Responsible adult that I am, I switched of my charger when leaving the block yesterday AM.
This morning I’ve woken up to an uncharged phone.
D’oh
Got stung by the same wasp 4 times. Im now patchy
Gmg…need to fly to cologne in Nov for work. But the flight times are making it really awkward and might need to come home early from a staycation.
Unless any of you flyboys want to chauffer me from Southampton on a Tuesday from Southampton. I can provide percy pigs and a sense of humour.
Probably won’t help, but an 0900 train from St Pancras will get you to Köln HBF for 1415…
Possible to go a few times each day, 4 hours each way with a change in Brussels.
People who still say a rank after the last person when numbering off!
1 Like
I don’t mind the rank so much. It isn’t in AP 818, but makes sense as a general courtesy.
On the other hand, “cadets on parade,” triggers me to the extreme and is certainly not in the AP!
On rank… Inserting the post nominal “RAFAC” in all sorts of weird places.
It’s a post nominal. It goes after your name, not the rank.
It’s also not necessary if the context is clearly linking you to the RAFAC, eg you’ve got a RAFAC address, are communicating about a RAFAC activity, or you’re using RAFAC headed paper.
Unless that guidance has formally changed and I missed it.
Bizarrely, Debrett’s (unfortunately I can’t provide a link as it’s now behind a paywall) says that post-nominals such as RN/RM, regts or corps, RAF, VR, etc., come after the rank.
Whilst this makes sense in a traditional signature block:
A N OTHER
Capt RN
CO
HMS …
I’m not so sure about other contexts.
So, Fg Off RAFAC Bloggs, not Fg Off Bloggs RAFAC?
I think the practice before CFCs was for RAFVR(T) to be treated (quite rightly) as a post-nominal, whereas for WOs and SNCOs the format was Sgt (ATC) Bloggs.
When these were standardised to RAFAC for all, I suppose some WOs and SNCOs (and those commissioned after the change) continued the old practice: but with (RAFAC).
Not that RAFVR(T) was a ever correct, it should be been simply RAFVR since the (T) indicated which branch of the RAFVR you were in and that not in keeping with post-nominals elsewhere in the service. You don’t have Flt Lt D Bader RAF (Eng) as a signature.
Shouldn’t it be:
Fg Off Whiskey November
In t’RAFAC
Here’s the policy, I knew where it was as someone called me up on it and I thought the same, but alas the massive RAFAC logo on page 1 was insufficient.
So my signature block is now as follows on emails & documents:
Joe Bloggs
Group Captain RAFAC
Senior Volunteer Advisor
1 Like
Now that has a nice ring to it… 
2 Likes
But that would be wrong according to what you’ve quoted, and appears to support my original position.
It’s not “gp capt RAFAC” any more than it’d be “gp capt RAuxAF” or “gp capt RAF”
If you were mandating the use of the post nominal, it’d then be (within the context you placed it):
Joe Bloggs RAFAC
Group Captain
Or with a bit more going on:
Joe Bloggs OBE RAFAC
Group Captain
Yes, but Joe Bloggs is only RAFAC with a rank…
It’s the rank that would make you assume RAF and therefore needs to be marked as not.
Havent we discussed this a milllllion times
2 Likes
And yet still it isn’t clear 
The navy do put “Lt (RN) Bloggs” and “Capt (RN) Bloggs”, but they do that because the misunderstanding that can result in a tri-service environment can range from minor to major…
Similar to how I, in an international environment, frequently put “Flt Lt (OF2) Bloggs”
It’s probably wrong but it is so muddled that I now just put my name on email and leave it at that.
The rest of the info is in the email address/directory, although my rank is wrong there in any case (and not even consistently wrong, I think I have an email with every Jnr Off rank!)
1 Like