The Ministry of Defence has launched a landmark tender for the Army Collective Training Service (ACTS).
Valued at £2 billion, this comprehensive 15-year contract seeks to transform the military’s approach to collective training.
Emphasising the scale and significance of this project, the tender notice states, “Around 60,000 soldiers are involved in collective training every year.” Under the Collective Training Transformation Programme (CTTP), this training is to be completely revolutionised to “match ever-more-complex future threats, through digitalisation, simulation, a different relationship with industry, and by changing how and where the military trains.”
The goal of the CTTP is to “appoint a Strategic Training Partner (STP) to jointly develop and implement the ACTS.” According to the tender notice, “The ACTS will exploit new technologies and digitalisation to deliver training which drives innovation and exploits data, empowers and stimulates the training audience and better informs Force Development.”
Key to achieving this goal is a two-stage procurement process. “The procurement of the STP will be through a two-stage procurement procedure […] and will involve the award of Development Contracts to short-listed Tenderers following the first stage of the procurement, and a Delivery Contract to the successful tenderer at the conclusion of the procurement process.”
The tender further elaborates on the STP’s responsibilities through the Service Requirement Document (SvRD), stating that the STP will be expected to “govern, direct, analyse, design, deliver, develop, and assure the Collective Training Service”.
It also highlights the importance of cooperation between the STP and the Authority, asserting that “collaboration between the STP and Authority will be an essential enabler to achieve the services as outlined above.” The STP might also be required to manage military-owned assets which will be supplied as Government Furnished Assets.
Professional qualifications are being sought for this tender, and financial and technical restrictions apply. The closing date for the tender applications is September 7, 2023.
That’s expensive. Just thinking what hardware or personnel £2 billion would pay for.
Still the Army can’t be like the Russians, who pre war lacked training and experience in combined arms and emerging threats.
£2 billion over 15 years is actually not a gigantic sum of money per annum.
Our people and training is everything.
The British Army has a stellar and global reputation for being exceptionally well trained. There is nothing amiss with current in-house collective training establishments and methods.
Exactly.
Spot on
You need software simulation and digital twins to have a proper training that can peep the future. Add new weapons to the simulation software etc. and connected to the tanks, arty, AD and soldiers that are in field training.
I find £2 billion if it includes all army not much if this is the tool to train all army . Plus it should be integrated with RAF and RN when operating in cooperation.
I think you will find part of Russias issue is their shocking training!
What more do you want .. collective training is where the sub unit, unit, joint command and alliances become the force they need to be !
So after nausing up the recruitment process by privatising it, the tories now want to privatise Army training as well! Surely the creatures responsible for such a ridiculous idea, can be prosecuted? All this is about is squandering and stealing more money from the UK taxpayers, before they get thrown out of office next year. Putting such a notion out to public tender, and having the gall to discount tenders from certain ‘sectors’ by suggesting that the tenderer must be “Professional qualifications are being sought for this tender, and financial and technical restrictions apply”. So what would Professional qualifications be?… Read more »
I don’t as yet fully understand it, but
I’m assuming this does not involve Phase 1 and Phase 2 training but just the Collective Training that takes place at Warminster.
Such as the ref to “military owned assets”, the LWCs Collective Training Group and LTF, Land Training Fleet, have those assets
So not “privatizing army training” in its entirety, at least I bloody well hope not.
If I’m honest, I’m against privatisation of military training full stop. Many of these private training orgs have ex military trainers, and in time surely that vanishes.
The standard too many cook’s.
I think you will find a consortium would have specifics to bring to the party … its not a free for all !
Phase 1 and 2 training are not classes as collective training never have been.
if we want collective trg to be at its highest level it comes at a price !
Privatising it ? What do you mean … the Army train the army with support from civilian companies like they have done for years
Agreed , this simply about trying to profit commercialise the armed forces.. How to make money out of govt taxpayers money . Having worked in an industry thats part nationalised and part contracted . There is a tipping point where it just becomes about individuals fleecing the mother company for their own personal gain. Bad decisions are made . We have an mod about 70k large. An over inflated officer Corp without accountability for an ever decreasing armed forces . How can private companies be best to decide best practice ? For training etc. May as well give the contract… Read more »
Russell, As a former member of the inflated officer Corps I can assure you that no officer ever wished for ever decreasing armed forces – headcount is a political decision.
Accountability – officers do get disciplined if necessary – every captain of a grounded ship or submarine will confirm that!
But corruption? I am no admirer of any PFIs or contractorisation in Defence but I have not heard of widescale linked corruption. Do you have any facts?
I must admit after making wild sweeping statements ! , I have no facts 🙂 and apologise for my generalised comment about officers as its unfounded. I am just conscious how too much contract outsourcing can erode a company or organisations quality, core beliefs , focus and costs. If I think about press reports of army recruitment , army accomodation maintenence being outsourced , and how if not careful and there are issues, the contracts can be not very watertight and difficult to manage once signed. On the flip side its good to bring skills in from outside the business… Read more »
Thanks. I can think of no advantages of contractorisation/outsourcing in Defence – and a host of disadvantages. Some things are inexplicable – Annington Homes bought MoD Married Quarters years ago for a song and were suppposed to upgrade them, but the programme has been sparse and for some reason MoD seems to now be funding some of the home improvements. Many Quarters were sold off and now there are not enough so many service personnel have to rent civvy houses and flats often a considerable distance from barracks – granted they get an allowance that helps to some extent if… Read more »
More rubbish from govt, although it isn’t just a Tory thing. The best people to train soldiers are experienced soldiers. Until the proposed digital set up is in place, then those experts can have their ‘modules.
Dern and Daniele and others will know but I don’t think collective training has lacked digitisation, networking and simulation thus far.
Why is a partner even necessary?
The army trains itself pretty well now does it not? Why do we need a strategic partner?
By “collective training” do they mean what takes place now with CTG at the LWC at SPTA?
Our army has a global reputation for being exceptionally well trained – it is one of the few strengths that the army has. Collective training is the training of organised groups of soldiers (and tactical HQs) to operate in the field – from Fire Team and Section to Division. It will presumably include Command & Staff Training System (CAST), Combined Arms Tactical Training Systems (UK CATT), DCCTs, CTG/LWC, BATUS, BATUK, training in Germany etc etc. Maybe this contract will narrow the scope down somehow? I am suspicious and concerned. There are few good examples of contracted-out activities of any sort… Read more »
I’m concerned too. Our training system works, leave it alone!
Right, thanks. So I was on the right track. This is not P1, but is collective included in P2?
As you know, many of those you list are at and around Warminster, like CATT, CTG, LWC. It’s our main UK combined arms site as it has access to the ranges needed. No way does it close.
BATUS is already diminished.
Our ranges are limited, surely the bigger TAs are retained.
For the life of me I cannot see what a private company can teach the British Army regards collective training. Specialist Technical Training maybe, yes, then they can input.
Collective is not included in Phase 2. It’s unit level training. Worth pointing out this paragraph from the Future Soldier Document: Modernised Collective Training. From 2024 the Collective Training TransformationProgramme will deliver an expeditionary and digitalised Collective Training System, with the flexibility to allow the Army to train globally when and where it needs. It will prepare and enable the Army to train in challenging, realistic, multi domain and world leading environments. The Future Collective Training System will fundamentally improve theexperience of all soldiers through the greater use of synthetics, instrumentation, as well asaugmented and virtual reality. Now I don’t… Read more »
Morning mate.
Thank you, that makes this a little clearer.
Hi mate, Mostly when people talk about Phase 1 and Phase 2 training they are referring to the different types of individual training: – Phase 1 trg is the Common Military Syllabus for Recruits (CMS(R) – which was all about induction into the army, learning to be a soldier (drill, weapon training, minor fieldcraft, fitness training, personal admin). Everone did this irrespective of capbadge. Took 11 weeks as I recall, but it is now 14 weeks. Mostly done at Army Training Regiments (ATRs) Winchester or Pirbright or ITC Catterick – link is for the ATR at Winchester: https://www.army.mod.uk/who-we-are/our-schools-and-colleges/atr-winchester/ but also… Read more »
A longer reply is going through the scrutineers. I wasn’t suggesting that everything will close, but I would be surprised if every physical site at which collective training is conducted is retained – we have lost good facilities before – just being cynical.
Its hard to get a read-out on what is happening to/at BATUS.
https://www.forces.net/news/mod-confirms-future-armys-batus-canada
This private company had better have individuals with massive military experience or they will have zero credibility.
Agree, things are vague. On BATUS, last I heard is that the armoured vehicle and SPG fleet has been moved back to the UK or Germany, which is helping with the CABRIT BG deployment and the Sqn in Poland. Also aware of the report, stated in the article, that the ranges at Ras Madrakah in Oman will be used going forward, but I myself think that will change with Labour coming is as the withdrawals begin. I myself believe Wallace that BATUS remains, but for other exercises. Not ideal is it given its size for all arms live fire BGs… Read more »
BATUS without tanks and SPGs makes no sense to me at all. They only had 22 CR2s (10% of the fleet) – not sure why 22 tanks were missed in Europe. BATUS exists (as you say) solely to do armoured warfare at BG level against a live enemy (TESEX) and also against realistic targetry arrays (live firing ex) – in a very large trg area (at least 6x the size of SPTA). I don’t think it can usefully be used for any other type of exercises. Most recent article that I can find: https://insidedio.blog.gov.uk/2023/01/05/putting-batus-to-bed-how-we-prepare-the-british-armys-canada-estate-for-the-winter/ I wonder what the private company… Read more »
Closure to save money?
Closure of sites and facilities is only ever to save money.
It has arrived!!
Hey Graham, just FYI you got the ORBAT of the Collective Training Orgs slightly off:
The LWC is the overarching command, under it sits the Collective Training Group, the Army Schools and the Experimentation and Trials Group.
Then under CTG sits BATUS, BATUK, BATSUB, CSTTG (What you call CAST), CRTC and MRTC (if UKDJ had a vomit emoji I’d post it here).
😆 I know all those bar CSTTG, what is that again?
Command Staff and Tactical Training Group, used to be called CAST.
Thanks, just checked I did have that listed under CTG with the other orgs at Warminster, didn’t have the meaning of that abbreviation in my head though.
A lot of agencies for a very small army. All very confusing, probably a fighting Bn worth of REMFS
I suggest getting your head out of your arse then.
Without REMFs all of us big cigar smoking, “tashed” up, ally as fuck hardmen in the combat arms would last about 24 hours!!!!! Its grown up time mate, stick with it, cheers.
Sorry you’re confused. How can I help?
For starters, those “agencies” help make the Britsh Army the professional organisation it us.
Thanks Dern, I left in 2009. Can be hard to keep up to date with all the changes!
Anyway, the British Army is extremely well trained both individually and collectively. I can’t see that a profit-making company is going to make collective training any better (or more affordable). I suspect they will force far more synthetic training (some simulation etc is of course OK) and the lads will lose some real world experience.
You cannot train a future war without an active software developer by your side.
There will be some former high ranking army bod making a fortune out of this. 😎
I don’t know enough about what happens to training just now and why this is needed.
Will this free up more personnel to be in actual active roles? In effect making the army bigger? Seeing as quite a few units of the army are trainers how does this effect them? rangers, Ukraine training units, across the globe training other countries forces?
Someone needs to do a deep dive into this for more info.
Do a Google of ARTD mate. Army Recruitment and Training Division. It’s a wide extensive operation which I won’t list in too much detail here as I’d be writing all night. But it oversees Phase 1 training at various sites and then Phase 2, more intense and specialist to arm training. Each Corps has its own training site, amongst them ITC Catterick for Infantry, then on to the IBS at Brecon. AC at Bovington for the RAC, Minley and Chatham for the RE, Blandford for the RS, Lyneham for the REME, Larkhill for the RA, Strensell for the RAMC, and… Read more »
Strensall is not the RAMC school, that would be the DMA at DMS Whittington. Strensall is the AMSTC which does now does PHVX and not much else, minor bit of empire building by the RAMC that used to let units run PHVX’s in their own camps. Edit: Also training of Ukranians is mostly an 11 SFA effort, but other units are jumping in too. Even reserves have been called up to help the training effort, as the Army has been keen to publicise in Soldier and Forces News. Anyway Training of the forces of other nations is considered and Operational… Read more »
Thanks for the correction re Strensall. I’m aware of the ORBAT of both locations but did not understand the differences. So Strensall in effect does more hands on field training and Whittington more of the medical theory?
How things have changed, when I started compiling my ORBAT research it was still ATR Lichfield.
Not at all.
Whittington does CMT Phase 2, Phase 3, BATLS (another bit of Empire building), BDSS, CHA, CHD, bits of Biomed and EHA, basically everything individual training that isn’t done at Uni or in Hospital in Birmingham.
AMSTC basically only does PHVX, which isn’t really training, just a test.
Thanks. Lol, I’m lost with those abbreviations, but regards Whittington and Strensall this is how I have them listed, no doubt some out of date – ST Com HQ – Surgeon General. HQ SG Director Medical Policy & Operational Capability. – Medical Operational Capability. – Medical Policy & Personnel. – Medical Directorate. HQ SG Director Healthcare Delivery & Training. DHD&T HQ – Joint Hospital Group. DHD&T HQ – Joint Medical Group. DHD&T HQ – Defence Primary Healthcare. DHD&T Future Health. DHD&T HQ – Defence Education Healthcare & Training. J M C HQ – Defence Dental Services. – Policy, Plans & Resources Directorate. – Clinical Services Directorate. J… Read more »
CMT Phase 2 – Joint Services Initial trade training for combat medics, RAF Medics and RN/RM Medical Assistants followed by single service specific training. CMT Phase 3 – Trade training for Army CMT’s to upgrade from Class 2 CMT’s to Class 1 CMT’s, typically carried out after a year in unit. BATLS- Battlefield Advanced Trauma Life Support, training in “advanced” (read limited) interventions for CMTs deploying into Battlefield roles. CHA/CHD – Combat Health Advisor/Combat Health Duties, training for RAMC and wider Army Personnel to identify hazards and risks to health of deployed personnel (CHA think things like “Where do we… Read more »
“CHD think “I’m getting trained to dig the toilets.” 😆
I’m off out now but will absorb this later, thanks.
And Strensall is scheduled to close by the end of next year, I wonder where all this will go?
It won’t, 21 and 22 MMR are both scheduled to move into Strensal in the next few years.
Morning mate.
Checking what I have noted, 22 MMR goes to Preston this year then Strensall in 26. Weeton or Fulwood, I’m unsure.
Has that changed?
I have 21 MMR at Strensall already.
33 FH, has that already disbanded or is it still at Fort B?
I think it was one of those locations that it was announced would close, until MoD changed their mind. I think there are others like that. When the costs studies are done that the costs of moving outweigh the costs of retaining sites sometimes it is rescinded.
In addition to what Daniele said, Rangers have to complete Collective Training as well, regularly in fact.
I can’t get my head around the utility of this idea, why?
Who thought it up? Where was the acorn from which such an idea arose?
You want a training partner?
NATO MSs, Australia, New Zealand, Israel, Sweden…
Totally do not agree, whats happening to our Army, and we have never learnt , continuos cutbacks?
Where is the Study that indicated this was a good idea? How can serious companies understand the remit and put together a bid for something as complex in just one month? Will bidders have substantial experience at delivering military training?
Standby, Another Capita fiasco coming up and a job on the board, for any ministers or friends of, after the next general election.
This Government, really has destroyed the Defence base over the last 13 years. Throwing a lot of money (through embarrassment) the last few years, with very little in return. Absolutely shocking.
Can you imagine the conversation about amalgamation of the entire infantry battalions,to the headline of the infantry , no individual regiments , the same for support arms, etc, no we can’t do that , but what about we commercialise initial training, we could save a packet of money there.
They’re not commercializing initial training.
A career for ex-officers.
Outsourcing works by cost cutting staff costs , holidays, pensions etc . Why not set up a not for profit MOD company. If the right people were in charge savings could still be delivered without box ticking KPI ‘s with their inflexibility . DSG productivity declined under privatization !
DSG (formerly ABRO and before that the REME Static Worshop organisation) was ‘taken over’ by Babcock. I understand that they got rid of some very useful kit from the Bovington Base workshop because it cost too much to maintain. I also doubt that they conducted Base Overhaul (or Base Inspection & Repair) on every A Vehicle every 7 or so years, again to save money.
I admit here to just floating things I have heard over the years and have no definitive evidence of any of it.
After paying 140 million for a business that the next bid was 40 million the share price bombed. Babcocks moto should be we know the price of everything and value of nothing.Their biggest crime was they don’t listen. They closed the BOV DET purpose built workshop with multiple roller doors , this wasted a couple of hours for each recovery by the time it was dragged over the road to the main workshop. After three years they finally admitted this was a mistake, however L.M. were now using this space and it was not possible to take it over again… Read more »
Peter, many thanks. Your detailed (local?) knowledge is most informative – and shocking. It suggests that Babcock knew almost nothing about running a Base Workshop or a Det (Bov Det) when they signed the contract, and then learned little more over the years. My first exposure to a Base workshop was visiting 23 Base Wksp REME, Wetter, W.Germany in the 70s – so impressive. I visited ABRO Bovington (REME-run) about 20-odd years ago also for a guided tour. The idea that outsiders can come in and do the same job as soldiers or MoD civilians and save the MoD money… Read more »