It’s no more a threat than to say ‘if you drive faster than the speed limit you’ll get a ticket for speeding’.
1 Like
I can’t see anything in the list of extant IBNs that matches. Published IBNs have a number, not “XX”, and if it was from this year would end in 25.
You have the actual ID or a link to the IBN?
1 Like
True, but the chances of getting a speeding ticket are dependant on a whole range of things, where you are, what you are driving ( its hard to get my old Defender above 40mph) . etc.
This suggests a unit or wing or region will face some form of action to force it to comply, and any action would be likely to impact on our cadets in one way or another… I am sure this is probably just someone being over zelous but none the less .
It says on the copy issued by my wing.
XX/24 ( Issued by Digital)
A
It’s still in drafts you have to search for it.
I imagine it’s still going through the policy approval process. Three weeks is very short notice
Hope so, but if that is the case then why has it been issued to all Bader address in the wing.
A
The three weeks only relates to the removal of non-complaint graphics and branding: not getting something authorised to replace them (we already have approved ATC / CCF / RAFAC branding for that).
When Her Late Majesty died we replaced all online branding, authorised or otherwise, with plain black backgrounds (and later authorised mourning imagery) in much less time than three weeks.
Someone jumped the gun & reading it makes a little sense.
In short only use the official (current) RAF air cadets logo, or approved badges (so ATC crest is still ok!)
I suspect Sqn & wing (& region!) badges that are compliant with the principles will be okay. As long as it’s gone through some form of approval process I.e. reviewed & checked by region CoS then it should be okay.
If they haven’t been authorised by the Inspectorate of RAF Badges then they are unauthorised. It’s like being pregnant: you are or you are not.
We were through this several years ago - sparked by the Tasmanian devil incident.
The aim is not the removal of unauthorised badges but the removal of any that are inappropriate & could cause legal difficulties.
Unless serious no compliant, It’s not something that be controlled or enforced easily in cadet world, it will cause kick off on the volunteers at a perilous time, result in letters to MPs & generally cause more hassle trying up media & comms.
You also have the charity/trustee issue where a Sqn registered as a charity in its own right could probably have its own branding used alongside RAF AC & ATC.
Which is why it’s still in drafts & not published yet as HQAC work through & negotiate a way fwd. 
From my reading the aim is to “maintain the integrity and legality of the RAF Air Cadets brand”, which means putting an end to making up its own logos and badges for all sorts of things without following the proper processes.
Fair point, but such branding would have to be careful not to use any element of copyrighted RAF or RAFAC branding or attempt in any way to impersonate an authorised heraldic badge without the appropriate authorisation (e.g. no ATC falcons, Astral crowns, etc.)
As long as we don’t let Durham copy their ACF counterparts badge i’m happy
The current guidance on badges is really unclear as to what’s 'approved" ‘authorised’ ‘compliant’ or ‘allowed’ and who the decision maker is for that process.
We keep throwing these terms around with no clarity as to what they mean.
And, until you get that clarity, every unit is going to rely upon the definition that helps them the most.
1 Like
So yes which last time was badges checked at region to provide assurance & compliance & remove some of the illegal ones or the inappropriate ones
Mainly it’s about avoiding complaints or getting sued.
If you fancy an archive rabbit hole the previous threads are here
1 Like
Given that only two of the six regions have authorised badges themselves, who are they (in the case of the other four) to judge?
1 Like
Authorised approvers with delegated authority?
According to the media guidance, they are the decision makers.
The current version of the media guidance has an internal authorisation process, with an optional external approval process from the College of Arms.
1 Like
This is the current guidance in badges in the media style policy:
So now we have the term ‘sanctioned’ to throw into the mix. And it also appears that “approval” for a suitable ‘unsanctioned’ badge could be granted by the projects officer as well!
And then wings and regions have had a plethora of other approval processes over the years/decades.
And then you’ll get units claiming it is sanctioned by the college, when it isn’t. Or claiming that some Royal approved the badge decades ago and that you “can come take it from our cold dead hands.”
As I said right at the outset, stick won’t work in this issue. So come up with decent carrots!
3 Likes
That thread is a rabbit hole! Found a Sqn that uses the device from a RAF Sqn badge as its own & all approved by inspectorate & college of arms so things are definitely not hard & fast!
In my experience of badging policies in the Armed Forces. The rules are meant to be broken.