And the criteria for “useless” would be:
Subjective
from tick-box exercise
Other options available
??
Yup, chin it.
Anything that takes our focus away from effective/not effective is doing us harm. Age, hair colour, favourite curry - it’s simply noise that we should tune out.
Secondly, it’s a hangover from a previous generation that’s now far less relevant than it was 40 years ago: in the 1980’s someone of 70 was old, now someone at 70 is still middle aged.
The criteria should be directly related to the uniformed CFAV role. It’s not easy to define, but age isn’t one of them
off topic so sorry for raising it but…
…i thought following an incident that the upper age limit for AEF pilots was set at 65?
All i can find via Google is a Wikipedia link indicating it is so but seem to recall something about an upper age limit as something had happened to an “old” pilot and the control measure going forward was to reduce the max age of pilots to 65…?
Maybe linked to ICAO / EASA limits of age 65? That said, EASA has certainly filed papers to consider increasing the age slightly to 68. Already actioned: - up to the day before 68th birthday:
In Japan, a country where the over-65s make up a quarter of the population, the government says it will limit flying time for older pilots to 80 percent of the normal maximum, meaning 80 hours per month or 216 hours over three months.
The co-pilot of a 65-plus aircraft commander must be aged 59 or younger, and those who opt to continue beyond their 65th birthday will have to undergo epilepsy tests.
Found it…
VGS pilots can continue past 65, they are restricted to flying/training with other pilots that are under 65 with a certificate of qualification on type.
what benefit is that to the Cadets?
Given what we fly are two seaters, and both seats are occupied what benefit is there for a 65+ pilot to be “hours building” at a VGS?
1 Like
That means an old but advanced trainer could train other trainers.
That’s all.
ahhh ok, i see
the P1 pilot can be 65+ if “training” a PUT providing the “student” is already signed off to fly the aircraft
I’m 69 in May, I’m a CI rather than uniformed purely because if age. I’m a OAA instructor with a local uni, Dartmoor moor guide and regular rock climber.
Just too old and decrepit to be in uniform.
1 Like
Slightly related FOI that went into the ACF.
As with ATC the issue isn’t whether you can be an active member, it’s what role you can perform in.
I’m a CI I’d prefer a uniformed role. Can do one, not the other, soley on the basis of age.
We can’t have you showing us youngsters up!
The Air Cadets seems to like the words effective and ineffective as they can be banded around with gay abandon and interpreted loosely to label people to suit the situation.
As for age there has to be cut off point so that as an individual can think you’ve done your bit, can hang up your tools, take life easier and give the youngsters a go, rather than just carry on. I think the Yanks need an upper age for people to stand for President!
If the Air Cadets was a true hobby age would not be a thing, but it’s not a true hobby and so age is a thing. I know a clutch of people well into their 80s and 90s who volunteer in all sorts of places, no questions asked. It is ironic that not so many years ago on this forum being between 50 and 60 and running a sqn, was frowned upon by many.
Have you considered writing a letter to which ever is your group captain?
Outline your argument. Use defence writing standards and request a board.
1 Like
This is actually pretty solid advice. The worst they can do is say no
3 Likes
As impressive as that list is…
…other than basic classroom work, these activities all take place in civilian dress…ie no uniform required.
I’m not trying to be awkward but if these are your passions and skill base and conducted in civilians throughout I’m not quite sure where your drive to wear uniform comes from…
Cynically the only benefit is being able to claim VA while taking part in these activities 
2 Likes
I think his point is that he’s fit enough to do those activities but it’s apparently too old and decrepit to wear the uniform. He didn’t say that was all he did. And should we kick all AT specialists out of uniform as the things they do are done mainly in civvies?
I would also say that VA is not the only benefit. What about being a full member of a uniformed organisation.
2 Likes
I’d agree with @Farmerdan…
Although I am also of the unpopular opinion of maybe binning off VA altogether. It is divisive (the opinion and VA!).
Different staff on different rates - some on higher rates doing less than those on lower rates… CI’s not eligible… Some activities but not others eligible… In my experience it causes chaos and irritation.
The majority of staff would likely do the majority of their activities still anyway.
Staff shouldn’t be out of pocket so lets look at other ways - maybe a higher annual uniform allowance, expand expenses to cover fuel and food/drink…
I’ve been the recipient of VA, and it is very nice to have the payment, but I think on the whole it likely causes more problems than it solves.