Soooo, Combat Logos for slides, avoid badge police.
What about embroidered No5 badges? I thought they were being provided, but none materialised. Can’t see them on Cadet Direct or Combat Logos.
So Tactical Recognition Flash are used to identify units when cap badges are not available. For example, when wearing a helmet in a tactical situation where it is too dangerous, due to combat circumstances, to wear a beret!
When is any current member of the RAFAC going to be in that situation?
They are pretty coloured badges that mean nothing to the public and could never be used for their purpose. Why do we need them?
If removing the need for these badges can divert funds to the PTS badges for the cadets, then please get rid of them!
6 Likes
Junior Leaders🤣
1 Like
not quite true, nor the whole story - TRF’s are a replacement for cap badges when berets aren’t appropriate, and being near aircraft is one of those times (which may be relevent for Air Cadets at some stage in the future…), but they are also an enhancement over cap badges because they are more visible/recognisable - simply that i can see a TRF at 50m away and tell what unit it is, but i’d be hard pushed to do that for many cap badges at 20m.
they are also, and this is where we move into a grey area between TRF’s and Formation Flashes/Force Identifiers, a part of a units/formations morale and identity. one could argue that this is something that ought to be adressed in a formation where those who have lead it for the last 70+ years have gone to great and repeated lengths to ensure that everyone knows that they aren’t actually part of that organisation and where morale is, quite simply, in the toilet.
theres also a very practical issue - TRF’s/Formation Flashes/Force Identifiers are now a fixed and very visible part of British military uniform: if we are to continue to be a part of the military community, and to visit and use military facilities and bases, to use ranges, to eat in canteens/messes, we do at least have to make some effort to look like the rest of that community - we all know of the fun and games that CI’s have always had because they don’t have a uniform and an ID card, and therefore are always getting the ‘and exactly what are you doing here mate?’ looks and question, well, without a TRF/Formation Flash when everyone else has them, Officers, SNCO (ATC) and Cadets are going to get the same thing - which means everything takes longer, requires more explanation, and involves more suspicion, which means less productivity, which means less stuff for cadets.
personally i think the ACO should have two - rather like the RAF - one for the public and media thats based on the RAF or RN ‘crayon’ badge, with the words Royal Air Force Air Cadets in distinct letters on a highly visible background, and a second thats a more traditional TRF, something that means something to the members of the RAFAC - something that encapsulates its heritage and traditions. i’ve always like the idea of the RAF TRF at but set at 45 degrees, perhaps with a gold ‘C’ in the centre…
1 Like
For 99% of the time we use facilities we wear blue and quite easily distinguishable.
As for CIs, always been like that. I never got phased by snide comments as a CI from idiots in uniform and treated the pillocks uttering them with the contempt they deserved, given most of them we just playing silly sods. If it meant I had to wait around with a group of cadets or on my own, while they faffed around, didn’t worry me one bit.
Angus, you have made a long justification for these little badges!
So where is the money coming from for this vital piece of Military Identification? RAFAC can’t afford the PTS badges, so I would rather any surplus go that way, not to make our second, non standard uniform look pretty!
You say it will stop questions about who we are and what we are doing. A small square of purple and blue won’t stop that. The public can’t identify the regular services, even the Regulars sometimes struggle to identify us, so how is it going to help?
We are talking about badges for a uniform that is not issued, therefore it is not “uniform” across RAFAC. Surely we should deal with the mix of DPM and MTP first?
This is moving away from the issue of Rank slides making lots of money for CD, but surely a new TRF would be offered to them to make, to enhance their profits?
1 Like
The organisation has far, far better things to be spending money on than vanity ephemora.
When these things first came into being they couldn’t be supplied in the quantities required.
As for identifying people the number of times the above is going to be required are so few and far between as to make them irrelevant.
If cadets are somewhere like RIAT give them clothing that identifies them as cadets.
4 Likes
Bring back OG lightweight trousers, polo/T shirts and berets!
2 Likes
DPM and working blue was the ideal distinguisher a few years ago pre RAFAC use of MTP…
Yep worked very well and it wasn’t only pre MTP.
MIXED DRESS … I can see many moustachoed ones dropping they pies and doughnuts at the very thought.
Now that sounds like common sense and would never work as someone with no life wouldn’t be able to write a dress reg for it.
1 Like
Stand by for No3A Public Military Engagement (PME) dress: No3 trousers and an approved polo/tee shirt.
2 Likes
Who approves the polo shirt and then pays for the countless thousands already bought and paid for if they don’t meet some anally retentives blinkered thinking?
The RAF impose the rules. You foot the bill.
1 Like
im not even buying extra FS ones until i get promoted as its a rip off at the moment!
sorry i didn’t mean mixed dress.
to clarify
at RIAT seeing persons in DPM during the MTP days it was clear which organisation they were: RAF or RAFAC
at RIAT seeing persons in Working blue also did the same.
the use of DPM and Working blue was a great way of readily identifying who was RAFAC from a distance back in the day when we weren’t permitted to wear MTP.
you mean like the No3 dress seen at RIAT?
currently RAFCTE pay for those t-shirts (ie event organisers) as i understand it. If we have a
No3A - greens
No3B - public engagement dress i can see it making sense, but as questioned the cost will be the stumbling block.
was there not talk once of a “template” for Squadron tshirts? and with that a No3B style dress code?
in that if at a fete or similiar and full No3 wasn’t suitable, Sqn tshirts could be worn, providing they met the approval format template?
Similar, but preferably polo-shirts. They are trying to specify pantone colours for the body of the garment and the piping, plus a RAFAC logo on the left breast. Similar constraints for baseball caps.
We’ll see the full mess if the v3 dress regs are ever released…
Well they can pay for my stock of squadron t-shirts, then buy a replacement for everyone who has one currently if they want to impose a mandatory template for them.
Or we can all abide by the spirit of the regulations and just wear our current polo-shirts in the manner they describe and anyone who whinges can jog on?
4 Likes
I understand that is the general intention, but as an organisation we are still sucking at the tit of the RAF and we seem scared to tell them where to go.
1358C needs to follow the general intention of 1358 whilst no longer stealing blocks of text verbatim. Other rules (such as hairdressing) need likewise to be appropriate to a youth organisation.
1 Like
Seems like a reasonable idea, so long as it’s applied reasonably. If the intention is that new t-shirts are to be made to an approved pattern then that’s fine by me - but as @pEp says we shouldn’t be expecting everyone to change things that they’ve already spent money on.