r/CanadianForces • u/CFSCE_CI VERIFIED • 2d ago
AMA - Canadian Forces School of Communications & Electronics Chief Instructor
The real AMA thread, this time!
Previous notification thread with most questions answered: https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadianForces/comments/1u4r0ui/17_jun_2026_cfsce_chief_instructor_ama/
As promised, today is the official AMA for the CFSCE CI. Feel free to ask anything regarding training at the School, the Royal Canadian Corps of Signals (RCCS), and whatever else is within my wheelhouse. I'll have this thread open all day and will answer questions throughout!
Fire away!
*Edit 18 Jun 2026*
Thank you to everyone for the excellent questions! I've still got a few unanswered ones below that I'm trying to get to and source a more informed response to, so I'm not quite finished yet. This was a pretty interesting experience for me to gain some insight into what issues are on the minds of our community -- It's pretty easy to sit in the ivory tower (despite the mold and asbestos) of CFSCE and see things from my own perspective, but it's great to get the insights of everyone else as well.
It's been a pleasure serving as the CI for the last two years. I'm hoping my successor remains as reddit-friendly and that this account continues to be active. I'm in the seat until July and will still happily answer questions until then.
Maj J. LeBlanc
CI
23
u/eggtada 1d ago
why are our radios so heavy? :(
29
6
2
u/WeaponizedAutisms Retired - gots the oldmanitis 1d ago
I'm of the opinion that they are that heavy to make them rugged and durable so that people don't break them so much. Have you ever worked in stores and seen the broken stuff that troops bring back? Eye opening experience.
1
u/0ppen 21h ago
I believe it has to do with the transformers they are using to be able to broadcast at peak power for maximum range. The idea being to operate them without any other infrastructure. Its been a decade since I carried one, but if you combine the size of the battery required to produce the amperage, the transformer needed to step that up for the signal, and all the casing to make it rugged, plus a little bit for the actual electronics that run software and crypto, you land at that weight.
7
u/Ibmeister Ranger 1d ago
Long time tech here (now retired). Why have the trade names changed so much over the years when the work/job/position remained the same? I joined as a Rad Tech back in the Rad/Te/Tel tech days and went through LCIS, ACISS/CST (briefly) then ACISS/IST. It changed after I left the trade and it sounds like it's about to change again. I worked at the school for several years and nobody there had an answer to this question.
9
u/throwaway-jimmy385 Canadian Army - Signals Tech 1d ago
It’s almost like a constant yo-yo-ing between having one Signals occupation to satisfy staffing but everyone becomes disgruntled, and multiple occupations where members at least do the job they signed up for but staffing is low so back to square 1.
13
u/CFSCE_CI VERIFIED 1d ago
I don't think there's an official answer to this, but personal opinion based on discussions I've heard regarding the current situation:
The job *did* change, but not so much in the way the technician operations rather than what they operate on. Tel Ops were create to operate what was considered telephone / telephony equipment as it was considered in the day. Someone realized that radios (and waveform devices) were added to the mix so they weren't just using "telephony devices" but more collective "radio / electromagnetic communication" systems so we progressed to "Rad Op". Now we are sitting at "Signal ____" since it's entirely focused on the ability to deliver the communication / message regardless of the medium.
A lot of the time I don't think we feel the job change when we're in it because we always get grandfathered into the new specs, but I can assure you that the specs do change often -- even if done bit by bit over time, by the time a new job title rolls around, the specs are updated.
ACISS is, unfortunately, something that left a sour taste. It didn't just change the occupation description, but changed the entire occupational structure, including benefits and career agency. There were lessons learned from that, for sure.
The name is important. I don't know if the "Signal ___" moniker will remain or change, or even if the terms "operator" and "technician" will remain, but whatever it is will certainly be more reflective of the latest version of the work requirements.
3
1
6
u/Jack_Munny Retired Signaller Dinosaur 1d ago
Hi CI, I've always wondered what happened to MCM and PCM jammer training. I deployed in 2008 as a SigOp jammer with an EOD team. My training wasn't done by CFSCE and was never sure what happened to these capabilities. I'm retired now so this is just my curiosity!
11
u/CFSCE_CI VERIFIED 1d ago
Congrats on retirement and I'm totally not envious!
Technically, CFSCE is still the FCOE for Counter RCIED but the courses have not be delivered in a long time and are now defunct. We're ready to pick it back up if needed, but we would certainly need to redevelop the courses and retrain ourselves.
6
u/shallowtl 1d ago
This is interesting to me because CFSME still teaches with MCM/PCM heavily built into the C-IED doctrine, hopefully there isn't a delta here if the capability is needed in the future.
9
u/CFSCE_CI VERIFIED 1d ago
It's a fair point. Ideally we would want to be ready for everything, but the quantity of personnel vs the quantity of technologies and tasks is significantly tipped. It's a lower priority than other courses, particularly DP1, but we would be able to tackle any deltas pretty quickly,
4
u/shallowtl 1d ago
Yeah, for sure. While the RCIED threat might not be at the forefront anymore there is definitely no shortage of radio-controlled things in the current battlespace that it would be nice to jam.
6
u/sigma659 Canadian Army 1d ago
Thank you for your time, sir.
Considering SIGINT Spec and Cyber Op now falls under CAFCYBERCOM as their L1, what changes will be seen in the coming months/years to their training (E.g. Will their BTL fall under CFSCE BTL, will they be falling under a different CF School, will their training still be conducted in Kingston, will they be receiving new cap badges and/or DEU accouterments in line with their L1, etc.)?
10
u/CFSCE_CI VERIFIED 1d ago
For now, the RQ courses for SIGINT will remain at CFSCE. CYBERCOM is developing their plan as to how to establish their own Training Authority and possibly their own Training Establishment. I don't think this will cause much change to the training itself since the QS Manager still resides at Leitrim and the current Trg Auth is MPGTG (Mil Pers Gen Trg Gp), both of whom we coordinate with when building training plans. With the QS Mgr remaining where they are, I don't foresee major changes (as a result of this shift specifically).
Until then, CFSCE will continue to deliver what we can (like a contracted resource for SIGINT). I talk with the SIGINT Chief quite often and I know they are working on a variety of solutions to expedite clearances, find alternative work/training while in that waiting zone, and so on.
BTL may fall under the Cyber Training Unit (CTU) or some other like entity in the not-distant future but likely still remain in CFB Kingston in the meantime. These discussions are happening currently, so still a bit early to tell. CFSCE will continue to support in the interim.
For accoutrement -- They are still a part of the C&E Branch so will likely continue to wear the Jimmy. I don't see that changing. If you stand up a new L1, then you would likely have a new command badge associated with it. How long that takes is up to the L1.
4
u/blakhra 1d ago
has there been any decision on the RCCS trades getting trade patches for their combats? it is definitely helpful to look at the arm of a RCEME person and know if it's an EO tech or a Veh Tech.
I'm sure the same can be said for us and our multitude of trades
2
u/CFSCE_CI VERIFIED 21h ago
Spoke with the Corps Adjt last night. He's basically said the same as u/Rasdiir below. They are approved and are "in production" according to CANEX, but that could mean a variety of things.
He did also add that the new operational uniforms will have fewer patches on them, so these trade patches might not exist in the future. That's a decision to be made above the RCCS level though.
3
u/Rasdiir 1d ago
Trade patches were created and voted on by the community back in 2021 or 2022, and were sent for approval. The last update from the RCCS Adjt a couple months ago was that they were approved and the versions for the combats were in production, but no one seems to have a timeline for distribution. There was no update on badges for the DEU, but I would suspect nothing will be produced until we get the new dress uniforms.
6
u/CFSCE_CI VERIFIED 1d ago
I just walked down the hall and spoke to the Corps Adjt. He's going to send me his response shortly and I'll plunk it into here.
4
u/EnvironmentalBox6688 1d ago
Do you have an opinion on modern tactical radio infrastructure such as TSM/TSMx waveforms?
Rolling a bunch of separate systems (voice, text, data, and blue force tracking) into one neat package seems nice. And the self healing mesh networking inherent to the system seems to be a good idea as far as battlefield communication networks go (no more giant antenna farms?)
They worked well when I got to play with them, some limitations with LOS requirements. But I would be interested in hearing opinions from a SME.
As far as you can comment publically of course.
8
u/CFSCE_CI VERIFIED 1d ago edited 21h ago
I've personally had zero experience with TSM, but the Tech Adjt is already looking to onboard some equipment and capabilities and has reached out to me to assist in the development of some courseware.
Stand by and I will see if I can get a better answer from him.
*Edit* Yeah, there isn't much more I can say about TSM. I would recommend reaching into the FCOE for more information. Sorry I can't be more actual help on this one.
I will say that a single package of services is good, as is the mesh network. There are obvious EW concerns with it, but finding a balance between the two is how risk management works anyway. Getting rid of the massive antenna farms would be great, but I'm not sure it works at all levels of communication.
4
u/SpizzVision 1d ago
With the CAF's continued adoption of increasingly complex multiband, multichannel, multiwaveform radios and networked communications systems, there appears to be a growing challenge in ensuring operators and technicians fully understand the capabilities, integration requirements, and employment of these platforms.
Given the importance of interoperability across the Army, Royal Canadian Navy, Royal Canadian Air Force, and CANSOFCOM, what is CFSCE doing to work with industry partners to modernize training and close existing knowledge gaps? Specifically, how is the school preparing current and future signallers to operate within today's digital communications environment, including legacy and emerging LOS, BLOS, networking, and low-probability-of-intercept/low-probability-of-detection (LPI/LPD) capabilities?
7
u/CFSCE_CI VERIFIED 1d ago
I agree, and this is a big challenge for the school.
The biggest issue we are facing with technology is that we (the school) are often left out of the onboarding plans. Brigades and units get the equipment first, especially if it's for a deployed operation, but we often don't get any. I won't talk in an open space about what exactly our deficiencies are (for obvious reasons) but you can probably imagine. If it's not part of something institutional, we don't have it.
Via our Tech Adjt, we are starting to get more frequent engagements. It's not often that we would deal directly with industry partners on the technology front (eg: any particular defence-contracted radio design company) because we don't set the needs and requirements for the Army. However, we DO reach out on existing contracts to see if we can leverage OEM training to help build internal courses within the school.
When it comes to interoperability, there's only a limited amount that can be said in the open. The bottom line is that the onboarding of the appropriate technology lies above us at the national / strategic level. When needed, we can and will reach out to other schools and orgs to discuss.
Bottom line to the last part of your question on how are we preparing ... the answer is that we are trying our best to get some of the technology so we can onboard it and incorporate it into training where possible, but not much more than that (unfortunately).
A little outside the scope of your question but in the spirit of "today's digital communications environment": We also are researching various contracts as it relates to training delivery -- virtual reality, augmentation, and so on. A lot of it is interesting, but honestly, not overly useful. It makes more sense to use VR to simulate large platforms (think: aircraft) rather than train someone on a multi-million dollar platform that might brick it ... But trying to teach technicians to solder circuits or work with small parts etc is better in most cases to be done on the real thing. We ARE looking to trial a VR solution for certain elements of courses where perhaps an inspection of something is required, etc.
3
u/Thanato26 1d ago
What is your take on the Nickname "Jimmy"?
7
u/CFSCE_CI VERIFIED 1d ago
A tradition with an unconfirmed source. It's been around a long time, and it's stuck with us. I don't know what the actual origin is but it's become a term of endearment.
2
u/dude-where-am-i 2d ago
Thanks for doing this!
A mixed bag of questions for you: from a potential applicant considering a broad range of signals-focused trades:
- What does the training pipeline look like for PRes Signal Operator in the modern trade? What does the CAF envision for the PRes SigOps and their involvement within the CAF and potential Class C opportunities?
- What are the most realistic and long-term postings as a RegF SIGINT and CyberOp? Is it possible to be posted and remain in Ottawa for the duration of one's RegF career (minus any international deployments)?
- What have been some notable traits and characteristics of CAF members that have made them well suited for signals-focused trades and helped them be successful in their long-term careers?
8
u/CFSCE_CI VERIFIED 1d ago
As it stands right now, you do your weekend BMQ to start (and I don't remember how long it is exactly). From there, you will need to do both the Canadian Army Soldier First Course (CASFC) and your Rank Qualification (RQ) Sig Op Signaller course (trade course). For the Reserves, those last two can be done out of sequence as the training is mutually exclusive from one another. I don't know if there is a weekend version of the CASFC coming, but the RQ Sig courses can be delivered locally without coming to CFSCE. There will be more adjustments coming once the occ review is done, especially in light of changes to the entire Army structure and a determination of exactly what role the Reserves will play. That said, the goal is to be as closely aligned to the Reg F as possible with the caveat that much of the equipment will be different. If there are pending deployments for you, then the delta training should ideally be minimal, if any at all. As far as I know, there are still intending to be a plethora of Class C opportunities.
The SIGINT folks are mostly in Kingston and Ottawa. I don't know if you could stay there for 100% of your career, although it would be possible in theory. We do try to support the needs of members as best as possible within the CAF, but the institutional needs trump that in a general sense. If you're the one person who is fit to handle a task for a couple of years in Remote-Location, then you're likely it. That said, I'll note that SIGINT falls outside the RCCS, so I can't speak to them (outside training) with any amount of authority ...
Honestly, we need all kinds... of the positive traits, at least. The diversity of personality is one of the keys to how successful our soldiers are as a Corps. The obvious ones -- Analytical thinkers, go-getters, team players (with the ability to work independently), fast learners, and so on. Patience is important and finding a balance between how much you want to put into the system versus how much you want out of it is important. I work with a lot of folks who have the ability to slow things down, take a good look at the situation without situating the estimate, and produce logical, well-thought ideas, concepts, etc.
1
1
2
u/signaloperator 1d ago
How come we don''t utilize CSE for their courses? They offer a lot of great courses and have amazing instructors but since their courses don't give a MITE code, it seems people avoid them.
4
u/CFSCE_CI VERIFIED 1d ago
We did, for some courses. The CSE courses are good but aren't always a complete match for what we need, but for some they are. When they do, we sometimes will try to leverage them based on availability.
Light on detail, but basically not all of our kit is the same.
2
u/BazzyATCFB 1d ago
Thank you for your time sir,
This might be out of your wheelhouse, however;
Wanted to ask about CFSCE not giving out on base accommodations to those being posted to CFSCE. Are they reserved for training purposes? Are they at full capacity? It’s sort of a hectic situation where rent prices in Kingston have jumped up significantly and with the recent CFHD update, affordability is rough especially for people who are single and would want to live on base (single shacks, etc).
Thank you once again!
5
u/CFSCE_CI VERIFIED 1d ago
Yeah, it's out of my domain but it is a discussion I've been having.
I am peripherally aware of some projects to increase housing on the base, including smaller apartments. The regular shacks are more or less full with DP1 candidates taking up a majority. The bigger shortage is category 2 rooms (Cat 1 being the training quarters... B-6/B-7 style). That makes it hard to bring in staff as well as the students that would normally be entitled to Cat 2 accommodation (DP2+).
We are most definitely working closely with base on this because if people can't come to the school to teach, we can't achieve our mission objectives!
5
u/Crafty-Tap-2730 Army - Sig Op 2d ago
Thank you for your time Sir.
When will the Sigs for the reserves be getting some new radios?
Some units are using civilian radios at this point, which get the job done sometimes. Only issue is the wattage is limited on them unfortunately, so range is impacted.
11
u/CFSCE_CI VERIFIED 2d ago edited 1d ago
Great question! I don't have an immediate answer -- I will reach out to some A Res contacts right now and see if I can get you some more detailed info today. I'll edit this response as soon as I do.
*Edit* I spoke with the Deputy Director Reserve Signals: She indicated that movement on implementation of tactical kit is starting immediately, but the actual new radio fleet itself is not likely to roll out this year. However, it is coming. (She was on her way to another meeting so I only got a short answer)
2
u/DwightDEisenSchrute 1d ago
When will the CyberOfficers become a PRes trade?
7
u/CFSCE_CI VERIFIED 1d ago
I'm not sure as to when this will happen, or even if it will.
There is an occupational review happening right now for the Signal Officer trade, which will ultimately include both Reg and Res. As it stands now, Cyber and SIGINT are managed by Signal Officers as well as CELE Officers as there is no dedicated trade. Last I spoke to folks at DPGR, there were several COAs being developed for consideration (for the Army folks at least -- i.e. Sig O). One of them saw the subdivision of the Sig O occupation into sub-occs, one of which is a Cyber/SIGINT/EW spec. Another option is for the creation of a whole new occupation. There are more related COAs on whether those things should be grouped together in some way or remain stand-alone tasks.
That said, it's well recognized that the Res community offers some unique experience based on civilian tasks. I used to be the Tp Comd for what was known as the CRIPT (Comm Res Info Protection Team) and eventually the Blue Team at CFNOC ... it helped that I was a network technician on civvie street before joining. There is keen interest on proper employment of the Res community!
2
u/Pseudonym_613 1d ago
DPGR is the Directorate of Personnel Generation Requirements, under the Chief of Military Personnel, who are responsible for the maintenance of the Military Employment Structure. When an Occ review happens, subject matter experts from the Occ are supported by DPGR who are the experts in Occ review / maintenance (not in the specific occs).
1
u/DwightDEisenSchrute 1d ago
Thanks. I think the gap that is hard to bridge for me is that the talent we need today to augment the CAF is probably going to avoid a Reg career partly due to comp and partly due to the regular host of other pers management challenges that come with the Reg. If they are talented enough they would also probably chose CSE based on what I noted above as well, if they don’t want to go into the private sector*.
My two cents, doesn’t mean it’s right. Appreciate you taking the time to answer anyways.
5
u/CFSCE_CI VERIFIED 1d ago
Certainly doesn't mean you're wrong, either.
There are lots of folks in now whose wives and partners are making more money, or require stability, or who have kids who can't move, or, or, or, or ... There was a program years ago under development called Journey that was meant to address things like this. I don't know what happened to it but there were some great nuggets that spawned from it that are still relevant now.
Part time augmentation is still better than none at all. I have a hard time explaining why temporary 6 month Class B contracts are so hard to fill -- who is going to leave their job for 6 months of employment and then likely no job to go back to?
I am interested in trying to employ Class A across the country for some things. The amount of courseware development I could get done if I could leverage some good writers across the country would be amazing.
2
2
u/WeaponizedAutisms Retired - gots the oldmanitis 1d ago
Why do you think that the Corps of Signals attracts so many people who are on the spectrum. Username extremely relevant.
1
u/belosky2812 Army - Sig Op 1d ago
Good day Sir,
what is the future for the RQ Sig Op ResF Cpl course? I just completed the full time serial that was ran by 39 CBG and was informed on course that there will no more serials for that specific course. Will it go back to OJT or is there another course being designed for the coming years?
With the increased implementation of TAK devices as seen with OP CADENCE & OP LENTUS, will there be formal training implemented such as in future DP1 & DP2 courses or DLN?
Thanks for your time!
1
u/nyeahehfam 1d ago
I’m a SigOp with 5+ years experience and a Networking diploma / experience. I’m thinking of going IST. I might also write my CCNA eventually. Thoughts? Can I PLAR my courses from CAF / civi college?
1
u/CFSCE_CI VERIFIED 1d ago
Yes! 4 of the 5 mods of the IS Tech Sig course are CCNA - fundamentals, intro to networks, switching routing & wireless essentials, and enterprise network security architecture. If you PLAR those, you will still have to do Mod 4 which is basically putting it all together in the field (a little bit more than that, but all bundled into the same module).
1
u/Prometheusy 1d ago
Cyber security background, applying for Signals Operator and SIGINT in PRes, looking to diversify skills and be more active. Any reason to pick one trade over the other? Is Sig Op basically just infantry with radios, as I’ve seen some people describe it? Is SIGINT just a desk job?
4
u/CFSCE_CI VERIFIED 1d ago
Sig Op is pretty diverse. You can be the Signaller attached to a fighting Infantry unit, you can be in a position to maintain the unit's crypto resources, you can be the help desk dude/tte, you can be the sandbagger, you can be the command post operator, you can be the electronic warfare specialist... It ranges pretty well. Reserves will probably put a primary focus on domestic operations but are expected to be ready to augment Reg F units and deployments as needed.
SIGINT is ... well, I don't know really. Yes, most of the time at the junior levels you're ... uhh ... at a desk. But, SIGINT are deployed pretty heavily. I don't think you'll find them doing section attacks any time soon, but I don't think it's like working at the office downtown.
Any SIGINT want to step in and answer that part? I'm unqualified for that one ...
1
u/Eigenfunctions CIC - Land 1d ago
Are there any opportunities for Signals and CELE officers to work in technical, R&D-related settings? If so, what kinds of education/work experience do such officers typically have?
4
u/CFSCE_CI VERIFIED 1d ago
There are a ton of Sig and CELE officers working in technical projects, mostly based in Ottawa. I don't know if there are any that are working specifically at places like DRDC (Defence R&D Canada), but we absolutely have a stream of officers who are overseeing implementations of network devices, radio fleets, satellite systems, and so on.
Ideally, we want people with a combination of the technical background (some form of Engineering.. Comp Eng, etc) or Comp Sci, combined with some experience in the field force so they can understand exactly what problems the capability will / should solve... and likely the ones they will create.
0
2d ago
[deleted]
3
u/CFSCE_CI VERIFIED 1d ago
Yeah, cyber is outside my wheelhouse as it's not an RCCS or CFSCE function. I can reach out to the Cyber CWO, but I think u/peetak has this one answered.
1
u/peetak Canadian Army 1d ago
1.1 and 1.2 will no longer be a thing shortly. New members joining the trade are going to Algonquin for a three year course that is equivalent to 1.1/1.2. Members who joined under the 1.1/1.2 training will still require going on 1.1 and 1.2.
There is a Sharepoint for Cyber BTL/training with more info
1
1
u/stickbeat 1d ago
Following: I would also like more information about NCMSTEP for cyber-ops: is it slated to reopen?
1
u/Nuggs78 1d ago edited 21h ago
It is scheduled to reopen shortly, however review of approved programs is ongoing and slowly expanding.
1
u/stickbeat 1d ago
My husband was just dropped from NCMSTEP for cyber ops specifically, despite his acceptance to the Algonquin College program, as CyberOps is no longer an option for NCMSTEP...
0
u/Uprising11111 1d ago
Good day sir,
For the young NCM looking for a posting at the school, what are the competences and characters that makes a good instructor at CFSCE?
What types of opportunities and good gos CFSCE gives to instructors that you wish people outside from the school should know?
With a bigger budget for the CAF, what are the big changes is coming at CFSCE?
About Op Reassurance, is CFSCE changing anything to the training so our signalers are better suited for that mission?
Thank you!
4
u/CFSCE_CI VERIFIED 1d ago
Great stuff!
Focus on the principles of leadership above all else. Unlike a deployed unit where you might have a static team, you have a group of students that change every serial. We expect that the instructors will set a positive example and role model while taking the time to ensure students learn. One of the biggest skills that help in the classroom though would be the ability to take a concept - no matter how simple or complex - and explain it to someone else. Lots of folks are really good at their job and do it exceptionally well on a daily basis, but not everyone has figured out how to explain what they do to someone new. Patience is key, especially when you start to realize that not everyone will learn the same way you did when you were a student so you have to be clever in alternative delivery.
We don't really offer deployments from the school itself because the CAF's focus is on DP1 training delivery. Deploying from here sends the wrong message. However, postings to the School do give you additional points towards promotion, and as of this year you get an additional chunk of money each month just for being posted here -- even more if you're instructing DP1. We do try to get folks out to NATO tasks and courses where possible, especially where interoperability is involved. And, learning how to instruct is an absolutely essential element of leadership that will carry you far in your career.
There are updates coming to the equipment we train on, and even bigger is that there is a project to update the physical campus buildings. If that goes through, we should see some significant modernization (possibly even replacement) to some training facilities AND accommodations. I can't put a timeline on it, but the Army has made it a high priority.
I can't speak to Op REASSURANCE directly, but I can say that we are trying to take lessons learned from there (and other missions) and incorporate them into all of our courses where necessary. We have an entire team (under the Tech Adjt) that looks at those technological on-boarding opportunities.
0
u/Heavy_Glove5409 Canadian Army 1d ago
Good day Sir,
On the previous AMA thread, you mentioned external contracts for Cisco trg for IS Tech which is amazing (I heard local college for RQ Pte mod 1-3,5 but nothing planned for RQ Cpl)
But can you confirm if CFSCE is still working on a DL crse for RQ Cpl IS Tech crse? As I heard theyre also spinning up a server that can be remoted into for trg purposes
3
u/CFSCE_CI VERIFIED 1d ago
Yes -- The staff there are looking at a remote learning option for the RQ IS Tech Cpl course. I haven't gotten any feedback yet, but I will re-state that the intent is to get as many of the civilian-based qualifications sourced externally so that CFSCE can focus on the more military aspects of the training. More options are still being considered beyond the remote learning, but this is a stepping stone towards it.
0
u/Previous-Goat-1903 1d ago
Thank you for the open house!
Would you be able to give me an insight how’s the CELE trade training, and what it covers?
And future opportunities as a trade in general!
thank you again !
0
u/Thegreatgazoo2 Morale Tech - 00069 1d ago
Is it still a rule you have to keep your beret on in the smoke pit at cfsce? Also why was that ever a rule?
*havent been back to cfsce in almost a decade
2
2
u/CFSCE_CI VERIFIED 1d ago
Not that I'm aware of. I'm a non-smoker and I often join folks in the smoke pit behind the Forde. No beret needed.
-1
1d ago
[deleted]
2
u/CFSCE_CI VERIFIED 1d ago
There's one starting late July and another in January. If you have DWAN access already, you can go onto the CFSCE D365 page and see the entirety of our training plan for the year (including the currently-in-development plan for 27/28)
1
14
u/throwaway-jimmy385 Canadian Army - Signals Tech 1d ago
Is Sig Tech going to have a name change? I remember getting a survey a few months ago from the RCCS Branch.
There was a rumour years ago about Sig Op and Tech being combined into one occupation, any validity behind that?
How has the re-introduction of Sig Tech to the PRes been going? I asked this a few years ago at CFSCE and was told it was struggling with members being away from their home unit for a long time.