Should headdress be worn when traveling to squadron on public transport i.e. by train?
No.
When traveling by public transport, you should be wearing a civilian jacket for security purposes hence why no head dress.
That was the old rules which were relaxed some time ago. Local sensitivities and intelligence may advise otherwise, and during the Lee Rigby incident aftermath which saw a national temporary instruction. Otherwise you can wear overtly. Just take your hat off.
We are in fact ‘encouraged’ wear uniform when travelling to and from duty whenever possible. As are the RAF.
my old boss noted that all this ‘KAPE’ (KACPE?) stuff was great for people with protection teams and who live and work on the pad…
i remember soldiers being murdered at train stations and army cadets having their hands blown off, and tbh, i don’t fancy young Aakif who’se been knocking one out to Al-Qada videos knowing the where my wife and kids live.
the threat is not Ayman Al-Zawahiri sending a dozen of his best bad lads to hunt down the devils of the Air Cadets, its overly excited idiots who’ve been watching video’s seeing a bloke in uniform coming out of his house while they are walking down the street.
if you want to take that risk its up to you, personally i don’t fancy it - its also worth noting that, like the facebook picture of you covered in vomit in the student union, the knowledge of where you live can’t be wiped. HQAC might change their policies/advice as the nutters come back from Syria and Iraq, but for you its a bit late…
Times have changed. Terrorists are not planting car bombs on every street corner. Personally I can walk through town in uniform with no worries about a threat to my life, and I am happy for my cadets to do the same.
my old boss noted that all this ‘KAPE’ (KACPE?) stuff was great for people with protection teams and who live and work on the pad…
i remember soldiers being murdered at train stations and army cadets having their hands blown off, and tbh, i don’t fancy young Aakif who’se been knocking one out to Al-Qada videos knowing the where my wife and kids live.
the threat is not Ayman Al-Zawahiri sending a dozen of his best bad lads to hunt down the devils of the Air Cadets, its overly excited idiots who’ve been watching video’s seeing a bloke in uniform coming out of his house while they are walking down the street.
if you want to take that risk its up to you, personally i don’t fancy it - its also worth noting that, like the facebook picture of you covered in vomit in the student union, the knowledge of where you live can’t be wiped. HQAC might change their policies/advice as the nutters come back from Syria and Iraq, but for you its a bit late…[/quote]
The biggest problem I could see is local muppets nicking it for a game of catch and making equally muppet-like comments.
I stand with angus on this one. I spend all my time in the forces trying to have as little time as possible in uniform! I even go as far as placing my MTP daysack inside my civvie one. Apart from the risk, when its out of work hours, I am a civvie.
I dont even use those godawful black grips, a coloured Northface one makes me look like a normal commuter or oil worker or someone thats travelling.
It is still a very real risk, and some would argue increased. With british passports found on dead fighters in the middle east and this whole new sitution out there too. With people seen on videos from local areas.
I always see blokes with black grips or MTP daysacks walking with Girlfriends and you can ping them a mile away. You dont need to target the Personnel, just follow that young lady.
I mean jesus theres been cars with a load of suspicious blokes on driving round married patches.
I saw some doorknob the other day in MTP, and “Bomb Disposal” shoulder flashes. How bloody stupid do you get.
The situation in NI and the Middle east and indeed other places is still a very real risk.
Dont be an idiot. Draw as little attention to yourself as possible.
Stop press. You’d better ring Mi5. You seem to know more than they do. Next COBRA meeting is in a few days, free to attend and give your insight?
perhaps you ought to ring Lee Rigby’s parents, or the RSM at 33 Engineer Regiment, and ask them about the dangers of being obviously pinged?
perhaps you should listen to the news - outgoing head of CT at the Met says that returning Jihadi’s are the most serious threat to UK domestic security, and the Security Service say they devote more resources to returning Jihadi’s than any other group.
perhaps you should call the Home Secretary and let her know that her fears, expresed in her Defence and Security Lecture at the Mansion House just today, are groundless.
perhaps you should retire, with your ignorance, to the Mess Ante room to consider your future?
Perhaps you should take the time to learn some facts. Perhaps we should stop selling Help 4 Heros hoodies (Lee Rigby). Perhaps we should stop wearing uniform to work day. Perhaps we should stop exercising the freedom of borough’s or home coming parades. Perhaps everyone should change into civvies before leaving the wire. Perhaps we should change all cadet unit signs to “WVRS unit” and parade in floral skirts to avoid detection. Or, or, perhaps we should put the whole situation INTO CONTEXT.
Yes, people returning from certain places abroad are a threat. Perhaps. So is a diminishing budget. Threat analysis is done daily, and specific intelligence, which you don’t seem to grasp, is disseminated to those who a) need to know and b) those who should know.
Live in fear and they have won.
Add: If what you were saying was true, you would have thought that the regulars would have been told to stop wearing uniform in public. :ohmy:
In my branch of the Military its a terrible “crime” to be caught in uniform out and about when not on duty or needed and is dealt with inhouse, all in good humour but the principle stays the same.
If you draw attention to yourself then the wrong people are going to see. Its not living in fear, its common sense.
And yea threat analysis did Lee Rigby a fat load of good didnt it? Or that French soldier that caught it up a week after. (excuse my ignorance I dont know his Name)
i dont see the argument for the Lee Rigby incident.
he was walking out of the barracks in a H4H hoody…thus following the “anti-uniform when not on duty” brigade.
he could easily have been a civilian contractor…the attack was random, indiscriminate and not targeted to a sole individual…
the attackers wanted maximum publicity for what they did and so cannot see the “appeal” (for want of a better phrase) for following Sarah to her home 42 Manor Crescent, just because she is a gf/wife of a solder…there is no audience, no publicity.
don’t get me wrong i can see both sides of the argument but the good Plt Off has it correct…if we live in fear and terror of “what if” they have won the fight on terror…
Your arguement is invalid.
Yes he could have been a contractor. Or even a cadet…
The attack was planned if I remember correctly. But yes if it was a random attack or an opportunity target, whats to stop people “randomly” attacking cadets?
They see little timmy in his smart MTP looking all ally and proud. They see the MTP. And attack “randomly”.
Poor little timmy is left with no head.
This was part of my argument from Cadets remaining in DPM and having a big difference from Regular forces.
You are both wrong. PERSEC is a very real thing. And should be taken seriously. Its not about living in fear, its damage limitation.
Your argument is invalid. It was planned because they saw him a) near a barracks and b) wearing the hoodie. Nothing more nothing less. They hadn’t conducted surveillance. They hadn’t followed him very far. It was almost opportunist. Very sad really.
They had done dry runs before. They hadnt selected him as a target until the moment. But they had done some planning.
And if anything your points just strengthen my argument. Random attack. opportunity target…
It could have “randomly” been a cadet. Or cadet instructor. Or a civilian contractor. Its happened before and could happen again.
Its not “living in fear” its bloody smart.
How are you pair not seeing this?
I would like other people to weigh in, see what other peoples thoughts are aswell.
i’m not disagreeing with threat levels and being smart. there is reason to take threats and dangers seriously, i am not disagreeing with that fact
however
if as we have determined it was random, Lee was an opportunity target…how do we avoid the same happening again…ie how should we protect ourselves to be “bloody smart” in future? and by “we” i mean all those using military establishments, uniformed, civilan, regular, voluntary, Cadet forces or otherwise?
Lee was in a civilians…which you are suggesting
Lee was no more obvious a soldier, contractor or Cadet (thinking here the older ones who can/are mistaken for regulars) even more so when considering his hoody
what lessons can be learnt about those living in and around barracks to avoid being a victim of similar fate in future?
short of not ever walking in/out of the gate and only using a vehicle i cant see how any threat, anyone who wants to do harm to a pedestrian (which at the end of the day that is what Lee was at the time) could be avoided.
would it have mattered if it was a Cadet in a hoody? not to them, your own words, random and opportunity target.
with that danger level for a Cadet should Cadet forces continue to associate with the military?
i take your point on MTP and complete agree…would they have seen a 15 yr own lad in MTP and thought oh no, best not pick him it wouldnt be fair…and then see Lee a husband and father and think yeah he’ll do.
no, they would see the uniform and that would be enough, much like they saw a lad walking out of the barracks and attacked him
i have been at and know of Squadrons which use TA buildings/facilities there are also those who use RAF Stations…these people are at equal risk irrespective of their uniform shade or even if they are wearing a uniform right?
so how do we protect them?
the wearing of headress on the bus becomes an invalid argument…it doesnt matter if wearing a uniform or not there is nothing Lee could have done to have made him less of a target that day other than not leave when he did…and how much intelligence is there to determine within 10 minutes when is safe?
please note i will say it again, i am not disagreeing there is a need to take security serious and there are threats out there for real.
but in all reality based on the Rigby example how can anyone be safe and protect themselves given the random attack in or out of uniform if they chose to be associated with military establishments…?
i will argue that the time our Cadets are out on the public eye “unsupervised” (1830-2200) is not the opportune time for maximum publicity from an attack which was the aim of the Rigby example. and in all honesty what kudos is there for attacking kids leaving a Squadron hut…not exactly an “eye for an eye”…i’d agree we have to be more cautious than the Scouts as a similar youth organisation,given our MOD connections but as for a direct threat to the Cadet forces…limited particularly when compared to that of the regulars (although obviously higher for those that use TA barracks/RAF stations to parade in)