In the move to create qualification standards for III volunteers in these posts:
I used some arbitrary terms to describe different levels of qualification, based mainly on performance in the PT test. I used:
I happen to like the term Rifleman, because I think it describes what it is. It was suggested in comments that I instead use: Minutemen, Trainband and Alarm List, for their historical context. Indeed it was suggested that am trying to codify standards for the new Minutemen. If so that wasn’t my intent.
I am not so sure that we need to, or should, go back to old terms. I understand the motive, but I am not sure it is right.
The idea for the three levels came from the PT test: Rifleman would be those that could pass it at the standard level. Reserves would be qualified as Riflemen but would be held to a lesser PT standard. Support would not be able to pass, of would not attempt, the PT test, but would require weapons quals. The support are in effect the auxiliary. The Reserves are more of a security or guard force.
So, these are the questions:
1) Are we right to have 3 levels?
2) What should these levels be called?
Max Velocity Tactical is on the leading edge of immersive, scenario based, tactical live fire and force on force training. Teaching combat proven, adapted, Special Operations / light infantry tactics.