I’ve not been in uniform that long, but I have been around for a while now, and I don’t really recognise the uniform complaints/bullying complaint.
There is a very fine line, and someone being matter of fact about why your uniform isn’t being worn correctly could be taken personally if you have done your best - so it could be very easy to accuse an enthusiastic NCO of being a uniform bully when they really are just trying to maintain standards (and ultimately stop you from embarrassing yourself if you are wearing it wrong).
Also, I can’t see how a “hub” that then has satellites is any different to having a sector HQ with squadrons dotted around. Although, if “sector HQ” is responsible for all RA’s etc etc then great stuff. Anything that takes pressure off of squadron… But if not then what’s the difference to now anyway, whatever you want to call it?
Just have one sqn. Sod the smaller units in all but the most rural areas.
If you really are someone “in the know” like you try your hardest to pretend, then you know the real problem. And the solution to that is not create more units, but to consolidate the existing ones.
Having numerous units doesn’t solve the real problem; not enough volunteers.
Let’s be realistic though, this is never going to happen.
Too much ■■■■ covering has to go on. Unless we no longer deliver any activities, in which case, yes, we can reduce the admin.
I know we all bang on about wanting an admin burden reduction, but it only ever gets worse. I’ve given up even thinking about asking for it. It’s simply not realistic given the culture.
Not feasible in the short to medium term. We recruit new people, send them off to their own units and then… Burn them out, they leave, and we’re back to square one.
Nope, let’s make fewer bigger units with lots of staff. Serve more cadets and deliver more of a cadet experience to each of them.
What’s going to be better, 1000 sqns of 20 cadets, or 500 sqns of 40?
We have an issue with growth. The Corps is not incentivised for it.
Although politicians and senior MOD folk talk up the benefits of Cadets, we are managed as a cost.
Partially because of the funding and support in kind (think uniforms)
In most membership organisations they work out the base cost of servicing the member add a margin or contingency on top and calculate a fee.
So more members brings in more revenue to support more investment.
That won’t be news to anyone on here but I’m not sure our higher ups really get it.
If say it costs £8/m to support a Cadet and we charge £10 or £12 or whatever the maths is we are winning and would be able to grow.
Instead we have a pot of funding and the more who draw on it the less per unit. I’m sure that drives the desire to merge and cut units. Which going back to government objectives is the opposite of what we should be doing.
well ok, I’ll rephrase to “rationalise the admin & processes and make them less time intensive”, something which the Volunteer Portal, and the move away from Universe, should make a big impact on.
So we need to be looking at the retention and reasons for burn out, alongside the recruitment (or prehaps ahead of)
Except we have two pots of funding, public and non-public. One of which our CWC at ivory towers could be doing a lot more to grow (and spend) I suspect.
it does seem odd to think the MOD/RAF would be behind spending more money on the RAFAC due to MORE units when in their primary responsibility we are seeing fewer personnel, fewer (/reduced) aircraft numbers and less airfields, Stations and bases.
All of which in comparison are of enormous cost - and don’t fit in with the future plans or remote piloted aircraft, cyber etc etc etc.
Whereas investing in young people, in a platform that in comparison is peanuts, would still be sensible. Especially when the bulk of the organisation is worked out on a volunteer and charity basis.
My parents could hear me about 100 yds away from our house on the way back from cadets. No chance to sneak in late after a “short” stop at the pub (over 18 of course!).
The USAF have proven their RAPID DRAGON palletised munitions system - ALCM’s on a pallet, lobbed out the back of a C-17, pallet breaks apart, ALCM’s go on their merry way.
The munition they’ve used is the AGM-158 JASSM - but there’s no reason you couldn’t do the same with A400M and Storm Shadow, or Spear Cap 3.
It’s an idea that’s been about for decades - this is from when A400M was called Future Large Aircraft, was going to have turbofans and the palletised munitions delivery was called Future Offensive Air System. Early 90’s…?
Oh no. So they open this up to the trolls who are always comments on UKDJ that the carriers are white elephants, F35 is a waste of money, etc. and then use that feedback as an excuse to scrap the lot.
