Million dollar question.
Both courses are very expensive to run, JL more than QAIC but neither is cheap.
Both are staff heavy with lots of traveling
Both are bit ticket events for the cadets, They keep our best in the corps. Without these activities would our senior cadets stay or move on to UAS etc?
We are a light blue org focusing on Air, Space and Cyber, Why do we do JLs? See above for one answer.
I for one think that the RAFAC is much more than Air, Space and Cyber and we are at our best when we are outside doing practical activities such as drill, leadership, Adv Trg, shooting, road marching etc, etc, etc
Yes there are wider issues at play and the organisation will continue no doubt. But we seem to overlook the impact on individual cadets when opportunities are withdrawn. Plus it affects the motivation of younger ones who see the senior cadets losing out this way.
I was holding out for an ILM quality, from ACLC, that didnât happen in 2023. Then hoping for JLs or QAIC, and that wonât be happening. No btec in aviation studies either, but itâs alright everyone, I have my level 2 btec in teamwork and personal development in the community! And donât forget an Entry Level Award in Hazard awareness in the workspace!
Edit: also no acps for flying, so Iâll hope for my first 10 min glider flight.
As I said further up, the organisation really needs to define JLs purpose, otherwise it will disappear for good. Or the other way of looking at it, is does it actually need to fit into the PTS? Can it just be itâs own high level course, combining high levels of leadership with high levels of military skills?
But either way, this will need better defining in the future.
This is the point of the pauses across a number of areas, donât get me wrong, it is needed in some, but what ever comes out in the wash, not everyone will agree.
Do you cut JLs, the greenies will say no, the flyers may say yes. The reverse for QAIC!
The big issue is that the whole system is in a mess, but how do you sort whilst keeping activities going.
With the new syllabus, hopefully JL assuming it loves on can become what it was purported to be - a leadership course.
It became a defacto fieldcraft course (or was at least seen that way) because of the severely lacking quality, breadth, and depth of fieldcraft and weapons skills at lower levels.
but as @JoeBloggs has indicated, if it lives on will that kill ACLC? and if it dies, does that permit ACLC to continue?
These are two top level âleadershipâ courses the RAFAC offer(ed) which run alongside each other. the method of delivery is very different but essentially the outcome is the same âteaching and then developing good leadership skillsâ given the pause has come about due to costs, it seems difficult to justify the cost of both courses given the same outcome
There was no JL in my day, and ACLC was quite âgreenâ, with nights in bashas, ORPs and hexamine cookers, navigation / road marching, lots of pine poles, and a fitness test (1.5 mile timed run). I wonder how much of this would still be allowed?
Edit: Not to mention press ups being used as punishment.
Done ACLC a number of times and whilst CCF Heavy (it started as a CCF course) there was definitely ATC involvement and each year there was discussion on how could they get more ATC involvement.
I didnât know about the CCF history of the course and assumed all the flt lts with no VRT identifiers were regular officers. Iâm now guessing they must have been CCF TEST officers?