Never trust a lawyer. :whistle:
Stay on topic please
I think it’s because people don’t particularly understand the fact that whilst we are a volunteer organisation, we are the Air Training Corps, and not the SAS (Air Training Corps Branch.)
There are too many volunteers that like to have special stuff, to allow badges, shoulder flashes, beret badge discs, sashes and pink tutu’s show superiority, rather than the ability of the individual to shine through.
In essence, if you resort to that kind of thinking, there’s a good chance you are an inferior member of this organisation in my opinion.
Stick to the facts from AP1358C kids, and you can’t go too far wrong.
[quote=“5432golf” post=970]There are too many volunteers that like to have special stuff, to allow badges, shoulder flashes, beret badge discs, sashes and pink tutu’s show superiority, rather than the ability of the individual to shine through.[/quote]I just spent a weekend in a room full of them 
As others have said, its in the AP, but it just doesn’t get worn. Fewer and fewer camps have general “duty” NCOs these days, a lot of that sort of snizzle is scooped up by the guard commander. Like a fashion its out at the mo.
In service spanning 3 decades I can’t actually recall when I last saw one worn :S
[quote=“sirvicalsmeer” post=988]
In service spanning 3 decades I can’t actually recall when I last saw one worn :S[/quote]
I do have vague memories of them being worn, but I agree, it might have been more in the era of Guard Room trade-group, people moon-walking on yellow dusters, and sharp bed-blocks.
However: I’ve definitely seen a MOVs officer wearing a wheel-type armlet down at Brize within the last few years, and I’m sure I’ve seen O.O. armlets being worn at Leuz as recently as (say) 6 years ago.
And of course RAFP can never be seperated from their’s, in No1s (different thing, admittedly).
wilf_san
ps 30yrs… :blink: so did you do initial at No1 SofRT at Swinders, then??
I did go to Swinderby, but I said spanning 3 decades, not 3 decades of service! Early 90s onwards for me.
Still see a few movers with the wheel, especially in theatre. But in the UK they are favoured by the pongos.
Surely adding extra embelishments to uniform is a military tradition? Hence what regiments end up with odd accoutrements that their recruits fight like mad to ‘earn’.
Within the RAF for example: Regiment mudguards, QCS caps (and boots nowadays), RAF Police armbands, white SD caps, whistles, ‘mars bars’, stable belts, side hats… all started out (and remain) as deviations from ‘the norm’.
I think it’s sad that the ATC is hell bent on destroying local squadrons individual and regional identities in favour of being the light blue borg.
All of those things mentioned are within the regulations; the spin that some ATC squadrons put on these are not properly authorised and therefore need to be either a) eliminated or b) authorised.
Whatever happens we need to ensure that we don’t end up with the kind of shambles which can be seen within the army as every regiment puts its own (and its predecessors’) spin on things. The ATC is a single organisation and needs to have a single set of dress regulations to follow. Those aim to be ACO-wide regulations but our CCF cousins are tainted by their association with the brown side and their own fractured histories and are more complicated to include neatly 
To add to what Incubus said. What we see on ATC squadrons is not about local identity or history, but in my experience generally revolves around one member of staff taking a like to sashes/identifiers/weird lanyards/pink tutus because of their own procivities, and foisting that on the unit.
[quote]All of those things mentioned are within the regulations; the spin that some ATC squadrons put on these are not properly authorised and therefore need to be either a) eliminated or b) authorised.
Whatever happens we need to ensure that we don’t end up with the kind of shambles which can be seen within the army as every regiment puts its own (and its predecessors’) spin on things. The ATC is a single organisation and needs to have a single set of dress regulations to follow. Those aim to be ACO-wide regulations but our CCF cousins are tainted by their association with the brown side and their own fractured histories and are more complicated to include neatly [/quote]
But traditions have to start somewhere. For example: the Grenadier Guards copied their bearskins off the French grenadiers they faced in battle, or more acurately, their CO did. The first tank crews wore berets because they were more practical than the SD caps of the day.
Neither of those things were supported by dress regs or the CoC at the time, they only became accepted later (when everyone got tired of fighting about it).
ATC squadrons shouldn’t be like fun size RAF squadrons, they should be proud of their own local traditions and customs. I know the ACO attitude seems to come down from the RAF, who since WW2 have desperately tried to stop any part of the Air Force looking different to any other part (copying Regiment stable belts, anyone?) and it makes me sad in both cases.
We’re Brits. Total uniformity and boring acceptance of dress regs (tongue in cheek or “dress guidelines” as I like to call them tongue in cheek)is for Yanks and Boxheads.
indeed… It’s these people who don’t have the discipline to follow regulations who shouldn’t be in the organisation.
Wing Staff Officer meeting? 
[quote=“tango_lima” post=1054][quote]All of those things mentioned are within the regulations; the spin that some ATC squadrons put on these are not properly authorised and therefore need to be either a) eliminated or b) authorised.
Whatever happens we need to ensure that we don’t end up with the kind of shambles which can be seen within the army as every regiment puts its own (and its predecessors’) spin on things. The ATC is a single organisation and needs to have a single set of dress regulations to follow. Those aim to be ACO-wide regulations but our CCF cousins are tainted by their association with the brown side and their own fractured histories and are more complicated to include neatly [/quote]
But traditions have to start somewhere. For example: the Grenadier Guards copied their bearskins off the French grenadiers they faced in battle, or more acurately, their CO did. The first tank crews wore berets because they were more practical than the SD caps of the day.
Neither of those things were supported by dress regs or the CoC at the time, they only became accepted later (when everyone got tired of fighting about it).
ATC squadrons shouldn’t be like fun size RAF squadrons, they should be proud of their own local traditions and customs. I know the ACO attitude seems to come down from the RAF, who since WW2 have desperately tried to stop any part of the Air Force looking different to any other part (copying Regiment stable belts, anyone?) and it makes me sad in both cases.
We’re Brits. Total uniformity and boring acceptance of dress regs (tongue in cheek or “dress guidelines” as I like to call them tongue in cheek)is for Yanks and Boxheads.[/quote]
RIGHT ON BROTHER TESTIFY!
Now where did I put my pace stick, snapped in half, because I’m an officer and we don’t need to count paces, we simply need to carry a big stick.
I’ve just requested to my OC that our Health & Safety officer attend in bubble wrap, so he’s easily identifiable.
[quote=“5432golf” post=1061]
RIGHT ON BROTHER TESTIFY!
Now where did I put my pace stick, snapped in half, because I’m an officer and we don’t need to count paces, we simply need to carry a big stick.
I’ve just requested to my OC that our Health & Safety officer attend in bubble wrap, so he’s easily identifiable.[/quote]
Well, you wouldn’t want to face a machine gun without your stick, would you?
KD during summer months anybody? I think it would look rather dashing.
An entire regiment adopting the tradition of a different hat is a world away from a pokey, little, country ATC Squadron of 25-30 cadets deciding to adopt something (like a shash, which already has a specific meaning) to identify the duty bod for the night. If the ATC as a whole adopted something, that could be more comparable.
There are “traditions”, and then there are pointless deviations.
Most of those are introduced for no other reason than someone thinks it ‘looks good’. I’ve seen duty NCOs adorned with peak cap, sash, and silver whistle…there’s simply no need for that.
I’m sure somewhere there’s a squadron where a staff member has found some aiguillettes in the cupboard and decided to adorn the duty char walla with those, just because they think it looks special.
It’s not the deviation from the regulations that narks me most, it’s the total pointlessness of some of these ‘invented traditions’…
Some people have obviously failed to step back from the situation and critically ask themselves:
“is there REALLY any point to all this? Or am I just doing it for the sake of it?”
It’s funny how often that question get’s thrown at HQAC initiatives (usually with resulting cries of “Change for the sake of it! Doesn’t appreciate the real world!”) but not at their own local level ‘traditions’.
…And there is the crux! Even the RAF have decided that for an entire station, although it might be authorised, there’s simply no need.
I’ve found another way of finding out if a cadet is duty or not.
“Sgt Bloggs, are you the duty NCO tonight.”
“No sir.”
“Spiffing, could you tell me who is?”
[quote=“wdimagineer2b” post=1067]An entire regiment adopting the tradition of a different hat is a world away from a pokey, little, country ATC Squadron of 25-30 cadets deciding to adopt something (like a shash, which already has a specific meaning) to identify the duty bod for the night. If the ATC as a whole adopted something, that could be more comparable.
There are “traditions”, and then there are pointless deviations.
Most of those are introduced for no other reason than someone thinks it ‘looks good’. I’ve seen duty NCOs adorned with peak cap, sash, and silver whistle…there’s simply no need for that.
I’m sure somewhere there’s a squadron where a staff member has found some aiguillettes in the cupboard and decided to adorn the duty char walla with those, just because they think it looks special.
It’s not the deviation from the regulations that narks me most, it’s the total pointlessness of some of these ‘invented traditions’…
Some people have obviously failed to step back from the situation and critically ask themselves:
“is there REALLY any point to all this? Or am I just doing it for the sake of it?”
It’s funny how often that question get’s thrown at HQAC initiatives (usually with resulting cries of “Change for the sake of it! Doesn’t appreciate the real world!”) but not at their own local level ‘traditions’.
…And there is the crux! Even the RAF have decided that for an entire station, although it might be authorised, there’s simply no need.[/quote]
Here’s my justification: cadets generally like to dress up. That’s one of the big reasons why they join the ATC, they get a uniform.
When I was a cadet corporal, we got given a clip board and told “You are duty NCO.” The majority of Cpls were then pretty apathetic about doing the job. They did give us an armband at one point, but that seemed so lame that we hid it. I’d argue that the reason the RAF doesn’t really do armbands any ore is less because there is no point and more because they look daft and people feel like members of the Nazi Party when wearing them.*
If they’d told us to wear a peak cap or carry a BFO stick, would we have done it? Hell yes! And we’d have climbed over each others corpses for the privledge and been the best damn duty NCOs the corps has ever seen.
Remember, the ATC is for the kids, not the geeks who like to pore over dress regs and slag off the people they can ‘catch out’. As long as it doesn’t get to the point viking helmets or Indian war paint, who cares if people want to have fun?
*for further justification of this, look at the RAF Police, they love armbands