But I don’t think anyone is suggesting that as a course of action
2 Likes
Thanks for this — I hadn’t realised it was there.
I’m avoiding hanging things on the new page until I’ve checked through everything for consistency of message etc.
Having looked at the screenshot, this speaks to my desire to tighten stuff up. As @Baldrick wont stop repeating (we get it! 
), it could make it difficult to manage going forward, although my inbox is full of units wanting to transition from the dark side.
Those who can’t be helped have almost certainly not followed these existing rules anyway (pinched a design, not following the same format as authorised badges etc).
The key thing is this: I can stop any more units going down the wrong path and misplacing emotional and financial investment by providing incredibly clear process and guidance, and making sure there are well-informed local advocates all around the organisation.
There are enough people who appreciate this stuff and want to support the wider organisation to get it right — no one sets about doing badges with the intent of doing a bad job.
3 Likes
Clearly some do! Look at that mermaid nonsense we saw the other day!
I’m sure they didn’t set about it with the intent of it being bad. Something like that is borne of ignorance.
That can almost certainly be avoided in the future.
I think that’s true for most. But this one doesn’t follow the colour scheme at all, so they must have looked at every other badge and actively decided to completely ignore every example going:
Maybe they did. I’m just giving the benefit of the doubt that perhaps they wanted blues etc because they’re on the coast and it was done in good faith.
I know a local unit that basically has a RN-style rope frame. Again, the motivator was preserving a link to something nautical, rather than deliberately blowing off the rules. Theirs was done in ignorance, thinking the frame didn’t matter (especially because it was “unofficial”).
Again, this is why it needs tightening a bit, in the right way.
I’ll ping them a PM, as they’re probably not aware.
I think they decided that nothing was impossible and therefore they decided they wanted to be red & blue 
I think something just flew over my head 
Genuine thought - it could something be a simple as colour blindness or a specific mode on their computer.
Or even someone thinking they needed to adjust the colours to make them more inclusive as part of Astra.
The ‘interesting’ badge is at least 12 years old, so likely nothing to do with Astra 
Another point with that badge though, is that it’s for a DF AFAIK. Should DFs have their own badges, or be using the badges of their ‘parent’ Sqn?
Say what you will, the art skills displayed in the centrepiece are much better than the drafts I put together for the college lol.
Because it’s copied from the towns signage
If you look up the Mablethorpe Mermaid, it exists outside of that badge.
Is there scope for a 2 tier approach?
Not every squadron can afford an approved badge through the college of arms.
Is there an ability to make the existing badges ‘safe’? Where they are brought more into line, from a branding point of view?
1 Like
The problem is that us saying it’s ok, doesn’t make it so.
This is the rub. We have an amazing privilege not open the to ACF, for example. To enjoy that privilege, there’s process.
If we were to make unauthorised badges look ok, it’s then just opening up carnage for people claiming “yeh, but you approved this for us”.
But I am going to look at various options for those units who can’t / don’t want to get their own.
It just probably needs to be clear that not wanting an authorised badge is ok, and no one is being forced, but that’s not the same as being able to go on a tangent and DIY it.
Otherwise, as others have noted, it’s a kick in the teeth for those who have bothered to do it properly.
Again, I’m just discussing personal views here in the interest of nurturing very useful dialogue.
Also, worth me clarifying that I’ve been a bit too loose with my terminology.
It’s the Inspectorate of RAF Badges, rather than the College of Arms.
1 Like
That’s not what you would be doing - you say here is the template you need to meet the style guidelines if you are going to emulate an RAF Sqn badge (which is where this has historically stemmed from).
There isnt stopping any squadron having a unit logo that isn’t a heraldic badge with corporate strapline.
That marketing decision is lead by the Sqn committee which is separate to the operational chain.
The ACF dont have a charity aspect that can make that independent decision so they don’t enjoy that privilege as they can register anything in their own right (although county associations might do).
Help the volunteers become compliant, particularly for new units & then register those who formally want them.
The new central & east badge is awful & doesn’t reflect the region at all & their old logo worked just as well - their next RC may even decide to go back to it.
Lets be fair, it’s very hard to create a badge that personally/explicitly reflects a large geographic region. Over time people will come to recognise it as the region badge and identify with it.
4 Likes
That’s true but the historical links to Viking invaders and the coming together just didn’t ring true - personally I would have linked to the three rivers of the Ouse, the nene & the Trent.
Perhaps three wavy lines in a circle with a ventral view of an eagle flying over?
It matters not now but does indicate why it’s important to properly consider the meaning before registering.
- So create the design,
- make sure it meets the standards,
- trial it for a bit
- then spend the money register it rather than
- diving into something that may not resonant the way you would like
Did they do a consultation for design ideas?
I know Sussex’s current badge certainly does not meet the guidelines. But, having seen @OC.1324 thing on Teams, it would appear a proper one is currently on the way. But I don’t recall seeing any consultation for ideas.