    Reply

raymond    RE:Special Forces Selection 18 Xray program   2/29/2004 2:32:44 PM
Problem is, there simply are not enough of those people for current and projected tasking, so something has to give. Given that SF has only rarely performs it's original mission (training guerillas) perhaps it's time to revisit and reasses the whole elite forces structure. The strategic demand is for commandos: units conducting well-rehersed, well-supported raids in platoon to company strength. The standards of maturity, leadership, and flexibility required for SF are not really nescessary for these kinds of operations. Take a look at things like Zebrugge, or numerous raids carried out in occupied France during WWII. SF needs to shrink drastically, and focus on it's core missions: insurgent training and strategic reconiassance. Stop doing things others can do cheaper. The Army can add a couple Ranger regiments and tweek the program a bit to fill the rest of the need. That way everyone can maintain their standards, and SF can stop alienating the rest of the combat arms with the 18X program.
 
Quote    Reply

Horsesoldier    RE:Special Forces Selection 18 Xray program -- soccadude   2/29/2004 4:09:38 PM
Seven weeks of airborne training? You might want to check with whoever printed your contract for you . . .
 
Quote    Reply

soccadude    RE:Special Forces Selection 18 Xray program -- soccadude   3/5/2004 5:29:57 PM
Hmm, It says : Type Location Start Date Length wks Prereq Mos(11B) Benn 20040806 16 Prereq Benn 20041126 7 Prereq Bragg 20050114 4 Training Path Benn 20050215 3 So I believe I wrote it read it wrong originally it's only 4 weeks?
 
Quote    Reply

Horsesoldier    RE:Special Forces Selection 18 Xray program -- soccadude   3/5/2004 8:14:52 PM
>>So I believe I wrote it read it wrong originally it's only 4 weeks? << I'm not really up on the ins and outs of the 18 X-ray program, but Basic Airborne is at Benning and is three weeks (unless things have changed), so, with the events you mentioned in your first post, I'm guessing: Infantry OSUT Pre-SFAS at Benning SFAS at Bragg Basic Airborne at Benning And then I assume it really gets fun . . . In any event, good luck.
 
Quote    Reply

ZealousZionist    RE:Attrition in Special Forces Selection   3/8/2004 12:08:49 AM
I was talking to an SF major a while back (before the new civilian recruitment scheme) and he told me that the average wash out rate in SF selection is about 50%. While the institutionalization of SF as a separate branch was probably necessary to deal with the hostile "leg" mentality of the regular army, I can't help but think that this has created problems of its own. Expecially in terms of maintaining quality. I was reading a piece on SF selection a while ago and the PERSCOM guys were quoted as saying "we need 750 new Special Forces operators this year." That sort of "assembly line" attitude where selection is concerned can't help but come at the expense of quality. Compare, by contrast, SAS and Delta selection rates, that are usually about 10%. There is also the story of the selection course in each of these units where not a single candidate was deemed suitable and passed. There's a similar story about BUDS (don't know whether it's true) The SF units with which I am personally acquainted (the IDF's Sayeret Matkal and its Naval Commando S-13) maintain extremely exacting standards that cause well over 95% of those who aspire to those units to not make the grade. The Brit SAS, and the US Delta and SEALS seem to have the same uncompromising attitude. With roughly 5,000 operator slots to fill in the US Army SF, it's undoubtedly difficult to maintain standards quite to the same extent. But the Green Beanies need to take care not to water down standards too much in order to keep their ranks filled
 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3 4 5   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics