Whatever fella. And stop PMing me, I’m not going to reply.
Personally - as far as the ATC is concerned - I don’t see the need for “cadet” identifiers on rank slides for PCS-CU/No.3 since cadets are already wearing a different cap-badge.
I can see the argument for ACF, since they wear the cap-badge and often stable belt of their parent regiment, so the distinction between 16/17/18 year old ACF cadets and 16/17/18 year old young soldiers in PCS-CU; could be difficult.
CCF(RAF) would also be different, since they wear an RAF cap-badge - and here perhaps there is an argument for an identifier …although the long hair should automatically give it away :evil:
If an identifier must be worn, why not just use the “old” CS95 Air Cadets FI? on both shirt and smock? Many Army regiments are already starting to wear name tapes on PCS-CU (including on the shirt), so the “no badges must be worn on the front of the shirt” argument no longer washes.
What seems to be happening now with PCS-CU is exactly what happened with CS95 15 years ago - that too was supposed to be a dedicated, no-compromise, combat uniform, sans patches, name tapes, not worn with stable belts etc. etc. Look what happened to CS95 - same thing starting to happen all over again with PCS-CU.
The process started with it being worn tucked in (which permitted stable belts to be worn), now badges are creeping back.
Cheers
BTI
You presume again my friend, never have pm’d you and don’t intend to.
I don’t particularly object to this, but it seems to be a bit unnecessary and potentially quite costly. TRFs have got to be easier way of essentially doing the same thing and as everyone already has one of these why not keep them, rather than bother with supplying everyone with at best unnecessary new rank slides. Also would this mean cadets would have to have a ‘blank’ rank slide with cadet written on it?
i don’t know know about ‘costly’ - rip-off direct and silverthiefs flog DPM/MTP/OG ‘CADET’ rankslides for £4 and TRF’s for £2, they flog the current blue RAF/ATC rankslides at £3 - and they aren’t selling any of them at cost price.
the TRF needs a redesign anyway, not only is the current one ‘lame’, but its out of date, and perhaps most pathetically, its a TRF that you can’t recognise because its colours render it invisible on DPM/MTP at more than about 2 metres… clever.
an increase of £1 of the annual subs price would probably provide each cadet with one pair of Blue ‘Cadet’ rankslides, one pair of OG ‘Cadet’ rankslides (OG would go with both DPM and MTP and stand out to some, but not a stupid, degree), and a pair of TRF’s that can both be recognised, and that gives some indication that the wearer has at least a fleeting connection with the RAF.
personally, i’m of the view that identifiers are required - not just outwardly, but it might help combat some of walty-tastic notions that a very small number inflict on the ACO.
I suppose, although if you assume to kit a cadet out with a pair of blue and OG rank slides costs around £0.50 for both, that still ends up at around £30,000 in total for something we have an, albeit fairly atrocious, version of. Whilst I hate to defend the TRF is does also stop the walting problem to some extent, something that looks that awful should remind the wearer that they are not a member of the RAF regiment.
i fear we differ on which is the waltier organisation of the two!
i think one of the big problems with the current TRF is the fact that its one organisation with 3 different TRF’s, differentiated by rank - with the lamest going to the lowest ranks, the second lamest to the midle ranks, and only the senior ranks having one that actually looks like a TRF.
now, obviously there are administrative reasons for that, but its not exactly espirit d’corps building. if thats insurmountable, then perhaps the ACO should wear a formation flash instead of TRF’s - a flash worn by everyone in the formation, regardless of their rank, capbadge or even service.
something, some nasty suspicious part of my mind, says the current cadet TRF would never have even got to the drawing board, let alone got off it, had there been a chance that CAC or anyone else at HQAC was going to have to wear it. hardly leadership 101…
I’m going to step away from the RAF reg discussion because their bigger than me and have rifles…
I kind of-ish understand the reasoning behind the three different TRFs although as to whether I agree with it… Perhaps the way to solve this is to have a common thread running through all three, hopefully meaning the adult NCO and cadet TRFs improve. Alternatively they could just plonk a Tutor and a nasty logo on the VR(T)one.
[quote=“angus” post=13903]
i think one of the big problems with the current TRF is the fact that its one organisation with 3 different TRF’s, differentiated by rank - with the lamest going to the lowest ranks, the second lamest to the midle ranks, and only the senior ranks having one that actually looks like a TRF.
now, obviously there are administrative reasons for that, but its not exactly espirit d’corps building. if thats insurmountable, then perhaps the ACO should wear a formation flash instead of TRF’s - a flash worn by everyone in the formation, regardless of their rank, capbadge or even service.
something, some nasty suspicious part of my mind, says the current cadet TRF would never have even got to the drawing board, let alone got off it, had there been a chance that CAC or anyone else at HQAC was going to have to wear it. hardly leadership 101…[/quote]
Just to throw a point of information in but only the badge worn by the VR(T) is a TRF. As the VR(T) are commissioned officers and part of the RAF then they wear the RAF TRF.
WO,SNCO & Cadets are technically civilians and wear a unit identifier. I remember a few years ago the CCF were told to remove their TRF/unit identifiers as they were civilians and this broke the Geneva convention (including a bit on Child Soldiers allegedly) hence the wrangling and difference in terms. Result is that WO, SNCOs Cadets are not allowed to wear TRFs, hence why their flash doesn’t look like a TRF.
The current unit identifier/Arm Flash for SNCOs seams to be perfectly serviceable. However I suspect making SNCOs wear the same badge as cadets will cause an almighty stink as a lot of SNCOs point-blank refused to wear the current one with CS95 (which is ironic considering they were the ones who are meant to be enforcing dress regs but ho hum)
I personally feel that far more important than badges to go on combat clothing is the combat clothing itself.
How about we make sure that every cadet in the corps has a serviceable, well-fitting set before we start to worry about what badges and rank slides they’re going to wear?
[quote=“MattB” post=13939]I personally feel that far more important than badges to go on combat clothing is the combat clothing itself.
How about we make sure that every cadet in the corps has a serviceable, well-fitting set before we start to worry about what badges and rank slides they’re going to wear?[/quote]
But surely it is all part of the same package - Apparently we have need to put cadets into servicable combat uniform and badging is part of that package.
Personally, I’m not too bothered whether it is well-fitting so long as it does the job. Well-fitting implies that we want to place a burden of issuing sized combat clothing to our entire membership…
I’ve been in 10 1/2 years, and this certainly didn’t happen in that time, so I suspect it’s an urban myth.
What did happen was that a quantity of PWS CS95 found its way to our CCF complete with RAF TRFs, and a very small number slipped through without this being removed. We were reminded to check, we did, two or three were removed, end of story. That said, our TEST Sgt used to wear the JHC unit flash, as his CS95 came from Benson pre-badged with it and he didn’t see why he should remove it, so the fault wasn’t entirely with the cadets…
[quote=“incubus” post=13940][quote=“MattB” post=13939]I personally feel that far more important than badges to go on combat clothing is the combat clothing itself.
How about we make sure that every cadet in the corps has a serviceable, well-fitting set before we start to worry about what badges and rank slides they’re going to wear?[/quote]
But surely it is all part of the same package - Apparently we have need to put cadets into servicable combat uniform and badging is part of that package.
Personally, I’m not too bothered whether it is well-fitting so long as it does the job. Well-fitting implies that we want to place a burden of issuing sized combat clothing to our entire membership…[/quote]I’d say that correct sizing is more important than putting badges on…
I’ve heard rumour of an interesting draft for consolidating the various different ranks and identifiers we have into a simpler rank slide only scheme that would see all ACO personal wearing the largish rank slides (like DMP/MTP ones) on all modes of uniform. VRT and ATC would lose the pins and any other identifiers, cadets would loose their No 3 identifiers and staff cadet/staff probationary ranks and possibly cadet classification would be shown by various coloured bars under any rank.
I can’t remember the details at all, but it actually seemed quite sensible at the time. I’m told it was spied in Sam Badgers office.
And on that note, I discovered this the other day - made me chuckle (source):
[attachment=138]1488187_646313328743427_867499945_n.jpg[/attachment]
I’m not sure you should be showing those names in public. Call me old fashioned but PERSEC!!!
Yes I thought about that, but they’re already public on the linked Facebook page where I found them. Feel free to address your concerns to the owner of the RAF Regiment Memes page.
Besides, it’s only names and appointments. Mods, feel free to remove the image and link if you think it’s inappropriate.
All those names are available on various press releases.
The picture doesn’t exactly scream security risk to me.
[quote=“blu3zirux” post=14741]I’ve heard rumour of an interesting draft for consolidating the various different ranks and identifiers we have into a simpler rank slide only scheme that would see all ACO personal wearing the largish rank slides (like DMP/MTP ones) on all modes of uniform. VRT and ATC would lose the pins and any other identifiers, cadets would loose their No 3 identifiers and staff cadet/staff probationary ranks and possibly cadet classification would be shown by various coloured bars under any rank.[/quote]It sounds reasonably sensible, except for the classification bit - too many permutations, too many changes throughout a cadet’s career.
The picture doesn’t exactly scream security risk to me.[/quote]
I would say that seeing as it’s already in the public domain removing it here won’t really do much. And besides, it made me laugh 
But back on topic please.