I agree the RAF won’t, although I think the CAA (and EASA) might object to the use of the term ‘random’, given they are responsible for quality assurance of DTOs and ATOs, and instructor and examiner standardisation.
2 Likes
Correct me if I’m wrong those “randoms”…dont they have to have passed CPL and Instrutor Raiting to just teach PPL? That’s a substantial amount of training.
A large amount of civvy instructors are either trained airline pilots bridging the gap between finishing training and first job or either qualified airline pilots seeing out their flying days
CPL theory and Flight Instructor rating - not an actual full CPL any more. (Used to be, under JAR, but there are a lot of part-time PPL FIs who aren’t in it for the money. When JAR came in, existing PPL/FIs were given a fudge called a Basic CPL which could only be used to instruct.)
A recent change means you can now self-study for the CPL theory if you only want to be an FI and not actually do a CPL, and I’m currently in the middle of that process myself.
But yes, it’s not exactly handed out with the cornflakes.
Given that the RAF have now outsourced some of its flying training to civilian schools employing civilian licensed instructors, many of whom have no military background the argument that only RAF QFIs are suitable mentors doesn’t hold much water.
2 Likes
Dont forget that you can still get an FI Rating in the UK on a PPL without having passed the CPL theory, however you will only be allowed to teach up to the LAPL level.
for a start all but flying wings are now worn on the brassard which is not a garment “worn” by Staff so difficult to be wearing it.
Secondly there are few examples of RAFAC badges with a equivalent civilian route to achieve the same.
First aid yes I get as our badges are offered for civilian courses, but shooting, music, radio and road marching are RAFAC lines in the sand of what is expected at each level.
the flying badges and/or Wings are much easier to compare with the civilian world.
yes, I accept that a PPL, ATPL, CPL or not directly equivalent to the RAF levels in every case and spending 50 hours at Biggin Hill flying School to gain a PPL is not going to offer the same standard of pilot who has completed EFT or other RAF training stages
however an RAF pilot does get recognised for their competency in flying by way of a badge on their uniform.
these badges (wings, brevets call them what you will) do not distinguish between helicopter, fixed wing, multi-engine or fast jet, nor the role be that instructor, student or veteran, the same badge is offered to all, a pilot is a pilot.
as such I can see the argument that a similar civilian themed badge is offered to those with a civilian pilot licence in recognition of what skills, knowledge and experience they have.
is it relevant in the world of the RAF? no - so can’t see them adopting it and probably why they never have. It adds nothing. I don’t display my RAFAC related qualifications and awards at work, so why would a RAF Airman or Officer do the same about their hobby (which in this case happened to be flying).
is it relevant in the world of RAFAC Cadets? - not really, it shows they have been fortunate to have other opportunities outside of the organisation but not sure what it adds. But hey I am not upset that Cadets have a “Civilian Wings badge”. it is an interesting talking point and from a HQAC point of view looks like there are more Cadets with “wings” than otherwise
is it relevant to the world of RAFAC Adults/Staff? - yes I can see the argument for it. there are many a pilot within the pool of CFAVs whose experience, knowledge and skills are well suited a selection of the training elements the RAFAC is part of and these persons are typically quick to offer help where they can
but should these CFAVs wear a badge? I don’t think so, or at least the RAFAC should fall inline with the parent service. ie when they [RAF] do, we [RAFAC] can.
In the same vein as the RAF mixing hobby and work - I do not use my RAFAC rank at work or in any other hobby that I have, so what argument is there for to mix hobbies?
of all the branches of the RAF Family (those who wear a blue suit), the differences are subtle, we used to see gilt pins be that VRT/ATC for the CFAVs and “R” for the RAF Reserves. I understand that the Reserves have since dropped the use of the “R” (which was only ever seen in No1s anyway) and now the differences are included into the Rank Slide embroidery and is limited to that.
I don’t think the CFAVs should include other differences into their uniform if we wish to be seen as “equals” and respected by our RAF colleagues.
if CFAVs do wear C-Wings then it is a bit walty in my opinion, and given we’re already civilians in a “RAF Uniform” it is a bit “trying to hard” to impress.
1 Like
Only after strict inspections - and much to the enormous chagrin of instructors within the RAF.
And only because senior officers have made an almighty horlicks of MFTS.
Sure, you can argue your point as much as you’d like, but the RAF won’t approve a flying badge for every Tom, Dick and Harry with a PPL.
If you read all my posts you will see I agree - CFAV should not in my opinion wear wings unless they are, or have been a QSP or Gliding Instructor / Pilot.
If however the organisation does decide that is the route we are going down then it has to be something that is recognisable and does not become the object of (further?), ridicule from regulars.
If we were all still RAFVR, I would agree with you and robustly defend that view. However, we now hold non-military commissions and that should suffice for a relaxation of former regulations WRT the wearing of brevets.
I’m not suggesting that unformed CFAV’s should be permitted to wear the Cosford or Nijmegen medals alongside their real medals; or any other non-aviation related insignia but if we are part of an air-minded organisation, then surely, relative flying experience (airline or otherwise) should be permitted in the form of badging?
IIRC, former cadets who had completed the Gliding Scholarship and who later became adult staff, were permitted to wear the circular FAI badge on the (left?) breast pocket of their No.1 uniform, so maybe a precedent has already been set?
1 Like
They might be non-military commissions, but they’re still very much military uniforms.
I agree with your post 100%.
The only time I would, as a staff member, wear a qualification badge, would be when I am acting as medic on a large activity, and may need to be identified as a first aider in a hurry. But even then, the same effect could be gained by wearing a Hi viz or similar.
There has long been a block on staff wearing any sort of badging beyond the basics.
We don’t have any sort of trade badging or qualification badging for our own “non-ex-regular” staff other than flying brevets and I think it’s mainly because the feeling that “staff shouldn’t be in it for achievements” still persists in some quarters.
What would be the issue for example with permitting suitably qualified staff to wear crossed rifles? Or for someone who suitably qualifies in comms to wear the lightning bolt trade badge?
It wouldn’t be introducing anything which isn’t seen on the uniform of the parent service but I guarantee that suggesting it would yield cries of “in it for the wrong reason”.
About 30 seconds after such a thing came out (were it to come out), there’d be messages from Wing Commanders demanding all staff have at least X number of badges. It’ll become another stick to beat staff with.
I have always taken pride in wearing the most bland and unadorned uniform as possible.
1 Like
But where would you stand on people who have multiple “specialisations”?
I am a licenced radio amateur - Comms badge?
I am an RCO -crossed rifles?
I am a First Aider - Rod of Asclepius badge?
I am a WI - Rifle badge?
I am a fieldcraft instructor - Bayonet badge?
1 Like
Are we an aviation organisation?
2 Likes
Not for the last few years, no…
9 Likes
Well, I’m not suggesting we start wearing badges for the sake of it, or go full “Royal Navy” and have a trade badge for everything, but for trades where there is a recognised trade badge in the RAF, adopting it ourselves wouldn’t then be without precedent. Especially considering that trade badges such as the lightning bolts (which were worn by TG 2, 3, 4, and II - Avionics, Comms, ICT) are only worn on No 1.
Obviously we tend to double hat a lot more and I suppose that where people do qualify in more than one trade I’d advocate picking their primary “trade” and only wearing insignia associated with that.
I’d not suggest that people start wearing badges for every qualification. For example, are you a first aider? No badge. Is your primary instructional pathway that of first aid instructor? Then maybe some sort of trade badge might be appropriate.
Quals like crossed rifles for having achieved a proscribed level of shooting could be worn regardless of trade and there’s an argument which says that shooting staff for example who achieve their crossed rifles would be demonstrating competence in their trade. Lending a little more credibility.
I just find it odd in principal that the idea of staff wearing badges is so roundly pooh-pooh’d.
RAF personnel wear qualification badges such as parachutist lightbulbs, marksmans crossed rifles, bandsmen badges so it’s not as though the excuse can be “The RAF don’t wear them so nor do we!”
In fact I think we are the only cadet force whose staff don’t wear qualification badges.
3 Likes
That’s a fair point, and well made. I’m not sure that our training is equivalent, but I suppose it doesn’t stop the ACF from wearing Army badges??
Indeed our training isn’t to the same level. But then arguably we wear the same rank badges having undergone lesser training than our regular counterparts, so adopting the badges to be worn iaw our own criteria wouldn’t be without precedent either.
I can’t recall at which point in their training youngsters can start to wear the telecomms badge for example. I fancy it might have been after completion of Phase 2 at Cosford, which some of our staff might be equivalent or senior to in qualification and experience anyway. If a junior aerial erector or ICT Technician in the RAF can wear the telecomms badge then I can’t imagine much basis for an argument against some of the radio and tech geeks we’ve got wearing one.
2 Likes