Multi coloured unit identifiers?


#1

What do we think about the below, latest trend to hit the streets or a unit bending the rules slightly?


#2

If we have to buy them ourselves now directly… why not, especially if they are know as Fourteen Seventy Five

Looks like a ATC75 legacy to me :wink:


#3

As someone in the same wing, I look forward to hearing the outcome


#4

Looks very tacky and cheap imo


#5

I believe they are being deemed ‘not sanctioned’ by the person who controls the dress regs book.

But that book doesn’t define the colour of the badges and it will take them years to get an update out so they should get some use out of them before they are banned.


#6

Assuming the blue/silver colour is a bit bluier in real life, I think they look rather good…

I’d imagine they’d look excellent on the blanking plate on MTP :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye: with a decent TRF…


#7

No, nor the dimensions. The illustration does however use a single, light colour for the lettering.

There are other questions about the squadron identification badge that require clarification too: that DFs use the main squadron number only, that with the exception of the F on founder squadrons only regular digits are used and not roman numerals or other affectations…


#8

Looks like it’s kicking off already!


#9

:popcorn::popcorn::popcorn:


#10

There is at least 1 Squadron that has an exemption to use Roman Numerals. (Happens to be that RWO’s region too, hence his clarification I suspect).


#11

as someone said to me, if we are to pay for them then they can either get what we pay for
or they get none!


#12

I think that OC 1475 has got a good point - he’s not breaking dress regs, and it is embarrassing for the ATC that we have to but our own PTS badges.

BUT… I’m not sure Twitter is the place to have that discussion, and I’m very surprised that RCOS Laser and his RWO and RAvO think it’s appropriate to publicly challenge (using smilies for goodness sake!!) him/her.

Surely a discreet email to the OC email account asking them to take it down, whilst the compliance of the badges is looked at is the best way forward???


#13

why?? I think precedent has been set by CAC, Social media is now the norm for HQAC is it not???

I do agree time and a place… and they should be looking at the reasons this happened.
I wonder regarding money how much it costs for the new camps they have brought in such as STEM, Drill, Aviation, choir etc compared to previous old style blue camps. Is this a case of diverting money away from other things so that for 1,000 cadets to go to some fancy camp but 50,000 go with out mandatory badges…


#14

But the response from HQAC is they have produced enough badges for everyone who needs them. In reality, badges have gone out to Regions and Wings, yes, but not in a manner that resolves the shortage. I have seen an ‘area’ who has received enough badges to cover over 100 cdts in every category of shooting; will it happen in reality, no.


#15

As a Cdt Cpl, I was taught “Praise in Public, reprimand in private” - which is something that has always stayed with me. I just don’t get why anyone feels that it is appropriate to challenge their subordinates in a public place, be it on social media, or in person.


#16

But I also see it the other way too… I don’t get why someone feels it appropriate to challenge their superiors in public. There is a time and place to challenge or criticise people higher up the food chain, and that is usually away from any public forum, usually starting with “With all due respect…”

Edit: Note - I agree with OC 1475’s point, but that should of been taken away from the public domain…


#17

Doesn’t look good in my opinion. Also a bit pretentious by whoever ordered the badges requesting the different colours. Let’s face it, no embroidery company will use two different colours unless asked to.

I’d be a bit more sympathetic if the issue was the wrong shade of blue. But to deliberately order multicoloured badges knowing full well they’ve never been done before and therefore may be banned from using, is a waste of time & money.

Yes I know the dress regs don’t state what colour the Sqn identifier has to be (or that it can only be one colour). But at the risk of opening up another can of worms, neither do the dress regs state that you can’t wear a pink tutu with the uniform. But I’m yet to see any Sqn do that to make a point.

I agree with those who state that whole Twitter conversation is one that should be done via email. It’s not professional & smacks of points scoring.

However, OC 1475 does have a point with regards to the PTS badges & cadets buying them themselves. Unfortunately, that’s not what’s being debated here and it should be kept separate from the original problem.


#18

On the other hand, it may force a Grip-Backside interface - if Sqn’s use evermore colourful combinations because HQAC hasn’t got it’s house in order ref either the regs or the provision, then those who delight in social media may find it biting back.

I’m sure the Twitter Queens employers find the spectacle hilarious…


#19

Agreed, willy wagging by the RWO. Should be done via e-mail and the chain of command.
The sqn has done nothing against the regs as the regs do not specify.


#20

not in our region, our regional FA is adamant they never received enough and also has pointed out they received 3 times as many AFA badges compared to YFA badges…