Also there isn’t a horrific cost here. These badges are about 50p each I think, been a while since I ordered. So cadets now might want 3, instead of 1. Their first months subs will cover this….
2 Likes
subs for their First Parade Night would cover the full issue !
3 Likes
Visual identity is important to people.
We can walk and chew gum at the same time.
Except in uniform. You get my point…
4 Likes
That’s just CCF
only on the right shoulder if i’m not mistaken?
Am I missing something here? The IBN has a minimum size stated as 40mmx30mm, are our squadron identifiers not 50mmx20mm for brassards?
1 Like
With the new addition of the unit IDs on No3s what is happening with staff within a wing and region level do they get there own wing ones?
Also why not just make it so squadrons could make there own patches and allow for some squadron creativity?
I would to know your opinions on these..
Thread already exists and a few of those topics have been covered but I’ll go rapid fire
- Badges are worn by ATC cadets only
- Sqn Badges and the emblems within can’t appear on other badges without approval from the Inspectorate of RAF Badges, and they are already under pressure with a years long list of Sqn, Wg, Rgn badges that need designing, approved, painted, and granted, they simply cant handle another ~950 badges
- and there wouldn’t be enough unique ideas for every Sqn to have their own and for it to not look gash
There have been discussions around Wg/Rgn Formation patches to go under the Union Jack Like the JL DZ or SATT badges but again its all about Cost, and the Inspectorate of RAF Badges, nothing in the Royal houshold moves quickly
3 Likes
I have formally suggested formation patches, but there is a bit of work to be done first.
But to address your other point, the reason units can’t just do their own thing is because it needs to be controlled. That’s for quality, but also if the whole point of unit patches is that they belong to and clearly identify a unit, they need to be significantly different from one-another. That requires strong governance.
It’s also required to stop units stealing the identities of units because they don’t understand how it works. That happens all the time.
I love the fact you clearly have a passion for this stuff. You’re not alone and that’s exactly why I’m working really hard to sort it all out. On the SharePoint there is the official register of badges which shows entitled units and provides a little extra detail. It’s within the Influence Hub.
Sqn IDs technically cover the need for patches as now cadets of all units are identified.
No staff will wear them.
To keep things simple, my original suggestion was to have unit IDs on the right arm and patches displaying authorised region badges on the left arm, but the regions don’t yet all have authorised badges.
5 Likes
Staff at Sqn level don’t wear unit IDs either it’s only cadets and then only ATC cadets (due to the variety of the school identifier for CCFs)
Staff in theory belong to RAFAC as a whole not the Sqn wing or region so there should be no need for that specific identifier.
3 Likes
Although I admit to being sad that I can’t wear my unit number when on duty with my squadron in green.
There’s no precedent for us wearing a brassard, but there is for mirroring the EAW patches that the parent service wear (hence blanking plates often have a patch of Velcro underneath the TRF).
That wouldn’t provide wings and regions an option though. That’s where I hope formation patches based on authorised badges might eventually scratch that itch.
2 Likes
You clearly never went to Nijmegen in the 90s and 00s…
It looked gopping.
4 Likes
When I was in the ACF, my particular ‘county’ (that covered three counties) insisted on instructors wearing rank on brassards.
This really suited me as I was only a lcpl in the Army Reserve (TA) at the time and so I could wear the brassard with sgt stripes over my normal uniform. This was obviously pre-CS95 when rank was still sewn on the sleeve of working and combat dress.
Cheerfully withdrawn. I recall that from when I went in the mid-naughties!
I think it was official policy under the Nijmegen regs at the time. I always ignored it in my teams. I couldn’t bring myself to do it.
1 Like
Is there anywhere in the processes that would lead to the wider HQ team having visibility before the rest of the org?
Or even having any input?
I feel like the entire WWO cadre having eyes on for a couple of weeks in advance is pretty good going…
1 Like
Bullets are about 7p each and our ammo allowance is being cut year in year.
Minimal losses are adding up.
2 Likes
That’s great for them… not great for wider communication at a HQ level though.
1 Like
Just another change being made for the sake of it. Let’s be honest, it looks rubbish and it should be filed under B1N. However I’m sure someone will be exceptionally pleased to receive their MBE on behalf of the bright ideas club.
Not something that I will be partaking in or enforcing. Perhaps I will reconsider when a better solution is found.
4 Likes