Just Found this it has to be a typo??
c. Beret. The beret is to be worn so that the black band is horizontal around the head and 25mm above the eyebrows. The surplus material is to
be pulled down over the right ear and the badge clearly displayed in a position directly above the left eye. The adjustment ribbon is to be secured
with a knot and the surplus ends hidden from sight. The beret is to be worn only with CS 95 or other forms of combat dress.
Yes - if you read the rest of the manual, it’s clear that the wording should have said “only the beret is to be worn with CS95”
Who ever wrote it needs to go back and try again its full of stupid mistakes like this looking foward to AL 1
Don’t know about AL1, just re-write the whole thing and start again.
Come on guy’s, it’s much better a clearer then the old manual ay?
Agreed - it is a huge improvement and certainly doesn’t need to be taken back to basics and started from scratch. There are lots of fixes needed and I hope that they are in hand but even as it stands it is better than what we’ve had for the past few years.
It’s already been ammended once. AL2 is next (although we don’t use ‘AL’ anymore, it’s version control now).
yup - it went up to 1.01 shortly after initial release.
It’s already been ammended once. AL2 is next (although we don’t use ‘AL’ anymore, it’s version control now).[/quote]
I suppose it would be if it was a DAP but isnt it still an AP? I have been out of the RAF for a year so it may have changed again
It’s already been ammended once. AL2 is next (although we don’t use ‘AL’ anymore, it’s version control now).[/quote]
I suppose AL is a bit olde worlde for the alle newe ATCe!
They can call it whatever they like as long as somewhere there is chapter and verse as to what and where the changes are.
I tend to feel ‘version control’ means non annotated change, which has been a problem recently with changes to documents.
There is an update list (like the old ammendment list) in the front.
You’ll note that it’s annotated to show taht it’s been emmended to version 1.01 by WO ATF
Going back to the start-point, here, and the clumsey wording of the AP…presumably this wasn’t in any way intended to prevent Cadets and Adult Staff from wearing berets in No 14 flying dress??
And there’s a curious point, now. Presumably ex- Regt Officers (reg or Aux), now serving with the VRT would be allowed to wear berets in No.2 dress?? As they are permitted to wear Regt insignia, as per Cmdt General RAF Regt’s guidance?
wilf_san
[quote=“wilf_san” post=436]Going back to the start-point, here, and the clumsey wording of the AP…presumably this wasn’t in any way intended to prevent Cadets and Adult Staff from wearing berets in No 14 flying dress??
And there’s a curious point, now. Presumably ex- Regt Officers (reg or Aux), now serving with the VRT would be allowed to wear berets in No.2 dress?? As they are permitted to wear Regt insignia, as per Cmdt General RAF Regt’s guidance?
wilf_san[/quote]
I wondered that…and concluded: No, because the badges are now worn as qual badges rather than branch insignia, while the ‘beret mit blues’ is for officers who are in the Regiment. For example: RAF Reg officer who becomes a logs officer later in his career would be allowed to wear mudguards because they are the badge that says he passed JROC, but not the beret with blues because that’s an identifier of being a Regiment officer.
Related Q: ex-gunner (ie: other ranks) leaves and decides to help out with his local ATC. If he choses to commission into the VRT, would he be allowed to wear the mudguards (since he qualified for them by passing Omega, not JROC)?
[quote=“tango_lima” post=485]
Related Q: ex-gunner (ie: other ranks) leaves and decides to help out with his local ATC. If he choses to commission into the VRT, would he be allowed to wear the mudguards (since he qualified for them by passing Omega, not JROC)?[/quote]
No. Only VR(T)s who have passed JROC are permitted to wear the Mudguards. Its in the same CROs
[quote=“Leeroy” post=494][quote=“tango_lima” post=485]
Related Q: ex-gunner (ie: other ranks) leaves and decides to help out with his local ATC. If he choses to commission into the VRT, would he be allowed to wear the mudguards (since he qualified for them by passing Omega, not JROC)?[/quote]
No. Only VR(T)s who have passed JROC are permitted to wear the Mudguards. Its in the same CROs[/quote]
It reads that way…
But is it just badly worded (what with it being, like lots of stuff HQAC seem to put out, pretty much copied and pasted from the original with Air Cadet specific bits tacked on)? The original DIN (and the CRO if you cover up the last bullet point) looks to me like it’s refering to rock commissioning into the Regiment specifically rather than other branches, meaning that they have to remove their mudguards while going through OASC, PROC, Cranwell and JROC and can then put them back on (same as the blokes I know currently going through training as RAuxAF gunners, who technically earnt their mudguards years ago, but aren’t allowed to wear them this time until they pass Omega again - although if they’d re-joined as, for arguments sake, movers, they could have had them up from day one).