In the real military I believe shooting comes under the auspice of NCOs, hence the dislike of CIs getting involved in shooting.
However go back 78-72 years and there was an awful lot of SNCO pilots, my granddad said, “it was so the toff’s sons as officers weren’t killed in droves as they were in the first war”. So the upper classes allowed ordinary people to suffer the losses. Once the war was over and the immediate danger gone, all of a sudden SNCOs weren’t regarded a good enough to fly RAF aircraft, although not the same in the AAC, where there are a IIRC a lot of NCO pilots.
So why keep flying restricted to commissioned officers? Protection of a myth, and nothing else. You will get guff like officers are trained to be managers and NCOs can’t do things like that. But going by some of the decisions made by these managers, I doubt their abilities above say NCOs.
I think that you’ve actually missed the point there - it’s the military part that is necessary RE the AEF, not the commissioned part (as you point out, AAC have non-commissioned pilots).
Hence why they need to keep the RAFVR(T) part - after all, they’d still be commissioned in the RAFAC if they changed over with us, but they wouldn’t be military.
The Air Navigation Order Article 145 is the issue- “Flight crew licence requirement – exception for members of HM Forces. A person may act as a member of the flight crew of an aircraft registered in the United Kingdom without being the holder of an appropriate licence if, in so doing, the person is acting in the course of his or her duty as a member of any of Her Majesty’s naval, military or air forces.” CFC doesnt count for this purpose.
Ps - Tutor and the CGS Robin are civil owned, civil registered but military operated
Yeh…Different regulations for every aircraft operated by the military. Different rules for who can command an aircraft dependant on service, Army, Navy or RAF.
I guess if the RAF wanted NCOs to fly certain types of aircraft, they’d change the rules/regs?
Teflon’s point regarding NCOs during war time…Well the circumstances were a bit desperate/different…?
Gentlemen, can anyone say if the 1990 Royal Warrant has been superseded? It specified that officers of the Air Training Corps should be officers of the Training Branch of HM Royal Air Force Volunteer Reserve, Doubtless that provision was to ensure a legal basis for issuing orders and compliance therewith.
Perhaps not, surely you have received an order from a Senior Officer, say whilst visiting an RAF station? If one is not integrated into the command structure how is one held accountable?
One presumes you don’t count the Queen’s Commission as an order then?
You are therefore carefully and diligently to discharge your voluntary duties as such in the rank of [insert rank] or in such other rank as We may from time to time hereafter be pleased to promote or appoint you to, and lead the officers, adult instructors and cadets placed under your authority and use your best endeavours to keep them in good order. And We do hereby direct them to respect your authority as their superior officer, and you to observe and follow such instructions as from time to time you shall receive from any superior officer, in pursuance of the Trust hereby reposed in you.
I did get close to issuing a direct face to face order recently… but the member of staff was due to move on (and now has) so it wasn’t worth the fight. Of course now I would lack the authority to insist.
Would it not be because when they were nominated when they were RAFVR(T) - and they are being honoured for service in that role? Bearing in mind state honours take many months/years to travel through the system…
Also, I would assume that there are RAFVR(T) honours that went in before 1 Dec 17 which will be reflected next year as well.
Also, does anyone genuinely believe that anyone outside of our sphere actually cares about any of this?
Yes you are right…
I would of fully expected the honours to be fully in place and those receiving them known about 6 weeks ago.
So everyone should of been RAF VR(T) not a mixture.
