Then submit an F765 to the appropriate authorities.
Can cadets do that? If so how?
You’ll learn that the ivory towers usually forget about us
You’ll be lucky! HQRAFAC have absolutely no idea what a 765 is let alone what to do with one! I tried many years ago, they ignored it! If pressed, they say they have their own amendment and suggestions process, but nobody has ever seen it…
1 Like
I got an amendment years ago, all I did was email Sqn Ldr Pelcot with the problem, and a suggested new wording. It was in the next version.
7 Likes
Oh I agree.
Took me three years to get an amendment for live technical documentation for the Chinook.
Only took me 3 months though when I wrote an SPL for the landing lamps. So swings and roundabouts.
1 Like
I think WO Mundy is the POC now! But yeah, I know people who have raised minor issues directly and had them fixed.
1 Like
What Ray said to me at the time is that the process is much easier if you also suggest the fix, that may have been why your SPL turnaround was faster?
1 Like
Absolutely isn’t a expectation for this. Where did you read this?
Was told by the local ACF & saw it live when we were sharing an exercise area - was a few years back though.
It was a Health & Safety requirement & best practise.
Ok - I’ve done a few courses and exercises recently. Even the army don’t do that - they only time they have safety supervisors marked is for LFTT - Live Fire Tactical Training. It’s not mentioned in CTR or fieldcraft manuals as best practice or taught on any MQual or FCI courses. Therefore it’s 100% not a thing.
Probably then either a local county rule or an obsolete rule that’s been superseded.
Could well be a DTE / Range SO thing.
Yeap. I’ve seen it too. Albeit, I’ve not done FC for a while - but it was 100% happening. So whilst not a “thing” by the book, it’s definitely something which people were doing.
1 Like
On JL, years ago, we had to wear white bands around our helmets, that was it.
I’m not sure the DS even wear helmets now, the cadets don’t.
I’m surprised that such a health & safety focused organisation such as our selves hasn’t adopted this rule. 
Helmets cost money 
1 Like
How does wearing a hi-vis tabbard make it more safe? THIS is what’s wrong with the organisation - doing stooopid stuff to “look like” we are safe which give no benefit to actually being safe.
1 Like
In the event of an incident during blank firing it makes easy to tell who are the qualified exercise assistant & who the Exercise director is quickly & easily, something that would be critical when dealing with an incident & blood is all over the place.
Fieldcraft like shooting is safe 95% of the time but if it goes wrong it goes wrong big.
Bear in mind that the L98A1 had no BFA connection so there was a 50m danger area in front of it when doing blanks.
ATC didn’t do blanks (officially) so probably didn’t worry but the ACF would use them regularly hence the need. It may well be an old rule that has been superseded by the introduction of L98A2 & BFAs which have made cadets blank firing a lot safer.
1 Like
I would hope the exercise brief would make all that clear - and for cadets it should more than likely be clear in most cases - the adults are the EAs, the cadets are exercising troops.
If you’re all wearing camouflage, some adults are an”enemy group” & you have staff cadets then it get confusing very quickly when something goes wrong & people start panicking - a big yellow/pink/green hi vis can be very reassuring.
No matter, if it’s no longer in regulations then not something to worry about although it did help to reign in the Walter mittys a bit & to remember safety over realism.
1 Like