On PCS on the sleeve panel as per the ACF. Sewing on badges on Blues would need 3x badges so maybe an enamel badge or a rank slide tab or pin?
I’ve missed the binning the brassard bit.
I wouldnt bin the brassard just have less stuff on it
Also in an ideal world I’d bin of 2C uniform aswell and just have No2/2a and 3
2 Likes
And move it to the breast where it should be, not the patch
1 Like
23 years US Army and Air Force, easy spot for a retired Senior MSgt
1 Like
The current problem with the brassard is that it can be full when the cadet has actually done very little bit just has all the blue badges. Seems almost slightly bloatery
1 Like
I think it’s definitely better looking than it was now that the badges all have a consistent feel.
1 Like
That was the entire part of the PTS every Cadet who has been about for a year should have all (or very nearly all) of the Blue Badges.
2 Likes
I tell you what, if we are proposing uniform changes, here’s my crazy idea.
Get rid of the embroidered RAFAC slides and allow us to wear officer ribbons with RAFAC pins.
The rank slides are gash. They’re massive compared to the epaulettes, they’re not the correct tone of blue for the shirt and they look like they say RAF Regiment from a distance anyway.
2 Likes
Yes! And the RAFAC pins aren’t that bad really, a bit gaudier than VRT, but a better option than the slides as they are!
Aye, but then we’ll have the aircrew complain about FOD.
I don’t at all mind the embroidered slides, though they could be a better colour match and a bit smaller.
I do however think the woven WO/SNCO slides were a massive waste of money. Primarily because of who they chose as the “supplier”.
3 Likes
Then that’s fine, the aircrew can keep the embroidered slides! 🤷🏻😂
2 Likes
I just don’t think anybody could seriously class a pin on a rank slide a fod risk.
I have pinned 30 various pins from raf charities and trade shows to my aircrew lanyard on civvie street and never had a problem!
Mind you, I’m also pretty happy to fly my puddle jumper across the channel in shorts and T-shirt - so maybe my tolerance to risk is a little more expansive than 2FTS!
And the Fieldcraft and Shooting crowd, who claim will claim the pins will fall off/rupture their spleen the moment they adopt a position other than standing…
6 Likes
Apparently the reason behind blue, bronze etc is that cadets wanted more badges.
The RAFAC Pins look gash, cheaply made and badly stamped. As I said at the time there is no reason why we can’t have our RAFAC Commissions and still wear our old VRT Pins, the SCC are still wearing RNVR insignia, the uniform change was a Dawn special not a necessity. But if we must keep this RAFAC branding leave it alone with the current slides.
If you wanted to rationalise the badging I would take 2 steps, bin off the blue badges but make completing most of them part of First Class. Then with shooting switch the badge shape to be the weapon type and bin off the Competition Marksman, so you only get 3 badges per weapon type, Bronze for Trained Shot, Silver for Marksman & Gold for Advanced Marksman shaped like the weapon you achieved it on.
2 Likes
I can’t see anything wrong with the RAFAC pins myself. I’ve never seen any evidence of “bad stamping”.
I note some people saying they don’t like the “melted” look which the radiused edges give them… But personally I prefer that to the old ‘crisp’ ATC pins.
The whole RAFAC re-branding for adult uniform ranking looks like it was done on the quick and as cheap as possible, with Mr Magoo sans glasses on quality control. The radiused edges would possibly look better if it was for fewer letters, but as it is they almost merge into an amorphous blob. If there wasn’t the almighty (as it seemed) rush to make us part of the “RAF family” it could have looked better.
1 Like
plenty i wish to reply here having had a few days away
is uniform required? - yes we are a uniformed organisation.
the Scouts is a uniform organisation, and yes ok, it is just a shirt and neckerchief but if they can manage to get their kids and Adults in a limited uniform I can’t see why we should be considering us all adopting a uniform free approach - we may be a youth group, but we are not a “Youth Club” (note the capital letters)
Process into uniform - its too long, too complicated, too much
although i don’t know the process how to become a Scout Leader, i doubt it is even half has challenging as it is for the ATC - hell, i doubt the ACF make it as difficult as the ATC does.
despite what some walty CFAVs may believe, we [CFAV] are no different to Scout Leaders - I have always seen what I do as “on a par” with what I used to do with the Scouts. Yes, i accept it is more formal, and yes accept that as part of a govenment funded organisation there is a difference in approach, but I am still spending 1 or 2 evenings a week offering some form of training or new experience to the youth in my local community - some of which may be of use to them once they have moved on and left the organisation.
why does it take the time it does to be deemed suitable to wear a blue suit (be it SNCO or Officer).
since the change in the Officer process to OASC i can’t say i have seen an improved standard in Officers being appointed, but i have seen a more driven set of candidates. I say driven to put a positive spin, i could easily have said " desperate" or at least they appear that way. in the last two years notable candidates from our Wing who have visited OASC have become Sqn OCs, often within 6 months of appointment.
i accept there is a argument who was the driven one; the individual or the WSO who wants a OC position filling ASAP?
imo the process is putting people off, and for some a good thing, avoids those who would be bad officers even trying, but fear it is putting off those who’d walk it, either CIs or SNCOs.
as mentioned there is little, if anything that one flavour of CFAV can do, that other’s can’t. we all know of examples where OCs or Adjs or other roles have been filled by all three examples. the only time differences become more obvious is in specialist areas.
so i totally agree with why CIs question why bother trying to get into uniform. I know a Sqn Ldr when they were a “parent CI”, they did however get involved in Sqn life and picked up the Adj role, and was soon appointed as a Sgt (back when it was still new), they changed none of what they did and remained doing the Adj role, attended the same weekend commitments and supporting Wing events. they were encouraged into an officer role (pre-OASC) as there were already plenty of SNCOs on the unit and was seen as a good candidate, sure enough they walked the board, but it was well known they had no interest in being an OC, and yes you guessed it changed little of what they did, although perhaps happier to commit to events now well established in the organisation.
10 years later, due to the sudden departure of the OC they took up the “caretaker role” in the expectation someone who wanted the role would come in - but now one did. 5 years later they are now a WSO and Sqn Ldr and for the first time away from Sqn life and no longer following that commitment they had as a CI.
CFM
for what it is worth i recieved my CFM (or at least was Gazetted/it was dated as awarded) at the age of 30.
i spent ~9 months as a CI, having been appointed immediately on ageing out as a Cadet, and soon after moved not just out of the Wing, but region with work.
pre-Bader it took ~6 months to get my new Wing up to speed and board me, but i was appointed to uniform and i’ve never looked back
when i claimed for my CFM i indicated that the “break in service” was due to the change in location as a result of change in employment and so was accepted.
note you change have up to three years break in service where you are “marking time” anymore than that and the clock starts again at 0.
as my “break in service” was less than a year i didn’t lose much, and put my application in at 30 and 9 months.
for some reason my Wing was convinced to counting time as a O18 Cadet you had to have been a CWO, but this isn’t the case - i can only presume that those Cadets staying much past 18, and certainly past 20 would have been CWOs and so the most likely to stick around and become staff.
I doubt many will get this nowadays as the process from Cadet>CI>Uniform is at best 12 months and so time as a Cadet wouldn’t be counted simply based on the break in service.
i disagree with dropping the 12 hours commitment - certainly without understanding the justification of where the 12 hours comes from to begin with. I’d predict 98% of all CFAVs meet that, and the majority that don’t may well be the CIs who only attend once or twice a month to look after a Sports night or similar. as most are able to achieve 12 hours without issue, why reduce it?
pushing CIs into uniform
i don’t see the need. the MOD has civilians looking after the RAF (ground crews at AEFs and Voyager to name two obvious examples) so why not in the RAFAC too?
the trouble i think we have is, as volunteers, it is hard to force the hand of the CFAVs. In an ideal world every unit would be 5 Staff; at least two Officers, and two SNCOs - with the fifith being a third Officer or SNCO.
there would be defined roles for individuals based on their rank, and the responsibilities that go with it.
but this isn’t the real world, nor is it anything more than volunteering or a hobby. suggesting that we get rid of CIs altogether would change the culture of the RAFAC and perhaps as a positive would see us more inline with the ACF - but i feel in the short-term at least would make everyone who stays on life a lot harder as CIs are wiped out of our team(s).
although i can see where this is coming from, the budgets for VA is not in proportion to the number of uniformed CFAVs.
ie Wing, Region or HQAC don’t have a budget on VA and steer uniform recruits to a desired route based on the funds available. nor does the RAFAC recruit staff into uniformed roles. i suspect since the introduction of the Sgt and FS ranks there has been an increase in uniform staff and SNCO VA to pay out, but the decision wouldn’t have considered if the fund were available to accommodate the VA.
i confess i don’t know where the VA comes from, and although accept it isn’t a bottomless fund, but would be surprised if there was a sudden influx (say a 40% of all CIs) of uniform recruits HQAC would turn around and say, hold up, we don’t have the funds for this, can you stretch out their process until we can get more money out of the treasury?
it is interesting however that the survey did mention “29 Consider if CIs can be awarded volunteer allowance, or equivalent”
so even without uniform the option is at least voiced in the report as something to consider.
1 Like
for me, see my original reaction, but mainly
why is this??
simply down to low moral, a change is expectations? or perhaps change in what they want to achieve/what they want to do is now harder?
goes back to the 12hours/month - but i’d be curious to know what is the expectation of HQAC as a “acceptable” number of hours. they’d never put a cap on it knowing events and activities would grind to a halt as some CFAVs would simply indicate, sorry I have already done my 48 hours this month…
but if 12 is seen as an acceptable “minimum” what is seen as the “acceptable average”?
how would we, the CFAVs, like to see this happen - ie, as these permanent Staff would be learning from the volunteers how would we go about sharing our experience?
And you forgot that they will also splinter the pancreas as well.
2 Likes