If you went tri service I think how you would structure it is keep the community Sqn/unit level as it is
Have single Service WSOs for coordination & personnel
Tri-Service OC Wg equivalent & Tri service SMEs.
Combined service admin HQ.
So no change at unit level but you can go wider for greater access & specialisation & you still keep service identity.
Access to Section 5 Firearms and DTE, but since both of those are a postcode lottery and the SCC manage with their relationship with the RN they clearly aren’t insurmountable.
The legal exemption for section 5 is for MOD sponsored cadet forces IIRC.
Nothing to stop a separate entity from still being MOD Sponsored.
Doesn’t sound remotely insurmountable, and even if it were tricky to do, it’s still more shooting than some units currently get.
Hell, we could just get rolled up into the Air Scouts. No issues with uniform supply, it’s an organisation that already exists and has RAF affiliation.
If we went with a Purple cadet org, I think that going with CCF model would be throwing all the potential efficiencies out of the window by simply replicating the current structure, but with more faff.
Single ‘service’, single syllabus, single uniform, single CoC - think of the MOD GS, but with cadets.
Sadly, I fear emotion will get in the way of this rational approach.
A purple cadet force is an ideal solution, but many people (particularly those of senior heritage) will be aghast at the idea of losing the capbadge’s cadet equivalent, or of what they perceive as losing service representation within the youth sector.
It would also mean people like TK and his contemporaries willingly sacrificing their job role for the benefit of others. So as much as I agree this is the right course of action, I’d also expect it to be a complete non-starter unless it was directed from Whitehall.
We could have a purple HQ structure, though, and one set of rules; down at the squadron and even Wing level we could still wear three different colours of uniform.
Do you really think that the army cadets and sea scouts would want to merge with us and risk having half their activities banned/paused?
One set of rules and regulations, making a level playing field? Ridiculous suggestion! Smithers, have the man making that suggestion flogged!!
There might also be some savings in the 1* salary budget…
So I think what you are proposing is either
Or
In both cases unless supplied by exceptional wealthy sponsor, it would need to be a charitable organisation with each unit and individual charity.
There a variety of non-MoD cadet groups who emulate the cadet forces as independent cadet groups:
Ranger Cadets
Nautical Training Corps
Ranger Cadet Corps
St John’s
& the closest aviation one
Girls Venture Corps Air Cadets - Wikipedia (whose website is down & actually predate the ATC)
All of the above (except St John & even that’s arguable) struggle without the support of central government who provide the biggest bung.
Part of the principle of the RAFAC is that we make use of the slack that’s available in the RAF to deliver what we want e.g. flights inn training aircraft that are not normally used at weekends, end of batch/life ex 5.56 ammo, etc
The magic happens because we use the culture, structure & ethos of the RAF to deliver. Without the RAF link it becomes Windsor castle without the monarchy.
Could we deliver without the RAF? Nope as been demonstrated by the number of unofficial cadet corps. None are able to deliver what we do on the national svake that we currently do.
The issue at the mo is that the RAF is on a semi-war footing so the spare slack isn’t there anymore. Training of pilots for Ukraine means there isn’t the flying opportunities & the spare aircraft going unutilised. There’s less airfields for gliders, less stations for annual camps less uniform to be passed onto cadets.
Even on a pure IT level we would struggle to produce a volunteer management system like bader or access to the email account hosting that currently need to function,
so in conclusion I don’t think the ATc has outgrown the RAf or vice versa & whilst we can now only deliver a lot less than before, it is still significantly more than could be delivered outside of the RAFs bubble.
I think the big issue is the AtC side of RAFAC has failed to keep up & you have volunteers too focus trying to deliver the cadet experience from when they were a cadet rather than the cadet experience as it is now resulting in the strategic drift frustration & the disconnect.
I think that you are correct in one sense about the cadet experience changing, but i also feel that there is more the RAF could be doing to support the ATC.
I understand the war-footing argument, however do not believe that not allowing cadets to use private gliding and flying schools is the right move, just because the RAF cant control it and assure it. If they have the correct insurance…whats the issue?!
A few things the RAF/ATC could do to better the cadet experience (i understand its not as easy as just saying lets do it, but given the right insurance, i dont see why not):
This is the case for the last 18 months / 2 years, certainly.
But we have been seeing the effect of the RAF draw down for the last 10, minimum.
It is a bigger, longer term culture of neglect and underinvestment.
With that in mind, as much as losing funding and support would be a negative PR blow, it wouldn’t actually change an awful lot for a substantial number of units.
I’m not quite at the mass-mutiny level (yet), but I definitely feel that just blindly carrying on with the RAF “because we always have” is definitely not an answer.
Put it this way, if you were setting it up from scratch right now, you wouldn’t do it this way. So why do we persist on trying to make this way work?
Apologies Thought you said you had left rather than was still in.
So why don’t just do it. What’s stopping you.
There is nothing stopping you getting a bunch of volunteers together & then setting up your own air cadets.
A few years ago some officers who were dissatisfied about the state of the sea cadets went & set up there own Naval Training Corps.
The ranger cadet corps above was set up by someone who has dissatisfied with how the ACF worked.
Both got killed off by Covid but lasted about five years.
If you want to get a group of friends together and set up a “cadet flying corps” there is nothing stopping you.
I don’t think it actually is the RAF that has caused this a problem - I think it’s that the mindset amongst the ATC has not changed or wanted to change.
It wants things to go back to when things were fun I.e. when they were cadets so you just get repetition Of what’s gone before & over regulation stifling innovation.
Time & time again activities are paused so that a training syllabus can be worked out which is very often just one small groups interpretation on how it should flow.
Fieldcraft, drones, leadership training, shooting, flying apt syllabus, basic drill - it is all formulaic one dimension chain that has too many single points of failure’s.
For an organisation who’s sponsor body works & is meant to think 3 and for dimensions the ATC is very one dimensional in its thinking of single input in single out.
So if you think you can set up & run a Cadet flying Corps Sqn (or the name that you choose) without RAF involvement then do so. It’s innovative & different & may break the cycle of stagnation or force the organisation to take a look at itself.
However i think it is more likely to succeed not due to the lack of the RAF but the due to the lack of stagnant culture at wing & region volunteer level.
It’s called the Royal Air Force Air Cadets for a reason.
You’ve said this before. It’s just as meaningless as the first time.
It’s only been the RAF air cadets for the last few years. It may well get another name in a few years time.
ahem…“do what is right, not what is easy”
Only the umbrella name of “air cadet organisation” was changed to RAF Air Cadets
It still remains the Air Training Corps & CCF(RAF). Legally the royal warrant is for the “air training corps “ not the RAF air cadets.
You could argue that too many cadet units assume ACO=ATC=RAFAC but that’s the ATC mindset that I referred to earlier.
A massive reduction in resources available is the fault of the ATC and an unwillingness to change? I’m sorry, but I don’t follow that line of thinking at all.
If, through change, we’re able to provide more opportunities to more cadets, it would be pretty universally popular. But that has been the very opposite of lived experience for too long now.