Have you seen this thread? Its a better place for info on ACPS.
2 Likes
Here here.
No need for it indeed
1 Like
Beyond disappointing to read in Weekly Brief No63 that the annual allocation of places on ACPS will drop from 200, when it was outsourced to Tayside Aviation, to a meager 40 places now it has been brought ‘in house’.
Only 0.07% of cadets will get a place on this scholarship!
Damn, I thought the minimum starting number was 50, and we were going to work upwards from there, per the long FOI. Sad to hear it’s only 40.
Sadly, I’m not surprised. It’s why RAFAC (@Cab) should be looking at ways to augment this meagre allocation. Clearly, there’s not enough resources to divert Tutors hrs even more from the existing use (UAS / AEF, etc), so let’s look at scholarships / bursaries - use the due diligence / duty of care protocols alrwady in use by the Hon Company of Air Pilots / Air League - & work from there. If OC2FTS can be linked within Air Pilots to allocate civvie scholarships / bursaries, then that already shows acceptance of the protocols.
Looking at 40 ACPS awards versus 150(?) that used to be flown annually at Tayside, there has to be some money left in the pot.
Same argument (due diligence / duty of care protocols) for allowing flights in non-Service aircraft - let’s look at all options to get cadets flying & instill that “wow” factor that’s very much missing at the moment.
5 Likes
And here I was thinking I was so horribly wrong to ask “where are the extra flying hours going to come from”… I know I perhaps was overly harsh when I said this:
But I feel like I might’ve made this point a good couple of months ago!
But rather that just slate the good sir, it’s clear we need to think about how to get more hours available for cadets, be it Military Flying or not.
4 Likes
So we’ve now had an update regarding selection processes for GS and ACPS,
I feel like the ACPS application wording doesn’t now quite align with the whole “The Air Cadets is not a recruiting organisation, and cadets will not be expected to join the military or face any pressure to do so.”
Your ambition to join the RAF is now one of the 3 4** main things you are assessed on during your application. Specifically favouring those with pilot/aircrew ambitions within the RAF.
I get it, we are the RAF Air Cadets. But we should be offering every activity we do irrespective and without prejudice of a cadets’ ambition on join the RAF when they leave.
This doesn’t sit right with me. Eh, maybe I’m wrong here, but just wanted to highlight this as it feels like a bit of a ‘shift’ in our fundamentals.
** The list goes 1, 2, 2, 3.
5 Likes
I think the reason for the favourability to RAF applicants could have to do with them learning the RAF’s Top secret numbering system to hide things from the russians
simply hide top secret info as a number thats already been used Genius
2 Likes
TBF it’s the same system used to number squadrons and confuse the enemy…
2 Likes
Too true.
Anyway, regardless of planned career choice, all a cadet will do is state that they have always wanted to join the RAF as a pilot / WSO…
Wouldn’t they join RAFAC rather than RAF to be a Wing Staff Officer?
2 Likes
Apologies, i never clicked the link until today, so it may have changed in the last 24+ hours since posted but…
that link now directs to IBN 031-2024 and within that:
- the number system you mention i cannot find, only bullet points.
- There does not look to be any ambition to join the RAF within the IBN
(although note in the FAQs on page 3, the last question does suggest that candidates interested in being an RAF pilot will be given priority (“more likely to be offered”)
have i missed something?
All the IBN says regarding the RAF is
- RAFAC aims to support the RAF’s ambition to ‘engage, inspire and attract’ suitable quality candidates for its profession
I read this as the RAFAC is following the RAF’s selection ethos by selecting the “quality candidates” for its most attractive opportunity (for the RAF being a Pilot, for the RAFAC, getting a flying scholarship)
- will be configured to signpost our brightest and best air cadets towards the RAF
Those candidates who do well will be pointed towards an AFCO with a recommendation to join the RAF as a pilot.
Has this been edited since @JoeBloggs first highlighted these concerns that the RAFAC was almost a recruitment process?
another point i notice:
- there is a need to ensure standardisation of the selection process for the GS and aviation opportunities…
- The selection process will be consistent within each Region
All good so far…
- a more pragmatic and discretionary approach might be required to ensure that training opportunities are not missed
while there are hopes to create a standard and consistent approach nationally to how candidates are selected, this last bullet point does act as a (massive imo) disclaimer that those who conduct the selection process still have the ability to use their own discretion
It’s possibly pointing to the fact that some Astra Ground Schools (AGS - the previously stated option for Bronze & various computer based trg) are not available = there has to be declared methodology for selection in those Regions / Wgs, otherwise it wouldn’t be fair to allocate GS / ACPS to those areas not covered by AGS.
Going back a very long time, the ACPS was only awarded to cadets who had attended OASC to complete the aptitude tests (although I have no idea if the required grading was the same as if applying for pilot). However, ACPS was a huge prize of 30 hrs flying, so perhaps understandable that a more vigorous testing procedure was used.
So are the current proposals suitable for the current style of ACPS / amount of flying? If only 40-50 are going to be allocated / flown at AEFs, then maybe it is necessary to filter - but as stated in the IBN, it will be very important to ensure that is is a standard assessment package RAFAC-wide.
The other point about this - what other options could there be if a cadet isn’t selected for ACPS? How about a bursary for some of them so at least they could get some flying - using an external provider of course! 
no, as indicated, i recognised the FAQs on page three…
I had missed the blue box you quote on page 2 - thanks
clearly i had missed this - odd to put it in the box and not in the body of the notice
1 Like
So are the current proposals suitable for the current style of ACPS / amount of flying? If only 40-50 are going to be allocated / flown at AEFs, then maybe it is necessary to filter - but as stated in the IBN, it will be very important to ensure that is is a standard assessment package RAFAC-wide.
With only 40-50 slots per year then there has to be filtering.
In the past cadets who applied for ACPS and didn’t quite make the final cut were offered other opportunities like a nav scholarship.
RAFAC made a decision a few years ago to trade time spent on nav scholarships for more AEF flying reducing the aviation offer to older cadets to some degree. If RAFAC doesn’t find the right balance with this then there’s a risk of losing the interest of our older cadets and failing to inspire younger cadets.
We Definately need a broader spectrum in the aviation offer and a better offer in the middle ground (bronze/silver level) to keep the air in RAFAC……
1 Like
Clearly it’s me not reading properly as I missed that in your post 
1 Like
Sqns/ wgs / regions need to keep pushing for flights in non-Service aircraft. If it’s good enough for OC2FTS (Gp Capt Baz Dale) to sit on the Hon Guild of Air Pilots & help allocate scholarships / bursaries to civvie youths, then the relevant duty of care / safety standards / MoUs are clearly acceptable to him. Time to put them into place for RAFAC. @Cab.
There are no logical “safety” reasons why RAFAC couldn’t move with this; I’ve got copies of the relevant documents that the Air League use - all very sensible. Air League signed an MoU with RAFAC - let’s put some meat on the bone!!
We can’t inspire by theory alone - more flying is needed!
5 Likes
you are right, and it did happen. a neighbouring Sqn whose OC is a BA pilot flew a PA-28 packed with Cadets on more than one occasion via the ACTO035 route before it was rescinded.
all the wording on the relevant documents signed by Cadet’s parents and those in the CoC to approve the activity made it clear the RAFAC was not liable, but it was still deemed “too risky” to continue (with no known situation that occurred to reinforce the opinion of unacceptable risk, eg a near miss)
No one who is pushing for ACTO035 to be reinstated is asking for a shift change to new ground - we had this before, successfully.
Suddenly, without warning or explanation ACTO035 disappeared and with it the process to use non-service aircraft
4 Likes
And even worse, a procedure was being set up to pre-approve some BGA locations to save a lot of the faff under ACTO35. Same principle - the risk (or lack of) was clearly acceptable at the time.
3 Likes