ACP16 - Prohibition of (replica) weapons, etc

Everyone Fieldcraft
1

So, this may be nitpicking to a certain extent, but I’m partly interested in starting a wider discussion and partly interested in getting some guidance from the ACC pool of knowledge:

A) does anyone else think the ‘weapons prohibition’ of ACP 16 is more than a little over zealous? Fair enough, I can understand limiting the teaching of MST to courses with the allocation of b and p and the appropriately trained staff, but I don’t see why the carriage of weapons by properly WHT’d troops in the course of FTX or fieldcraft training is outlawed. Also, bypassing the WHT/need for SAAIs issue, why the prohibition of ‘replica’ weapons, presumably including the type of wooden cut outs used by regular gunners/marines/infantry when they go through their initial fieldcraft training before being trained on the rifle?*

B ) I want to broaden the scope of some fieldcraft lessons (staying well within the ACP as far as I can see). The relevant example here being demonstrating how camouflage and concealment/why things are seen/observation can all be applied beyond just the man/human body: ACP 16 certainly used to contain a lesson plan for cam and concealment based around vehicles (is it still in there? I’m guessing so**), so if I wanted to use the example of a machine gun/rifle/other weapon, does that count as ‘using weapons’?

*just to over state the point, I’m just talking about carriage of weapons/replicas, NOT teaching mil skills

** I know, I know. I should stop being lazy and just check myself. Just wondered if anybody knew off hand

2

There’s no lesson for camoflauge and concealment of vehicles in ACP16 and yes, you’re right - we need to stay within the boundaries of the manual until such time as an additional volume may be released (starts holding breath…).

From what I hear, some RC’s are sympathetic to allowing wpns and B&P being used during properly-planned courses but there are some cold-war warrior type RC’s who are firmly stuck in the past, who continue to object to it.

So until the day comes when CAC finally gets a grip of all RC’s and issues non-negotiable instructions to them that the use of wpns and B&P IS to be permitted, ACP16 is all we have. Much to the amusement of the other cadet forces.

3

Any idea why it was ever there? Always seemed like an odd choice.

Although, I’d say in answer to your post, that I’m specifically not talking about using blank and pyro. Whether I agree with it or not, I can understand that decision, what I can’t understand is why we’re expected to conduct fieldcraft training while avoiding the ‘use of weapons’. Is the suggestion that we work on the basis that everyone sneeks around the battlefield watching each other? Is the scenario that we are unarmed, but the enemy is armed? How am I supposed to communicate the fact that the enemy is armed without talking about weapons? And if we have live enemy, they can’t be carrying any weapons or replica weapons, so why are the cadets not just strolling up to them in dayglo vests? Or are we saying imaginary invisible weapons are fine, but imaginary wooden ones are somehow totally different and evil?

4

The answer to your burning question is, how many Chin’s are there in the Hong Kong phonebook?

5

Fair point.

I just feel like this is a single paragraph in the ACP that just makes life unnecessarily difficult, when a slight rewording would keep things sensible without the need for any major changes whatsoever.

The ACP even defines fieldcraft in terms of ‘cadets carrying out military activities’. . . presumably in an alternate universe where the world’s armed forces tickle each other into submission?

6

Unfortunately, with the current ACP 16 there would be no need to carry weapons of any time.

There is nothing remotely weapon based in the ACP, with target (enemy) indication being replaced by “indication of objects” like some poorly worded Eye Spy game.

In any event, grab a SAAI and do lessons 10, 11 and 12 in the field, as it should be taught and the cadets will get all the cammed up with lessons fun they will need before blank and pyro are introduced. They CAN do movement with weapons, reaction to effective enemy fire, firing from cover etc provided you have a SAAI. Just ensure you are clear on what needs to be taught in line with Pam 5C and have the appropriate staffing.

7

[quote=“juliet mike” post=9506]Unfortunately, with the current ACP 16 there would be no need to carry weapons of any time.

There is nothing remotely weapon based in the ACP, with target (enemy) indication being replaced by “indication of objects” like some poorly worded Eye Spy game.

In any event, grab a SAAI and do lessons 10, 11 and 12 in the field, as it should be taught and the cadets will get all the cammed up with lessons fun they will need before blank and pyro are introduced. They CAN do movement with weapons, reaction to effective enemy fire, firing from cover etc provided you have a SAAI. Just ensure you are clear on what needs to be taught in line with Pam 5C and have the appropriate staffing.[/quote]

I’m not 100% on this. As I understand it, ATC SAAIs don’t cover anything beyond lesson 10, so aren’t able to teach lessons 11 and 12. :? :? Hopefully I’ve been grossly misinformed… :cheer:

Edit to add: having thought about this, surely this falls in the realm of ‘Military Skills and Tactics’, which (to paraphrase) are ‘only to be taught on approved courses’ (JL, CLC, RAF Regt experience)?

Again, though, I think you’re missing my point… to me the idea of being in the field doing fieldcraft without weapons is totally alien and weird. However, I get why it’s not practical to run Air Cadet exercises with mil skills and bandp. What I don’t get is why you can’t give every cadet a big stick and say: “This is your ‘rifle’. Look after it, don’t leave it unattended.” That just seems like a pointless overreaction.

Also, while there is no need to have weapons for ACP16 stuff, if I mention their existence and relevance to the subject during lessons, is someone going to come and throw a massive tantrum at me?

8

WIs or SAAIs should cover all of the lessons (inc 11 & 12) - IIRC the policy was that cadets only have to undergo lessons 1-10 before taking a WHT which is where you may be getting mixed up.

9

Quite possibly. I’m sure I remember the last course literature I had a chance to read through was pretty specific about ‘lessons 1 - 10’, although that may have been in regards to what candidates should already be familiar with…

10

[quote=“tango_lima” post=9519][quote=“juliet mike” post=9506]Unfortunately, with the current ACP 16 there would be no need to carry weapons of any time.

There is nothing remotely weapon based in the ACP, with target (enemy) indication being replaced by “indication of objects” like some poorly worded Eye Spy game.

In any event, grab a SAAI and do lessons 10, 11 and 12 in the field, as it should be taught and the cadets will get all the cammed up with lessons fun they will need before blank and pyro are introduced. They CAN do movement with weapons, reaction to effective enemy fire, firing from cover etc provided you have a SAAI. Just ensure you are clear on what needs to be taught in line with Pam 5C and have the appropriate staffing.[/quote]

I’m not 100% on this. As I understand it, ATC SAAIs don’t cover anything beyond lesson 10, so aren’t able to teach lessons 11 and 12. :? :? Hopefully I’ve been grossly misinformed… :cheer:

Edit to add: having thought about this, surely this falls in the realm of ‘Military Skills and Tactics’, which (to paraphrase) are ‘only to be taught on approved courses’ (JL, CLC, RAF Regt experience)?

Again, though, I think you’re missing my point… to me the idea of being in the field doing fieldcraft without weapons is totally alien and weird. However, I get why it’s not practical to run Air Cadet exercises with mil skills and bandp. What I don’t get is why you can’t give every cadet a big stick and say: “This is your ‘rifle’. Look after it, don’t leave it unattended.” That just seems like a pointless overreaction.

Also, while there is no need to have weapons for ACP16 stuff, if I mention their existence and relevance to the subject during lessons, is someone going to come and throw a massive tantrum at me?[/quote]

Look, if you want to play at being a soldier with cadets, then go to the ACF. The rules are what they are, deal with it. Then you can be a real SF Super-Trooper, just like you are with your fellow auggies :popcorn: :stuck_out_tongue:

11

In fairness, it was the ATC who asked me to come and play soldiers. I’m aware of what the rules are as written, I’m dealing with that by trying to find out what exactly that means in practice so 1) I don’t get into trouble and 2) I’ve got a proper answer to the usual cadet questions.

PS: you never got back to me on whether you wanted that hug?

12

[quote=“tango_lima” post=9530]

PS: you never got back to me on whether you wanted that hug?[/quote]

I’m good thanks. Stop sending the weird & harassing PMs though or I will report you to the forum admin.

13

[quote=“tango_lima” post=9530]I’m aware of what the rules are as written, I’m dealing with that by trying to find out what exactly that means in practice so 1) I don’t get into trouble and 2) I’ve got a proper answer to the usual cadet questions.

[/quote]

You already know exactely what it means in practice. Bleat all you want here, but if you want to do that stuff, you’ll have to go elsewhere. And by that I don’t mean 2624/501.

14

Sirvicalsmeer,

I genuinely do not know what your problem is…

  1. Why are you stalking me around the forum trying to de-rail any thread I’m on?
  2. I don’t think I’ve ever sent you a PM.
  3. I don’t care what your opinion of the reserves is.
  4. What is your connection to the ACO? Apart from hanging around here being rude to people?
  5. Why are you trying to ‘out’ me as a member of a particular unit? Is it to impress me with the fact you ‘know things’?

Only one of us is guilty of harassing anyone. So what’s the issue?

15

I have sent a PM to tango_lima and sirvicalsmeer:

[quote]“ACP16 - Prohibition of (replica) weapons, etc…”, which you have participated in, has been moved for review.

If you have any queries, feel free to PM me.

Operation Archway[/quote]

I don’t know what to do here, ideally they would report the PMs in question, but I don’t think they have the capability, so they can’t be found without going database diving.

I had a quick look and I can’t see any other examples of 1), I agree with 4) and I don’t understand 5).

So what to do? I would like to ban sirvicalsmeer, but I am not sure it would be just.

16

I would send them both a PM and tell them to cool off. I’m not sure who started what so it doesn’t seem fair to ban one and not the other…

17

I think they’re both a bit to blame and I bet there are no PMs it’s just baiting, I’ll check though.
In the mean time keep the thread offline

Cheers

DJ

18

yup,

just checked and neither have ever sent each other a PM.

I suggest editing the off tpoic posts, warning the users to pack it in and re-instate the thread.

cheers guys, good job as always,

DJ

19

I have cleaned up and returned this thread.

Anyone who attempts to derail a thread with personal attacks will be suspended from the site. You have been warned! :evil:

The same applies to anyone who replies to such posts as it makes the whole thing worse. If you object to a post, report it.

If you have any questions send me a PM.

20

Done.