Which rules? I can’t see a new version of Return to Face to Face training.
I have a tenner on it not being on key documents, but a new version passed through CoC
1 Like
Someone owes you a pay out, the return to F2F doc on sharepoint is still showing V6.
5 Likes
If I am taking Cadets somewhere, say flying or gliding. If I read that there was a chance some Cadets couldn’t fly, I wouldn’t go flying as I have done that before but many Cadets have never been near an aircraft before, let alone fly. Call me boring but many CI’s or staff took me to things when I was a Cadet and didn’t fly etc.
But I wasn’t there that day so I don’t know how hectic it was with the awesome planning I have read about and you don’t think of birdstrikes or mechanical problems arising beforehand 
1 Like
OK it is a youth organisation, but occasionally staff need to be given the chance to do something fun/interesting that they haven’t spent ages planning etc. As a group volunteer staff are overlooked, so when something like the chance to go flying in something a bit meaty comes up, they should at least be thought of.
In the old days many AEF and AEG sessions would get chances for staff, which I would suggest CIs did, if they wanted.
A bit OT but a lot of goodwill could be gained by Wings, Regions or HQAC organising “fun” things for staff that don’t require them doing anything other than turn up.
2 Likes
Advance email from our WExO
A bit of difference when AEF may be for 20 cadets and they all flew, then the staff get a chance, than potentially 500 cadets didn’t get a look in 
1 Like
But if it was a case of them going round in syndicated and needing a staff member there would those cadets really have got a flight if the staff hadn’t flown?
1 Like
Except all of the Rotary Wing experience flights I’ve known about in the last few years have required Staff to accompany cadets in the standard 1:10 ratio. So if the Staff didn’t fly none of the Cadets would’ve flown.
3 Likes
Yes. I have been IC puke bags before now
1 Like
My view is that in general, staff should be offered a flight, and that is also our formal policy for AEF (though I can’t now recall where it’s written, I was pleased to spot it while looking for something else). If we have no CFAVs, we have no cadets; and how are staff supposed to be able to teach the aviation syllabus if we don’t let them near an aircraft?
Of course, if staff don’t want to fly they don’t have to, and if they prefer to sacrifice their own flight for a cadet (especially if they have been many times before) then that would be admirable.
1 Like
its a JHC Flying Book Rule
this!
I have been “Staff escort” for a flight of RIAT Cadets in a C17 there were spaces for 12 Cadets , of course (as proven recently 
) we know the C17 could take more than 12 - but it requires some staff to accompany them.
Of the ~800 Cadets at RIAT was it fair that I and another Staff member flew (to escort the Cadets) when there were 100s who didn’t?
1 Like
I will never begrudge a staff member who gets to fly. I love flying, and was lucky to get 20 minutes last time I went to AEF after the cadets flew. It’s a nice reward for what is otherwise a pretty hard day out.
3 Likes
Just seen an email from wing which has made me think of something else that was likely over looked at this event.
How many cadets attending didn’t have photographic consent? Because of the introduction of the electronic 3822, all consents were revoked until they have the new form back. As an example, in our wing we have a big parade soon and currently about 130 of the 300 cadets attending don’t have photographic consent. So I’m assuming if it stays that high they won’t be able to use any photos for social media or otherwise?
5 Likes
Highlights the fallacy of binning the old consent en masse. Shows just how clueless the oiks at HQAC are.
I disagree. I think it was the best way to do it. I just wish there was a way for the SMS to flag up who has submitted the new forms!
2 Likes
It was a Corps/ region event… that sort of logical thinking wont have applied.
1 Like