Correct way to call "By the numbers"?

[blackbrandt]

According to the First Sergeant, this is incorrect:
Flight Sgt: "By the numbers, RIGHT FACE"
Flight: (as they do the face) "One!  Two!"


What is the correct method?

Thanks!

[jeders]

Well, what does the D&C manual say about that?

[lordmonar]

Nope.

The correct way is.

"By the numbers"
"Right Face"....the flight perform the first part of the manuver.
"Ready, Two"....the flight perform the second part of the manuver.

1.5.3. BY THE NUMBERS is the method in which precision movements of two or more counts are demonstrated, practiced, and learned one count at a time.
1.5.3.1. This method enables the student to learn a movement step by step and permits the instructor to make detailed corrections. The instructor commands BY THE NUMBERS before giving commands for the movement; for example,

BY THE NUMBERS, About, FACE.
The first count of the movement is executed on the command FACE.
The second count is executed on the command Ready, TWO (the pivot is the second count).

1.5.3.2. All subsequent movements are executed by the numbers until the command WITHOUT THE NUMBERS is given.
For example, in teaching right and left face, the command BY THE NUMBERS is given at the beginning of the practice exercise. Each facing is repeated by the numbers until the instructor gives WITHOUT THE NUMBERS. Subsequent movements are executed in the cadence of quick time

[coudano]

What your guys are doing is a misconstruction of by the numbers and mass commands.

by the numbers, only the person commanding speaks.

mass commands, the whole flight gives the command, then executes it (but don't say 1...  2...)


by the numbers is a good way to teach new commands to a new cadet.

mass commands are great for teaching command voice. (I use it to train new cadet nco's how to give commands)

[Garibaldi]

They must have changed things since I was a cadet. Used to be "by the numbers" was the flight commander would call (for example):

CC: By the numbers, right...face"!
Flt: 1! 2!
and the cadets would perform the movement, counting each step of the process.

Delayed by the numbers, to me, was always:

CC: Delayed by the numbers, right...face!
Flt: 1!
CC Ready...two.
and the cadets would silently finish the movement.

Guess that's what I get for not R'ing The FM!

[lordmonar]

You would be surprised on how long cadets have been getting that particular command wrong.

Back in my AFJROTC days(83-84).....we did it that way too.....it was wrong back then.

[NIN]

"In cadence, Right FACE"
"1...2"

[lordmonar]

"In cadence, Right FACE"
"1...2"

Is that for real?   Sounds useful though.   I might use that someday.

[coudano]

yah i think there might be some other-service-ism creeping in here
but i haven't researched those enough to know

[NIN]

yah i think there might be some other-service-ism creeping in here
but i haven't researched those enough to know

Yes that is the army way to do it. FM 22- 5, er, 3.21-5 or whatever.....

I was always surprised when I learned that that was called "in cadence" and the way I have been taught to do by the numbers in CAP was technically that.

Thankfully I was paying close enough attention during the instructional blocks for D&C that I learned that "by the numbers" really involved the command "ready, two", because if I had been given that command without any prompting I would have shouted "1...2" while executing the whole command. And did pushups.

[NIN]

By the way, mass commands are intended to teach people how to give commands not to put everybody in sync

[SarDragon]

The text that Pat quoted is essentially the same as what's in CAPM 50-3 (Leadership Lab), dated 1965. Y'all been doin' it wrong for a long time. 

[NIN]

b. For stationary movements of two or more counts, the instructor commands In
Cadence, Right, FACE. The soldier simultaneously executes the first count of the
movement on the command of execution and sounds off, ONE; as he executes the second
count he sounds off, TWO

My bros at Benning...

BTW, ALL of Chapter 2 of FM 3-21.5 is HANDY for ANYBODY wanting to learn how to teach D&C.

[abdsp51]

I have seen this in my current unit and my old one and nipped it in the rear.  AFMAN 36-2203 is required reading for cadet staff for us.

[lordmonar]

I have seen this in my current unit and my old one and nipped it in the rear.  AFMAN 36-2203 is required reading for cadet staff for us.

Are you saying the were using "By the numbers" wrong......or that they were using "In Cadence"?

[abdsp51]

Are you saying the were using "By the numbers" wrong......or that they were using "In Cadence"?

By the numbers as that is what the thread is titled.

[lordmonar]

Are you saying the were using "By the numbers" wrong......or that they were using "In Cadence"?

By the numbers as that is what the thread is titled.

That's what I thought.

I do like the idea of stealing "in cadence" from the army though....and it is not a bad idea to send your C/NCO's to the army FM for more information on teaching drill.

So long as they understand the differences between army drill and air force drill.

[NIN]

I do like the idea of stealing "in cadence" from the army though....and it is not a bad idea to send your C/NCO's to the army FM for more information on teaching drill.

So long as they understand the differences between army drill and air force drill.

Honestly, I'm midway thru the 1st or 2nd D&C instructional period in BCT and I'm thinking "Crikey, the Air Force doesn't know @#$%^ about teaching dudes how to march.."

In Cadence was one (excellent) example.

(In Cadence is also the command prior to "Exercise" when doing calisthenics. This synchronizes everybody)

The FM 3-21.5, Chapter Two, is really interesting about the different WAYS to teach drill.    Certain commands are not well taught with 9 cadets standing in formation while some dude who can barely do it himself tries to demonstrate while talking/moving as his own demonstrator...

[abdsp51]

Chances are they didn't have a great teacher to begin with,  which I have noticed is a trend in CP.

[PHall]

What does AFMAN 36-2203 say?  Since that is the manual that Civil Air Patrol uses.
What the other manuals say is doesn't matter since we don't use those manuals anyway.