On my RAFAC OASC report you could only score approx 50% marks. Huge chunks of assessment criteria on the mark sheet were blocked out as not relevant; “motivation for a career in the RAF” (May not be exact wording but you can see how that’s not relevant).
So as @GrandMaster_Flush says; I think the day is run pretty much the same, but the scoring is very different.
It would clearly be much harder to pass as a regular than as RAFAC, but then you have to keep in mind that the two are likely looking for different things from a young officer…
RAF - can we build this young person up in our vision and increase responsibility overtime.
RAFAC - can we immediately make this person safeguard lead and head of squadron of 50 of other peoples kids…
Smashing the RAF OASC may not mean the candidate Is fit for the RAFAC, certainly as being in the RAFAC doesn’t mean you’d be suitable in the RAF.
But should they be suitable, you’d hope some common sense would prevail and they wouldn’t have to redo. However, I would expect that they would.
If someone passes OASC for a regular or reserve commission, then they do not need to do OASC again for the RAFAC, as long as it is within a certain time frame.
I know of one person who went for a regular commission, passed OASC and then something came up, which meant they failed their medical. They then became RAFVR(T). This was a few years ago, so things may have changed.
In your hypothetical scenario, given their age,
I would imagine they would just have to wait until they’re 20. However, whether or not that’s within an acceptable time frame of passing OASC is another question.
They could always shifty on over to the CCF and commission at 18 and then go back to the ATC at 20.
Not sure how that would work in terms of being supernumerary on the ATC Sqn in the interim
i always thought it was not required to do it a second time.
providing regular service could be proven as an officer then there was no need to prove the individual had the right “Officer qualities” given they made a career out of it…?
(in much the same way Regulars who were SNCOs don’t start at Sgt but are “fast tracked” into the FS role…)
Not regular at all. But sometimes happens when a cadet finishes school, doesn’t go to uni and wants to help out. No staff cadet/SNCO option and only recently introduced CIs in the RAF sections so at one point it was the only option for staff
That’s debatable. The commissioning scroll says commissioned into the CCF(RAF). I don’t know whether an officer in the ATC gets one that says RAFAC or ATC but either way, on the face of it, it’s a different commission.
I agree it should say the same, but it doesn’t. And as we can’t go up to 20 for cadets (unless they’re really thick and have been held back a couple of years) I can see the logic in the difference here.
It specified on my commissioning letter; “approval has been given for your appointment to a Cadet Forces Commission in the rank of Acting Pilot Officer for service in the Air Training Corps in accordance…”