Virtual ROC post/bunker on YouTube

[wilf_san]

@tango_lima

The only people I know who are in favour seem to be the ones from squadrons which were previously VR (who would prefer we were all ‘Reservists’ rather than them having to be auggies).

Ah, but isn’t that all in keeping with this new-world ‘RAF Reserves’ branding?? And anyway, the RAuxAF (VR) squadrons are in the minority.

[quote=“tango_lima”]I wouldn’t object if they wanted us to put them back on working dress, if I’m honest.[/quote]Ah, but bear in mind that the vast majority of RAuxAF airmen+women+ WOs never wore 'A’s in any form of modern working dress (other than on the old No2 jackets, which were pulled in 1992). They just weren’t scaled for issue to ORs. And, of course, Auggie Officers stopped wearing 'A’s on No2/3 in about 2002 (03?), but prior to that, they always wore them on all orders of dress. There were some random exceptions to Aux ORs not wearing 'A’s in working dress, sometimes you’d see Auggie movers at Lyneham or occasional Aux Sgt medics wearing 'A’s in No2/3s.

But: originally (pre-'97), our VR(GD) Other Ranks comrades-in-arms wore their VRs on absolutely everything…you might say almost ATC LaSER Sgt style. And on No2/3, they seemed to wear every variety of woven VRs/brass VRs you could ever think of. They also tended to either wear their brass 'VR’s right through the middle the rank, rather than below it, ATC-style (or, if I think about it, Officer-style?)

[tango_lima]

[quote=“wilf_san” post=1200][quote=“tango_lima”]The only people I know who are in favour seem to be the ones from squadrons which were previously VR (who would prefer we were all ‘Reservists’ rather than them having to be auggies).

Ah, but isn’t that all in keeping with this new-world ‘RAF Reserves’ branding?? And anyway, the RAuxAF (VR) squadrons are in the minority.[/quote]

[color=#0000ff]True. The ‘Reservist’ branding is a funny one…everyone uses it, but it doesn’t seem to sit right with the majority. (If that makes any sense at all?)[/color]

[quote]

@tango_lima

I wouldn’t object if they wanted us to put them back on working dress, if I’m honest.[/quote]Ah, but bear in mind that the vast majority of RAuxAF airmen+women+ WOs never wore 'A’s in any form of modern working dress (other than on the old No2 jackets, which were pulled in 1992). They just weren’t scaled for issue to ORs. And, of course, Auggie Officers stopped wearing 'A’s on No2/3 in about 2002 (03?), but prior to that, they always wore them on all orders of dress. There were some random exceptions to Aux ORs not wearing 'A’s in working dress, sometimes you’d see Auggie movers at Lyneham or occasional Aux Sgt medics wearing 'A’s in No2/3s.

[color=#0000ff]Didnt know that. I had wondered what the form was for ORs in the past, since I’d only seen shiny 'A’s (‘VRT’ style) on photos of officers from the 90s.
[/color]

[quote]But: originally (pre-'97), our VR(GD) Other Ranks comrades-in-arms wore their VRs on absolutely everything…you might say almost ATC LaSER Sgt style. And on No2/3, they seemed to wear every variety of woven VRs/brass VRs you could ever think of. They also tended to either wear their brass 'VR’s right through the middle the rank, rather than below it, ATC-style (or, if I think about it, Officer-style?)
[/quote][/quote]

Had seen that on another 90s photo of (I think) one of the old VR int units.

Made me wonder why ATC sergeants have the ‘ATC’ at the bottom of the rank rather than in the middle like officers…

[40b]

[quote=“tango_lima” post=1309]
Had seen that on another 90s photo of (I think) one of the old VR int units.

Made me wonder why ATC sergeants have the ‘ATC’ at the bottom of the rank rather than in the middle like officers…[/quote]

Clarity I should think. That VR isn’t as clear because it is against the Stripes.

[tango_lima]

[quote=“40b” post=1313][quote=“tango_lima” post=1309]
Had seen that on another 90s photo of (I think) one of the old VR int units.

Made me wonder why ATC sergeants have the ‘ATC’ at the bottom of the rank rather than in the middle like officers…[/quote]

Clarity I should think. That VR isn’t as clear because it is against the Stripes.[/quote]

That would seem to make sense.

[tmmorris]

Interesting (re the main question) - I don’t actually know any CCF(RAF) SSIs but there must be some. I will ask around. I do know KCS Wimbledon has a RN one (‘commissioned’ - actually an appointed officer) - I met him on a SATT DCCT course recently. He’s ex regular RN and I wonder if a commission might be a simpler solution.

T

[wilf_san]

Hi TMM, good to see you on the new forum!

Presumably the existence of an enabling scale for uniform in the dress-regs isn’t actually proof-positive for the mythical RAF SSI?? Maybe I was just being optimistic.

Rarer than the yeti, and lesser-spotted than a jet biplane…

wilf_san

[duty_pongo]

[quote][wilf_san ] Rarer than the yeti, and lesser-spotted than a jet biplane…
[/quote]

[attachment=18]images.jpg[/attachment]

[attachment=19]LJ061027F86.jpg[/attachment]

[Hendon_Chipmunk]

That’s a Belphegor agricultural jet biplane on top, not sure the lower pic (biplane Sabre) is genuine though!

[tmmorris]

Not here very often I’m afraid, too busy!

T

[wilf_san]

@"Hendon Chipmunk" post=2162

That’s a Belphegor agricultural jet biplane on top, not sure the lower pic (biplane Sabre) is genuine though!

The scam Sabre’s good, but…

[quote=“tmmorris”]
Not here very often I’m afraid, too busy![/quote]

Even so, always welcome

wilf_san

[axl]

And thanks to the precident set by ATC LaSER Sgts

I’m a wee bit confused by this… What precedent?

Interesting thread.

[wilf_san]

[quote] And thanks to the precedent set by ATC LaSER Sgts

I’m a wee bit confused by this… What precedent?

Interesting thread.[/quote]

Two precedents: firstly, the first-ever ASgts/Sgts(ATC) in the Corps were trial-appointed in London and South East Region. And the second precedent was the wearing of AWO gilt lapel titles by SNCOs- an action which has become ratified by the dress regs. And thus aiding (perhaps more than just in principle) the wearing of what are normally CCF(Army) gilt titles by CCF(RAF) WO+SNCO School Staff Instructors.

wilf_san

[axl]

Ah right. Thanks for clearing that up.

On a side note I was surprised to learn that the CACWO doesn’t wear T&Ls… I thought given their position they would. You seem like the man that would be able to answer why they don’t? Given that they are the senior WO in the ACO they should surely wear the senior slide no?

[Batfink]

I’d like to think it’s because he understands the Dress Regulations - and, as custodian and guardian of the holy book, wouldn’t want to undermine them, and his position, by flouting & disregarding them… however, I standby to be corrected…

[incubus]

[quote=“axl” post=3012]On a side note I was surprised to learn that the CACWO doesn’t wear T&Ls… I thought given their position they would. [/quote]Permission to wear them is not (presently*) based on any position held by the WO in question. They can be worn only by those who were awarded them under the obsolete “time-served” basis (which is why many of the more crusty WOs have them) or by WOs who previously held WO1 (or equivalent) rank in the armed forces.

[size=2]*though he is working to make it so![/size]
[size=1]If I had my way we’d all be wearing the standard rank slides, perhaps with a colour version for certain positions. Christ, the RWOs have voted themselves swagger sticks already! Walts!![/size]

[axl]

I’m fully aware of the regs re T&Ls but I’m sure someone told me that the cacwo wore them, obviously not

[wilf_san]

There are a number of puzzles regarding the history of the rank/appointment of AWO/WO(ATC), some of which can be hard to spot, due to familiarity.

The first puzzle is why ADCC/ATC AWOs existed for 65 years without the perceived need for ASgts/Sgts(ATC). I haven’t yet been able to work-out why this historically was the case (unlike the situation throughout the respective histories of both the SCC and the ACF).

This may have had a bearing upon why, even now, there is a reluctance to authorise the wearing of the Royal Arms by appointed RWOs/CACWO, despite this approach being used by SCC and ACF, but I’ll admit that it’s not an explanation, just an observation regarding Corp-specific curiosity associated with that rank, and it’s emblems.

It’s maybe just a shoal of red herrings, but the origins of ATC-specific rules and reasons relating to the beginnings of AWOs appear to be deeply-hidden (not purposefully, just undocumented). For example, it’s probably a complete coincidence that about time the RAF were withdrawing the crown rank of WO2 was the general era within which the first ADCC/ATC AWOs started wearing the original wreathed eagles (this in the day when all ATC Cadets and AWOs were prohibited from wearing the Crown in any format- this despite the Royal Warrant). Even Cadet FSs were banned from wearing the Crown above their chevrons: instead it was a falcon in a circle until well into the 1950s. It’d be interesting to see if the SCC/ACF/OTC were similarly forbidden. Does anyone know for definite?

Anyway, international comparisons can maybe help shed some light on the ‘ATC AWOs only, no ASNCOs’ puzzle. Some evidence suggests that the other Commonwealth ATCs/ACOs appear (initially at least) to have had Officers only, but no other Adult Instructors. An interesting example of that exists to this day in Canada, which (although direct comparisons can’t be made with us) still only appoints volunteer Officers and CIs to serve with their respective Cadet organisation. There it’s not just a case of no (or belated) ASNCOs, they don’t have their own AWOs at all.

Then at the other end of the appointment option spectrum, the Australia Air Force Cadets (nee ATC) appoint adult uniformed staff in every conceivable rank from LAC through to Gp Capt.

‘The truth is out there’…in the X-Files of history. Facts unseen, still have been.

And if, being eventually uncovered and understood, maybe they’ll help better-shape the future.

wilf_san

[incubus]

[quote=“axl” post=3021]I’m fully aware of the regs re T&Ls but I’m sure someone told me that the cacwo wore them, obviously not :/[/quote]Until recently he did, because he was a different person. Steve Mansfield was entitled but Gary Tonks is not.

[merlin456]

[quote=“axl” post=3021]I’m fully aware of the regs re T&Ls but I’m sure someone told me that the cacwo wore them, obviously not :/[/quote]Until recently he did, because he was a different person. Steve Mansfield was entitled but Gary Tonks is not.

But my understanding from the WO Conference is that Gaz will be auth to wear T&L along with all RWO.

WWO are still being reviewed as the CASWO (Chief Air Staff WO) is going to monitor the ATC and it’s NCO’s and then make a decision about WWO being authorized to wear the T&L.

Incubus did you get that from the meeting?

[incubus]

[quote=“incubus” post=3030][quote=“axl” post=3021]I’m fully aware of the regs re T&Ls but I’m sure someone told me that the cacwo wore them, obviously not :/[/quote]Until recently he did, because he was a different person. Steve Mansfield was entitled but Gary Tonks is not.

But my understanding from the WO Conference is that Gaz will be auth to wear T&L along with all RWO.[/quote]
Yes: will be. Future.

[quote=“merlin456” post=3099]Incubus did you get that from the meeting?[/quote]Yup.