RAM to RSD? Process on SMS for approvals

The RSD template has signature boxes for RAU, RCO and SPO as part of the approvals.
If we are submitting these by SMS does this mean that for each RSD:

  1. RAU/RCO wet sign
  2. Scan RSD and attach to SMS
  3. SPO prints RSD
  4. SPO wet signs RSD
  5. SPO scans and re attaches to SMS (can you do that?) and approves SMS
  6. RAU/RCO prints RSD for shoot (as per normal this bit)

Now since I have to do an RSD for every parade night as I do not know 2 weeks in advance if I will have all the staff etc needed that is going to be a lot of trees dying in vain
Anyone know what the accepted procedure for this is as I can see the SPOs being drowned in printing and scanning otherwise - or have I missed a brief on this somewhere

1 Like

We are passing them around to signatories by email (or manually, if practicable) then uploading the final version to SMS.

As before, it can be prepared with staffing as “best guess”, amending and signing a copy on the day. I believe that amended copy can be uploaded as part of the post-activity process.

Its the 3 signature boxes that are the problem for me - the old gotcha if someone has an incident and a piece of paper does not have a monika on it.
It is still a lot of printing and signing if doing by email

The joys of a distributed organisation with no proper collaboration tools/process
As fast as we develop a process to save time (SMS can save time :face_with_hand_over_mouth:) we are forced to adopt a practice designed for our parent services that does not work in our distributed model

I’m not saying that the RSD system isn’t a total crotch-ache, designed for full-time staff sitting in adjacent offices who can sign stuff easily and not really fit for how we work here.

Perhaps we should get @james_elliot to build an RSD template into the shooting SMS application - that way the SMS audit trail an be printed on the final RSD when you print for the shoot

Only problem is every time they change the template we would need an SMS modification

you mean, change the entire mechanism, process, name, …


The RSD is absolute :poop: and far inferior to a RAM.

So far I have just been putting my electronic signature on and uploading it and then sending it to the SPO via SMS. If he wants to then download it and do stuff he can. (As long as SMS goes Green before the shoot it’s his responsibility).

1 Like

I actually prefer the RSD to the RAM, just not the requirement for a wet signature!

Could be worse you could be dealing with DIO and they want wet signatures on the stuff you submit to them in certain areas.

Ultimately the RSD needs to be signed by the RCO and SPO, the question I’ve posed is if there is a precedent for this to be wet signature or if digital will do.

Edit to add CTR says ‘Original Signature’ and it’s up to the RAU:
"2-33. On all DIO controlled estates and on other ranges and training areas where Range Orders dictate, the RSD, RASP or EASP will require approval from the RAU for planning purposes this should be at least 15 days before the start of the activity, all written instructions must have the original signature when submitted to the RAU. Planning officers are to determine time constraints on or before the Recce . "

Would be interesting to hear your justification of this. The RSD has some clarifications in it that were long time pending for the RAM and actually contains mostly the same information.

So is that a pukka digital signature or just a scan or ‘font’ signature

RSD?? A change to the RAM??

Had nothing down the CoC!!

A new version of CTR was released and it is the qualification owners responsibility to ensure they are current in their qual, an IBN went out about the new CTR. The SPO should also be checking you are submitting suitable documents as part of their checks.

1 Like

That is my name followed by “signed electronically” my understanding is that by then sending it via a pukka secure method (either an individual corporate email or SMS) it should be sufficient as it’s auditable that it came from me. (If that system is good enough for the Criminals Justice System it should be good enough for the Air Cadets!).

It isn’t the Air Cadets who require it, it is the army/SASC/MOD who are apparently very much expecting a real signature.