There was a survey sent around recently to sqn training (and I believe adj) to gather needs for role training.
So there might be something coming along these lines at some point.
Would that be organisation wide to a common standard to try and get rid of ‘local rules and procedures’ so that those who attended can say this is Corps policy so do one.
2 Likes
No idea. Came from “RAFAC Training Needs Analysis Team”.
As someone who will probably end up going somewhere for training late next year, is there any benefit to going to RAF Lincolnshire, or could these training packages be delivered as online courses (at least to enable those with a desperate need to get the raw information without having to wait half a year for a course)?
It also seems odd that someone might need to attend an OC’s course to do a wing role, thereby pushing an OC with immediate need out of a course place…
Edit: Not that I see myself doing the OC’s course, but I assume there are adjt, Trg Off etc courses too…
Nope. Not currently.
I think the suggestion for the hypothetical training/adj courses was that they will be online and self-led.
1 Like
Currently there are 5 courses run by the Command & Leadership School.
Combined Initial Course for newly appointed SNCOs and Officers to complete within 12 months
Squadron Commanders Course for those looking to take command, or who have done so, the theory is completed within 6 months of OC appointment. Is required for acceleration promotion to be implemented and also for the Flt Lt matrix for a SME role.
Drill Instructor course for SNCOs to become a DI, currently now also touring regions on weekend delivery.
Arms Drill Instructor Course for SNCOs who have completed the DI course to be able to reach Arma Drill.
Senior Officer Course for Sqn Ldrs + and in rare cases Flt Lts who are looking to take on WSC type roles.
There is currently no actual training for Adj or Training Officers beyond AVIP, unless your Wing/Region already run’s something of their own.
To note that this is changing name soon to Junior Command Course - a change which causes me some discomfort. Many people in the OC position aren’t going to feel they’re particularly junior given all the accountability which comes with the position.
4 Likes
That makes sone sense, with flt lts being junior officers and all, but would make even more sense of individual units were flts and sqns were commanded by sqn ldrs.
1 Like
I did a quick poll the other day and the top three things people cared about were…
- Cadet experience
- Admin burden reduction
- Staff recruitment and retention
And these were the overwhelming responses.
Anything else - including rebranding ATF/or whatever it’s called this week - and rebranding courses is akin to rearranging deckchairs on the Titanic.
16 Likes
I agree, which is another reason why I’m confused that HQ are pushing ahead with a rebrand in the first place when they have bigger fish to fry.
2 Likes
Low hanging fruit - makes it look like they have achieved something
5 Likes
I can see the logic of changing the name to align with Flt Lts being junior officers. The RAF had (have?) a Junior Officer Development Programme, mainly aimed at Plt Offs/Fg Offs.
But I can’t see any benefits from the name change. The only consequences are confusion over the course name and plenty of OCs being even more aggrevated because of a perceived devaluing of their role and committment. We’re ‘just’ a junior commander running a Sqn, depsite having more and more responsibilities piled on, never-ending admin tasks to do and working all hours to try to run a good Sqn. Yet another small straw on the camel’s back and another nudge out of the door.
5 Likes
The problem is, increasingly i think, our set up with the parent service and MOD.
A huge number of our problems over the past few years have been MOD or RAF requirements that don’t suit us. Tents, climatic injuries, lack of flying, inability to use private providers, convuluted joining processes, lack of shooting, cancellation of activities, fewer camps all appear to be driven by MOD or RAF processes. Freedom from this would give the the ability to be more flexible and agile. Isn’t flexibility the key to air power?
I know we’d lose some things, but the Sea Cadets are constantly lauded on here for how they do things and I’m more and more inclined to think they’ve got it right.
6 Likes
Yep.
It’s that pesky organisation being run by the RAF who just happen to have sod all knowledge of the people they lead again.
Changing the name to the Junior Command Course matches up with the RAF’s Junior Officer Command Course so it does make sense if you are an RAF Officer.
Our Squadron Commanders however aren’t doing the job of Junior Officers they are running units with all of the responsibility that comes with it.
Quite frankly all of our Squadron Commanders should be Squadron Leaders.
12 Likes
Ooh lets hope so.
Makes them FEEL like they’ve done something. Everyone else can see right through it.
ATF had been renamed twice in the last few years, OIC and SSIC have been renamed by virtue of combining them - this is a change perhaps reflected by an actual need.
But what benefit is there, other than playing semantics just like with ATF, to renaming SCC? It’s a Course for Squadron Commanders. Unlike the CIC it already does exactly what it says.
Is it part of the One RAFAC integration of the CCF? Do they care about the name?
Perhaps it should be the Squadron and Unit Commanders Course, because it would SUCC to be on it…
Drones, flying, below 100% access to L144, joining and onboarding, admin burden, local rules, morale, recruitment, retention, how everybody loves Raymond but has a dim view of CAC and the majority of HQAC…
3 Likes
Maybe they are going to open up the Squadron Commanders’ Course to CCF Section Commanders? It’s always been a beef of mine that CCF Section Commanders are not offered any training at all.
Then, they would need a new name for course preparing junior officers for their first command…
3 Likes
Yeah, ‘Section Commanders’ Course’ sounds too much like something for corporals, at Brecon.
2 Likes
Distraction - we can’t achieve XXX (which REALLY IS urgent and necessary…! So, instead we’ll concentrate on doing YYY (which will look like we’ve done lots - and have successfully (?!) achieved something - even if it was unnecessary…
1 Like
1 Like