The question is though, Is this new OASC better targeted at cadet staff, rather than being too similar to the regular officer selection?
(I say this having experienced non of the above routes. Mine was 10 minutes with headmaster an hour with a TEST officer which mainly focused on my time as a cadet some cough years ago).
[Though I’ll need to go through it if I transfer to the ATC after next year’s house move -even though I’ll have completed OIC by then]
the move to Cranwell was a move away from being user friendly in place of a “uniformed and standard approach” rather than the post code lottery depending on how well you knew the RC and how chocolatey the biscuits were you brought!
Is that the ruling for CCF(RAF) to ATC Officers then?
I know and understand that, and that was fine when candidates were undergoing a myriad of assessments over 2 days.
Now you’ll have candidates who’ll spend longer getting there than being assessed. You’ve got to ask if that’s value for money.
I am questioning whether I’ll go ahead with this board given that it’s a five hour drive each way and my current circumstances are more than likely going to preclude me going to OIC within the mandated 12 months.
Thought I’d ask on here to be able to make an informed decision.
If I do go I’ll feedback on here.
a very valid question - although i think it was still valid when it was two days…
are we seeing better Officers now than we were before?
or are we seeing Volunteers better prepared to pass a RAF requirement?
we do see officers who have made a commitment, without a doubt OASC is more than 2 days at Cranwell, but does that then make them more committed, or more likely to commit to Squadron events?
It proves commitment for OASC, but doesn’t prove or indicate an improved commitment continually from that point on…
As far as I’m aware there’s absolutely nothing in place to be able to quantify that, before or after.
which begs the question how can we know the process is an improvement other than a common standard?
Yup, if you’ve not done OASC then you need to do it for a permanent transfer (rather than going supernumerary) regardless of time served or roles held. (For me I don’t object as such if I have to do it because I’m relatively new - and also think there should be one selection process for all RAFAC officers). Would be interested if they applied it to CCF officers commissioned before OASC was brought in for ATC.
I’m also intrigued as to what would happen to my CCF commission if I failed OASC. Would I still be allowed to be a CCF officer and do joint RAFAC activities with the ATC, or continue to be supernumerary on an ATC squadron?
I’ve known people wait longer than 12 months for OIC for extenuating circumstances. I’d say do OASC to get it done and then worry about OIC later.
I wouldn’t be put off by the 12 month bit either, if there are good reasons which you clearly allude to then this should be accommodated. You are a volunteer after all and the organisation should not be putting unnecessary barriers in the way of the right people.
This topic was automatically closed 60 minutes after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.