For what reasons?
Thought the same at first, but assume this is exercising mqual type stuff? Not much else would be regularly within the site of the TSA…
Seems to be a difference between taught as per Army and RAFAC and the pamphlets, there are the odd changes such as Cadet/staff ratio, assessors minor hiccups
What region are you?
CCF(RAF) has its own TSA.
That’s the challenge with doing an Army course, as will cover their sS policy rather than ours. The ACFTIs will close the loop alongside the TSA, locally ours is great and wants to facilitate safe cadet activity.
I believe a survey has gone out to a selection of personnel about this… Be interesting to see what that results in
I’ve had it, and replied.
I thought some of the questions were written by someone who couldn’t countenance squadrons being able to run some more of the advanced stuff - which makes me think that the new syllabus is going to force some squadrons to have to now rely on Wing to provide training to cadets they may have been able to provide themselves…
Indeed.
Another survey with forced questions to get the answers THEY want.
Isn’t that the idea of all the PTS though? Sqns offer blue, maybe in extremis Bronze, but everything higher has to come from the higher formations.
No idea why, mind, but if there’s a rule in place then everything should follow it.
Without starting a mud throwing match 3 Sqn OC have told me it feels like it’s going to result in being able to deliver less locally and harder to he permitted to deliver training.
Given I haven’t seen the actual email I don’t know but that’s the vibe it’s apparently creating
3 Likes
My understanding is as follows. This is direct from source.
- The intention is to remove all training of tactics from the Air Cadets. I.e. the only FT we will be able to teach at any level in our org comes from lessons 1-22.
- I quote directly here… “if people dont like it they can join the Army cadets”.
- Badges are almost a certainty.
I gave up halfway through as it wasn’t a great survey. And despite being sent to CCF emails forgot that we have a different set up to Sqn, Wg, Region and often have access to Army/RM CFAVs
1 Like
What concerns me…
Is it is really starting to feel like people at the highest levels on MOD and CS who are responsible for the tri service cadets, are making shoeboxing decisions…
Army cadets - they can do all the green stuff.
Air cadets - stem, space, lessons, PowerPoint.
Sea cadets - adv trg.
There is a definite push at top level to limit FT.
I have had that said to me directly in conversation when asked by perms at the highest levels.
If as an org we lose meaningful FT, with the difficulties placed on us for shooting and flying/gliding almost non existent… what is the point?
I really dont want to run a space/stem only youth group.
I hate this mentality. I’ve heard it before. Maybe we should also stop all paddling and sailing as if you want to do that just join the SCC 
1 Like
Have those who are concerned expressed those concerns via the TNA?
Sadly I think this is the way of it.
It’s been queried before why some.sqns and wings spend so much money on water craft etc… as “its.not our primary focus”
I have. In detail.
1 Like
That is the idea, but is it flawed?
I totally understand that sometimes you need external support to run activities, and that pooling of qualifications is a good way to give cadets the most “value for money” experience. But will the Blue element be worth running at the squadron? Will it mean an end to sqns being able to run deployed exercises? By forcing FT into the syllabus, the squadrons that run fieldcraft weekends may well have that option removed from them.
I also don’t think it’s particularly fair on Wings to be expected to deliver a new syllabus. The wing structure isn’t set up to deliver enough courses to make Bronze a reasonably attainable badge. Think of GM wing - how many FT courses will be needed for you to make Bronze a reasonable proposition for your cadets? Where do you find the staff to run it? Where will you run it?
And on top of that, the survey mentioned training courses. Will everyone have to requalify? Will we need authorised blue instructors, like in radio?
There is no point creating a progressive structure if anything above squadron level is unobtainable due to Wings and above being unable to deliver sufficient courses for everyone who wants to reach that level. For example, What’s the point of having a gold Cyber badge if only 12 cadets a year get a chance to go on that course?
7 Likes
It’s just sad if that is the way we’re going. The Great thing about youth groups, be that us, ACF, SCC, scouts, heck, even the groups like St John’s cadets, is that they give young people a very broad look into different things. It ain’t about specialising. It’s about giving young people lots of different experiences.
4 Likes
This is.my.biggest concern.
Bye bye x3 yearly FT overnight ex…
And for what?
Just to meet a sausage factory PTS?
ITS SUPPOSED TO BE ABOUT RAISING STANDARDS.
NOT lowering to the common denominator.
4 Likes