QI klaxon for introduction of L/Cpl into ATC RAFAC ranks.
I suppose it’d make sense to standardise it across the RAFAC, as there’s precedent (or get our CCF(RAF) colleagues to use AS2/1).
1 Like
Been a while since we’ve had that debate to be fair.
CcF(RAF) use L/cpl as they have to align with the other sections
AS1/2 is not a rank - just a classification of a type of private.
The RAF only brought in LCpl for the RAF Regiment because they couldn’t get their heads around SACs being section commanders without NCO rank.
I think it was also that an SAC didn’t have the authority to give a lawful order as SAC/LAC/AC are grades of aircraftsman I.e. private & were t covered under queens regs.
This is also why the old junior tech rank had to be changed from an inverted stripe as again it wasn’t a lance Cpl & wasn’t backed under regs.
Pity the RAF didn’t go for the name J/Cpl as the unique RAF rank (which the CCF had for years previously)
If you wanted to align the rafac with the sac/lac/ac change then you could tweak the classification badges to Part 1, Part 2, Advanced & Master maybe?
2 Likes
That’s why I think AS2/1 is worth nicking, precisely because it’s not a rank in the same way.
Allows us to recognise cadet achievement and general development while separating it strictly from taking on leadership/management responsibilities.
2 Likes
Isn’t that largely just our Classification syllabus then?
1 Like
I don’t think so.
Our classification system starts off by including general knowledge etc, but then just becomes very focussed on academics.
Arguably you could wrap a load of these things together (even if you continue with separate badges) and then award AS2/1 as waypoints.
Chiefly to recognise cadets who are progressing well and developing that NCO potential (of which general progression is a part).
The biggest gap I notice is that many cadets really throw themselves into the organisation and hit a bit of a wall whereby they have lots to do but, what they really focus on, is promotion as the next challenge they want to tackle.
In most cases we’ve added 6-12 months on the beginning of their cadet journey (from when I was a cadet) and maturity is an element of what is required, so having some stepping stones before that big first JNCO step could have merit I think.
1 Like
I like the L/Cpl /J/Cpl rank as that “Cpl in training role” as an excellent way for new NCOs to gain that development & mentor forward & emphasis to the full cpls the need to mentor
The quick way to introduce is just permit Sqn cdrs to promote to that rank & have the establishment for the total number of JNCOs be the same as number of cpls.
Then let it evolve from there.
Lcpl started as “chosen man” an experienced solider trusted with minor responsibilities of others until the develop to full Cpl. We should do something similar in our cadets. 
2 Likes
Isn’t this basically how the SCC and ACF classification systems work?
Sounds a bit like “Acting Corporal” to me, which isn’t a thing we should have.
I should caveat this to say I agree it would be good to have a better system for identifying and developing “potential NCOs” (another term we should probably avoid).
Why?
Arguably a proper and recognised rank would be better than “acting cdt cpl”?
I can’t be the only one to notice that you suddenly get a load of cadets who show considerable promise but they’re not quite there as cpls, but having even one extra rung would be an excellent way of recognising that progression and giving a positive feedback loop.
Better yet if it’s not a JNCO rank and therefore doesn’t imply leadership responsibilities.
Even if it meant the organisation was swimming in lance corporals, I don’t think that’d matter.
1 Like
It’s what the classification once was when it was about more than pure academics. Projects at the lower levels, and Staff Part 2.
Maybe even have it as an on unit rank only.
I think it was just how Chief Tech phrased it, as a “Cpl in training”.
Take that point my rationale was based on the idea that a pilot officer is a “training rank” so was applying that principle to cadet NCO ranks.
I don’t like “acting Cpl” either as a cadet who is promoted too early then has the confidence hit of being demoted - much better to do the initial promotion in stages
1 Like
Even handing out acting rank and swapping it to someone else a month later as standard seems to make people very nervous
I think if we want something formal we’d be better going with something similar to the NCO development programme you’ve talked about before, where everyone goes through it (at least the early stages), and then you can work with individuals through that if they don’t quite meet the standard.
3 Likes