China Mil Watch Mandarin-source monitoring · Chinese military & security reporting
Independent monitor
Official PRC military media, read in the original
← Daily Brief
Exercises Doctrine Nuclear

Close Partners Become the "Strictest Examiners" on the Testing Ground — How Effective Has It Been?

亲密搭档成了考场上的“最严考官”,成效到底如何?
PLA Daily (解放军报) 4 August 2026
View original source ↗
An unnamed Rocket Force transport regiment — whose primary positions require two-person coordinated pairs — piloted a revised evaluation mechanism (考评机制) in which paired soldiers are split during competitions, with one competing and the other serving as examiner, before culminating in a live-force confrontation exercise (实兵对抗) that assigned original partners to opposing Red and Blue forces. The reform originated after a realistic-combat confrontation exercise (实战化对抗训练) exposed delayed judgment, rigid responses, and poor coordination that routine evaluations had consistently missed — a documented pattern in PLA training reform discourse where partner familiarity masks individual skill deficits. The article's value is as a record of how one regiment frames the gap between evaluation scores and battlefield performance, and of the institutional logic used to justify restructuring internal assessment to surface weaknesses that social familiarity and fixed routines had previously concealed.

"Impressive! I deliberately added false-positive decoys to raise the difficulty, and you still weren't stumped." "A fall into the pit, a gain in your wit — ever since I got stumped at the last competition, I've put in enormous effort to train hard." … On a scorching summer day, a professional skills competition and evaluation at a Rocket Force regiment drew to a close. Rather than resting immediately, the officers and soldiers formed pairs and began their after-action reviews.

The regiment's primary mission is transport operations, and many positions require two personnel working together in coordinated pairs. Yet for this competition, the regiment deliberately split the two personnel assigned to the same position — one competed, while the other served as examiner.

"Having close partners become the strictest 'examiners' on the testing ground is a new exploration in refining our evaluation mechanism (考评机制)," a regimental leader told reporters, explaining the origins of the approach.

During a realistic-combat confrontation exercise (实战化对抗训练) the previous year, soldiers of a certain battalion repeatedly exhibited problems including delayed judgment, rigid responses, and poor coordination, ultimately ending in defeat.

Sergeant Zhang Xiangtian and Master Sergeant Liu Yongqing were partners; during that exercise, the two were tasked with securing a critical position. Zhang Xiangtian made a series of errors due to nerves, freezing in place on several occasions and failing to properly handle contingencies (特情). At the after-action review, this pair — ordinarily a model of seamless coordination — fell into an argument.

Liu Yongqing felt that Zhang Xiangtian had "dropped the ball" at a critical moment. Zhang Xiangtian felt somewhat aggrieved: to prepare for the exercise, he had trained extra hours nearly every day that month. "In routine evaluations, I have never dragged the battalion down. This was just a momentary lapse from nerves — was there really any need to put it that way?"

"On the battlefield, will you get a chance to be 'momentarily nervous'?" "But I just get nervous easily — we've been partners this long, don't you know that?" At those words, Liu Yongqing fell silent for a moment, then stood up to offer a self-criticism: "I bear responsibility for this failure too. Zhang Xiangtian has a relatively poor capacity to handle psychological pressure. As his squad leader and partner, I knew full well about this weakness, yet I thought it didn't affect routine evaluation scores anyway, so I never put in the effort to help him correct it…"

After the two finished their reflection, several other pairs present stood up one by one to reflect on similar problems. This drew the attention of Chief of Staff Li. The defeat had exposed many problems that had not previously been identified. Chief of Staff Li was initially quite angry, but he quickly realized: these pairs of soldiers who lived and worked side by side day and night both understood each other's weaknesses and shortcomings and were intimately familiar with the responsibilities of their own positions — so why not have them keep watch over each other's weak points and serve as each other's "examiners"?

The regimental Party committee soon studied and discussed the matter and decided to pilot this mechanism. They specified that each unit could, based on its actual circumstances, split paired soldiers during evaluations — one participating in training and testing, the other supervising training and administering the examination.

Squad leader Zhang Qinghui had long noticed that his partner, Junior Sergeant Wang Chongyang, habitually followed a fixed troubleshooting sequence and lacked experience in handling multiple faults simultaneously. During the evaluation, he layered in conditions including missing equipment, personnel casualties, and electromagnetic interference, forcing Wang to break out of ingrained thinking and forge genuine troubleshooting skills (排障硬功).

Staff Sergeant Liu Keyi, targeting her partner Junior Sergeant Jin Daoxiang's problems of slow leak-plugging movements and poor procedural sequencing, set up a multi-point leak contingency during the training tank leak-plugging segment, deliberately compressed the time during medium transfer operations, and introduced a relatively complex set of environmental interference — giving Jin a genuinely substantive lesson. Walking off the training ground, Jin Daoxiang exclaimed: "When your partner is the 'examiner,' the questions are far more 'devious'!" Liu Keyi then pulled him aside to begin the after-action review immediately.

Routine training and evaluations became more targeted and carried more of the smell of gunpowder (硝烟味), causing weaknesses and shortcomings that had previously been difficult to surface to emerge one by one. More and more officers and soldiers began proactively identifying capability gaps, and an atmosphere of learning from, competing with, helping, and surpassing one another (比学赶帮超) grew increasingly robust.

"On the testing ground, there is less of the formality of 'outsiders watching the spectacle' and more of the seriousness of 'insiders scrutinizing the craft,'" the regimental leadership explained. They have also combined this approach with realistic-combat training to advance upgraded measures such as cross-squad mutual examinations and scenario-setting for key and difficult subjects, allowing "the people who know you best" to hone "the sharpest blade."

Not long ago, the smell of gunpowder rose again on the training ground as a new round of live-force confrontation exercises (实兵对抗) was held on schedule. The regiment broke from existing position groupings and assigned the two members of each original pair to the Red and Blue forces respectively. At the outset of the confrontation, the Blue force continuously jammed communication frequencies and disguised itself as false targets to lure the enemy into traps; the Red force used terrain for concealment to close with the "enemy," rapidly assessing the authenticity of targets. The intensity of the confrontation escalated quickly: the Blue force dispatched squads to harass and attempt to fragment the Red force's combat formation; the Red force rapidly adjusted its disposition and directed rear fires to conduct precision strikes…

Walking off the training ground, members of both sides immediately launched their after-action review, their identities as "comrades" and "adversaries" shifting back and forth as they dug into each other's problems and put forward recommendations.

Original Chinese
“厉害!我特意增设误判诱饵加大难度,居然没难住你”“吃一堑长一智,自从上次比武被难住,我可下了大力气苦练”…… 炎炎夏日,火箭军某团一场专业比武考核落下帷幕,官兵们并未立即休整,而是两两一组开始复盘。 该团主要担负转运任务,许多岗位需要官兵两人一组,互相配合操作。可这次比武考核,该团特意将同一岗位上的两人拆分开来,一人参赛、一人监考。 “让亲密搭档成为考场上的最严‘考官’,是我们完善考评机制的新探索。”该团一位领导向记者说起由来。 在去年一次实战化对抗训练中,某营官兵接连出现判断滞后、处置僵化、协同不畅等问题,最终铩羽而归。 中士张翔天和一级军士长刘永清是搭档,此次训练,他俩担负保障关键号位的任务。张翔天因紧张出现连续失误,好几次愣在原地,没能妥善处置特情。复盘会上,这对向来配合默契的搭档争执了起来。 刘永清认为张翔天关键时刻“掉链子”,张翔天则有些委屈,为了完成此次任务,这个月他几乎天天加练:“平时各项考核,我从没给营队拖过后腿,这次只是一时紧张导致的失误,没必要这么说吧?” “战场上有机会让你‘一时紧张’吗?”“可我就是容易紧张,咱俩搭档这么久,你还不知道吗?”话说到这里,刘永清有些愣神,沉默半晌起身检讨:“此次失利我也有责任。张翔天心理承受能力较差,作为班长和搭档,我明明知道他的这个短板,却觉得反正不影响日常考核成绩,就没有下功夫帮他纠治……” 他俩反思完,现场其他几对搭档也逐一起身反思了类似问题,这引起李参谋长的关注。这次失利暴露了不少以前没发现的问题,李参谋长原本很恼火,可他很快意识到,这一对对朝夕相处的搭档,既清楚彼此的弱项短板,又熟悉本岗位职责,为何不让他们互相盯着短板弱项,担任对方的“考官”? 很快,团党委经过研究讨论,决定试行这一机制。他们明确,各单位可以结合实际,在考核时将原本两两一组的战士拆分开,由一人参训参考,另一人监训执考。 某班班长张庆辉很早就发现自己的搭档、下士王重阳习惯按固定流程排障,欠缺多故障同步处置经验。他就在考核中,叠加器材缺失、人员负伤、电磁干扰等多重条件,倒逼小王跳出固有思维,锤炼排障硬功。 一级上士刘可意针对搭档下士金道翔堵漏动作偏慢、程序衔接不紧的问题,在训练罐体堵漏环节中,设置多点泄漏特情,并在介质转注时故意压缩时间,设置较为复杂的环境干扰,给小金上了实实在在的一课。走下训练场,金道翔直呼:“搭档当‘考官’,出题更‘刁钻’!”刘可意则拉着他立即开始复盘。 日常训练考核更有针对性、更有硝烟味,让原本不太容易显露的短板弱项逐一露出水面。越来越多的官兵开始主动排查能力缺项,比学赶帮超氛围日益浓厚。 “考场上少了‘外行看热闹’的过场,多了‘内行看门道’的较真。”该团领导介绍,他们还结合实战化训练,推行跨班组互考、重难点课目专项设情等升级举措,让“最熟悉的人”磨出“最锋利的刀”。 前不久,训练场硝烟再起,新一轮实兵对抗如期举行,该团打破原有岗位编组,将原有搭档双方分别编入红蓝队伍。对抗伊始,蓝方持续干扰通信频段,伪装成假目标诱敌入套;红方则利用地形隐蔽接“敌”,快速判断目标真伪。对抗强度迅速提升,蓝方派出小队袭扰,试图分割红方战斗队形;红方迅速调整部署,指挥后方火力实施精确打击…… 走下训练场,双方队员立即展开复盘,“战友”与“对手”的身份,在互挖问题和研提建议中不断变换。