Land Navigation 2025 - A Year of Observations

We’ve developed a little cycle of reporting on SFAS Land Navigation every year about this time so we thought it would be a proper time for this year’s observations, some general learning guidelines, and some predictions for the next year. So here we go… 

SFAS is a steady-state operation. Not much ever changes -- and that’s by design. If you’ve figured out a system that really works (and SFAS really does work) then there isn’t a requirement to change much. The past 18-24 months have been a true anomaly. We saw the biggest change in nearly 40 years with the addition of an extra week of Land Navigation training. This was earth-shattering in that it signaled some remarkable phenomena. So how did we get here?

Starting around 2022 we started to see the SFAS select rates incrementally creep down. The historical select rate is about 36%. Land Navigation failures historically accounted for about 25% of the drops in a class. This number has held steady pretty much indefinitely, until 2022 when it started to increase and reached a crescendo of about 50% by 2024, where it remains. The overall select rate has dropped into the 20-27% range. If you are a system engineer and you see a significant shift in your output, you immediately start looking for the reasons. It’s a signal of an issue. When you see a doubling of your Land Navigation drops you shit a brick and the boss starts looking for the reasons.

So that was what happened, the bosses started asking questions. Logically, only two things can impact this sort of drastic shift. Either the Candidates aren’t as well-prepared, or the training/assessment has changed. I put training and assessment together with a slash because SFAS does have some training element when it comes to Land Nav, unlike the other assessment domains where you simply get assessed. The original POI includes several days of dedicated classroom Land Nav instruction and serval days of practical exercises, including a Cadre led terrain walk. So, leaders looked at both of these elements – the Candidates level of pre-SFAS preparation and the SFAS instruction. Let’s look at the level of pre-SFAS preparation first.

It's hard to isolate Candidate preparedness when your Candidate population comes from across the entire force, so the investigation focused on the population that they do control, the 18Xs. It turns out that 11X OSUT, through which all 18Xs must pass, is wildly inconsistent. The tumultuous times of COVID didn’t help, but it was not uncommon for an 18X/11X trainee to only conduct Land Navigation as part of a group or buddy team. That’s right, it was (and sometimes continues to be) normal for trainees to not do solo land navigation. It was also almost unheard of for trainees to conduct solo night navigation. It is also not a requirement to “pass” land navigation training. A trainee must simply “attend” that training. There has been a concerted effort to improve the quality of this instruction, but you are dealing with a massive beast of a system that deals with a “lowest common denominator” restriction.

This training assessment isn’t my opinion. I’m simply summarizing what I have repeatedly been briefed by Drill Seargeant cadre, attending trainees, and senior SWCS leadership.  The 18Xs (who make up ~50% of our force) are at the mercy of Fort Benning and this lowest common denominator system. So SWCS leadership started to focus on the SF Prep Course to address these deficiencies. They revamped the Land Nav instruction and they did make some improvements. There was better instruction and more practical exercises (a critical element to the LN learning process). Some Cadre even attended the TFVooDoo LN musters (they didn’t declare this, but when you get a 35-year-old bearded attendee who paid for his ticket with his girlfriend’s credit card to obfuscate his identity it’s not hard to figure out). But this didn’t have the full desired impact.

I note this because it is one of the critical phenomena that we need to address. I share this story in Ruck Up Or Shut Up, but it was well documented that an old SFPC NCOIC was quoted as telling a PC class that there was no way he would let them do solo night training because they were getting too lost during the day. Understand what I just said…the senior NCO in charge of preparing aspiring 18Xs refused to train them in solo night land navigation. That’s a dereliction of duty and the sort of thing that should enrage the entire Regiment.  I independently confirmed this with a half dozen sources before I recorded it. But it is telling in that it does not matter how good the instruction is or how willing the trainees are, if the Cadre have not bought into the culture, then nothing else matters.

I have been pretty steadfast in my support for SWCS cadre in general and SFAS Cadre in particular (there is an entire chapter in RUSU where I describe this admiration). It is a tremendously difficult job and is perhaps the most important job in the Regiment. I understand the challenges more than most and I will continue to support this narrative. This is noteworthy in that I am well aware of how they speak of me in return. I’ve yet to hear an articulate argument for the vitriol and it certainly does not sway me from my purpose, but it is odd. I’m often impressed by the ability of people to not allow evidence to affect their opinions. And this is important because it speaks to the next element of the phenomena.

 Having examined the incoming Candidates and isolated that variable in the system, leaders looked into the actual instruction. It is good instruction, no question. Maybe even world-class. There really is only so much you can instruct when it comes land nav, so getting to a high level is fairly fundamental. Maps and map features, grid systems and MGRS, terrain features, plotting grids and azimuths, etc. We cover all of this and more pretty extensively in Never Get Lost: A Green Beret’s Guide to Land Navigation. I don’t think that you could include more relevant information or present it any more clearly, so it remains at the top of my list of recommended resources. But it’s not really instruction. Instruction is hands on, best presented in person, by an expert instructor capable of formative and summative assessments, pacing, feedback, tonality, and all the little nuances of instructional technique that mark “world-class instruction”. So the leaders validated the existing instruction and went so far as to add an extra week so that everyone could benefit from it. You cannot imagine how difficult this was to do. SWCS is like an aircraft carrier and turning it takes immense time and effort. They essentially strapped two carriers together in opposing directions, set the reactor to full output, and made it turn on a dime. Remarkable. But the instruction is still vulnerable.

Everyone reading this knows exactly what I’m talking about. You have all suffered through poor instruction, even on an interesting topic, where the instructor isn’t invested in the process. It’s painful. You don’t learn, you simply survive the session. Similarly, most have been exposed to high quality instructors where it doesn’t even matter what they’re teaching. They are so engaged and engaging that you can’t help but learn. They put you at ease, they help you engage with the material at your level, they almost seem to effortlessly wander through the topic, and they allow you to take it all in. You just end up at the end of the lesson and somehow you know more and have an inherent curiosity. Teaching is a skill and the unskilled should be discouraged from engaging in it. So, the instruction at SFAS is good, but there are ample reports of the inconsistency of the instructors.

Before anyone gets their hackles up, I’ll just cite a single event to make my point. The infamous Terrain Walk. Any candidate who has attended SFAS in the last 5 years will be able to immediately confirm this. The Terrain Walk is a Cadre-led event wherein the candidates receive a “guided tour” of the training area. It is designed (as in, it is a critical component of the instructional design of the approved land navigation POI) to demonstrate the various terrain features, common obstacles, and significant elements of the terrain – especially as they translate from the classroom instruction. What it has become is a PT-survival-smoke session. Everyone knows this. So instead of allowing Candidates to engage with the instructional material appropriately, Candidates simply sprint behind a fleeing Cadre as he vaguely describes what he is galloping past. It has become a rite of passage, not a learning event as designed.

This is actually how we construct our Land Nav Muster events. We do a few hours of “classroom instruction”, but the bulk of the learning is during the terrain walk. We walk, not shuffle, and certainly not run. We walk at an appropriate pace so that students can ask questions and we can provide instructional vignettes along the way. Our first route is about 5 kilometers long and we stop no less than a dozen times along the way to highlight various elements and discuss strategy. So, you won’t walk more than 500 meters without a lesson. You won’t ever really be out of breath, even. You are encouraged to ask questions, and we leave no topic unaddressed. It’s a learning pace for a learning event. And it is expertly led by an instructor who not only has mastery of the topic, but also mastery of the technique. Ask anyone who has attended a Muster. You learn a ton and it’s actually fun.

This holds true throughout the entire Muster training day. We show you how to properly negotiate a draw, how to deal with unwinnable scenarios, how to manage yourself along the way, how to set up your gear and why, how to get un-lost, and we even cross Scuba Road. You get wet, you get dragged all over the map, and you somehow learn and have fun while doing it. Just like a terrain walk is designed to do. We do even more at night. We learn drift, we practice mitigation strategies, we train about how to manipulate the environment to our advantage. For many, even the 18Xs that attend, it is the first time that they have navigated solo at night. Imagine that…prep that actually prepares. 

The other component of the phenomena is the rules. There are rules at land nav that you can’t violate, and rightfully so. You can’t talk to other Candidates, you can’t walk on the roads, you can’t be separated from your weapon or your ruck. These have always been the rules at SFAS. Since forever. But at the same time when we saw larger than normal drops in SFAS Land Nav Week, we saw corresponding increases in rules violations. We saw an uncharacteristic rise in Road Kills. You aren’t allowed to walk on the roads. Everyone knows this. There is no interpretation to be made. Stay off the roads. But there is a corresponding rule that Candidates can’t handrail within 50 meters of a road. Makes sense, right? But not all roads are created equal. Some are trails, barely noticeable. Some are nearly impossible to see even in the day, much less at night. Were guys cheating more? Maybe. But many Candidates reported that Cadre were “unforgiving” when they errantly wandered too close to an unidentified trail at night and were classified as Road Kills. Were they too close to a road? Technically, yes. The letter of the law is the letter of the law. But the spirit of the rule is that Candidates shouldn’t gain a navigational advantage by being on the road or trail. If you can’t even see the trail at night and you have no idea that it’s even there and it doesn’t even appear on the map, then how are you gaining a navigational advantage? Dropping a guy under these conditions is ticky-tack bullshit.

Let’s be clear. Cadre are in charge. 100%. If a Cadre wanted to target a Candidate or Candidates, then there are innumerable ways that he could create conditions that would fail them. I could get an entire class to fail with about 30 minutes of unsupervised and unethical “instruction”. We all know and understand this. It’s a modest proposition. It’s a simple matter of intent.  But that’s not the role of Cadre. Cadre are supposed to simply provide an assessment environment and then record the Candidates performance within that environment. Neither encourage, nor discourage. That’s the intent of SFAS. If you want to get mercilessly harassed and belittled then go to Ranger School (you should all go to Ranger School, BTW…). The SFAS assessment environment is brutal enough without unnecessary manipulation. It was specifically designed that way.

So it was clear, by simply reviewing the data and observing the classes, what the issues were.  I predicted a year ago that we would see some changes and that selection rates would return to historical norms. I’m a systems engineer in this regard and I understand SFAS. It wasn’t a difficult prediction to make. And what has happened in the past six months? No standards have changed, but Cadre have been directed to re-assume their rightful role, and rates are returning to normal. No standards have changed, they actually got rid of the extra week of land navigation training, and we are seeing a return to historical norms. It still sucks. SFAS will always suck. But it is returning to fairness, which is the best that one can hope for. You want it to suck! It is the ultimate rite of passage, but it must be fair and thus just. It’s hard to swagger around claiming to Free the Oppressed and then act like an unjust oppressor.

So you no longer get the advantage of the extra week of land nav instruction at SFAS, the standards remain unchanged, and you can expect it to still be a mighty struggle. For those that claim that you don’t need anything more than to show up and partake in the training they provide at SFAS, I would simply cite the data. We are holding fast at just under ~50% land nav fail rates. Nobody has fixed land nav instruction in OSUT (it’s actually getting shorter, thus less instructional opportunity) , it’s still wildly under-trained in the operational force, and map reading and analog navigation are a vanishing skill at the population level. So, if you don’t seek additional instruction then you deserve to get exactly what you get. Don’t complain about the results you get from the training that you didn’t do. This is true of strength training, running, or rucking. And it is especially true for land navigation where skill exposure and repetition are critical to the learning methodology. This is why Officers pass SFAS land nav at nearly twice the rate as their enlisted counterparts. First, Officers are simply bred better…elite, learned scholars, and physical specimens to be adored and revered (prove me wrong!). But every commissioning source has a significant land navigation element as part of the process, so Officers usually have years of instruction, exposure, and repetition. And they are more likely to seek additional training opportunities.

So, what is one to do in order to prepare for this incredibly challenging assessment environment? Learn the foundations of land navigation, get some hands-on instruction, and get repetitions and practice. We built an entire enterprise to address these. First, we have a book, Never Get Lost: A Green Beret’s Guide to Land Navigation. It is the best, most comprehensive, easily digestible land navigation book available. It covers absolutely everything that you need to get started on in your preparation. Even seasoned navigators have repeatedly commented on how good it is. There are other books out there, but none better. Amazon puts it on sale regularly and you can get it delivered directly to your house. No excuses. 

Next, get some hands-on instruction. We, of course, recommend coming out to a TFVooDoo Land Nav Muster. We host them nearly every month and they are tailored for SFAS prep. But we have plenty of non-SFAS attendees attend -- Cadets, Ranger and Sapper School hopefuls, OCS and WOCS attendees, and plenty of regular old civilians. You can’t get more hands-on tailored content packed into the day. The Red Light Night Series Musters are usually paired with a day course, so you can attend both courses in one weekend and save on time and travel costs. We don’t keep super accurate records of every attendee, but we calculate about an 80% success rate at SFAS. Ask guys who have attended, they’ll endorse its value all day. We absolutely will not teach you how to cheat and you won’t see extra STAR points, but you will gain the sort of confidence that only real-word instruction can give you.

If you can’t get to a Muster, then check out training opportunities local to you. Orienteering clubs, scouting groups, local Search and Rescue organizations, ROTC and JROTC programs, and other military units on your post or nearby installations can all be valuable opportunities. Even if it’s not MGRS maps and Cammenga lensatic compasses, it’s still valuable experience on the ground learning to navigate. We repeatedly remind our students that land nav is one of the few skills that you must fail in order to properly learn. You must get lost so that you can learn to get unlost, so spend some time getting lost. If you do that with us at a Muster, you’ll get unlost faster, but you can certainly get lost on your own.

If you are local to the Center of the Universe, aka Fort Bragg, we have free land nav maps and resources for self-directed training at Area J. Everything that you need for multiple sessions at your own pace are available to you free of charge. We ruck out there regularly, so maybe you’ll see us out and about. In the next year we hope to have an online, self-paced, comprehensive land nav course available. It’s designed to take the lessons that you read about in Never Get Lost and give you multiple looks at them under varying conditions. It’s designed as a stepping stone between the book and attending a Muster or as a stand-in for the Muster if you can’t get to Bragg. It’s not nearly as good as in-person instruction, but it’ll scratch an itch for a lot of guys looking for training opportunities. It’ll include map kits and all of the material that you need for high quality instruction. We are also developing a tutorial article on how to make your own maps and develop a land nav course wherever you are. We plan to include a database of user-generated courses and maps so aspiring operators can use them to train on their own.

And then keep practicing. Get as much time under a ruck in the woods as you can. Try to replicate the conditions that we describe across all of our media and get more reps in. Test your gear, test your skills, and learn to get unlost. There is no substitution for experience. We like to say that there are no finer teachers than well-made mistakes. So go out and train. We’ve provided, and will continue to provide, as many high-quality resources as we can. SFAS isn’t getting any easier and it’s up to you to show up prepared to be properly assessed.  Yes, thousands and thousands of guys have been successfully Selected without the benefit of additional instruction. I am one of those people. There were no books, no social media, no courses, and no help when I went through SFAS and I made it just fine. But had they been available I would have read every word I could find and listened to every word I could hear. Treat SFAS with the respect it deserves and show up ready to be assessed and selected. Make your chances count.

That’s this year’s observations. Despite the recent updates in SFAS, Land Navigation remains a major obstacle. Much of the ticky-tack unfairness is vanishing, but it’s still incredibly demanding. You are truly forced to rely on your skills, now more than ever. Rucking is still the number one performance predictor for success, but what is land navigation other than rucking-cross county to a predetermined point. If you keep getting lost, then you better be able to ruck 5-minute miles! If you can’t do 5-minute miles under a 70-pound ruck, then maybe more navigation skills will be helpful. Prepare accordingly.

Ruck up or shut up and now…never get lost!