Air Training Corps [Archive]

RayDarr

10th Feb 2006, 11:56

As an ex cadet, a father of cadets, a ex CI. an ACLO and supporter of several ATC Sqns according to where I was posted at the time, I think I know something about this. Indeed, Mrs Darr is ex VRT, ex CI and current Civ Committee member of an ATC Sqn.
My view is it is a great organisation for kids, and contains a large number of committed adults doing their best. It is however spoiled by the internal politics and the small number of idiots who like to ponce about in uniform pretending to be officers in the RAF. Now as they hold a VR(T) commission, they actually are , but with only a week reading and writing course, they know the square root of bugger all about the real service. I have great respect for the RAF people who turn up at their local Sqn to help out. They are in the minority however, and people on the inside with real RAF experience ane few and far between. In fact people with real RAF experience are often considered a threat, and I have observed several over the years,being slowly frozen out because the "In Crowd" didn't want someone in their private club knowing the real way of doing things. I have also seen very successful Sqns decimated, because of jealousy by others on "the wing staff" Some of the tricks would make you cry.
While I would wish the ATC to continue and prosper, I think it is about time the RAFVR(T) was abolished, and the adult staff were given an alternative identity. The committed leaders would remain, but the posers, having lost the ability to walk round our stations and make our airmen salute them, would soon drift away.The ATC would become a better run organisation for that.
Now, I expect I have started WW3 with the above. I hope not, as I have a lot to thank the ATC for, both on my own account, and for my children, all ex cadets. I honestly think however that it needs a serious shake up to get rid of those who do it no good and who seem to be in it for their own benefit rather than for the kids.

mgdaviso

10th Feb 2006, 12:44

I'll stick my head above the parapet.

As a current RAF VR(T) Officer, commanding a squadron of 50 odd cadets, I'm confident that I'm not in the minority of idiots who tar the name of the VR(T) with office politics, and empire building.

I do have to ask RayDarr - with what would you replace it?

I also have to add that I have the utmost respect for our "service helpers" but unfortunatly in this day and age, they cannot be relied on, not because they are unreliable per se; but they are down for a couple of months all keen and enthusiastic, and then they ahve to go do guard duty for a week, they go off to sandy places, and they have night shifts, or training to do. Therefore I can't rely on them to be available consistently. Not their fault - you guys are overstretched as it is. It's just the way it is for me (and I have an East midlands, harrier base practically on my doorstep.

We have cr@p officers, because of two things

1) there is a nationwide shortage of officers: ergo: We'll take anyone who is prepared to put on the blue suit.
2) The selection process is not rigorous enough, and the follow up leadership and management training and support is naff to say the least.

and point 3 - you'll always get some tw@t who gets through the system because they know how to jump through all the right hoops.

also, where the ACO used to be staffed greatly by ex-regular personnel no-one leaving the service these days wants anything but bugger all to do with us. They cannot get out of the parent organisation and away from it fast enough - do you think they really want to help us? nope.

hey-ho.:sad:

batfink2

10th Feb 2006, 14:37

All good points, well made!

I must 'fess up to being a CI in the ATC. Flame me all you like - I have broad shoulders!

Edit: Bejesus, was that really my first post - guess I'm officially a 9 month troller then!

FCWhippingBoy

10th Feb 2006, 16:00

probably, but no-one will admit it, lest they attract incoming.

Well I'm not afraid to admit that I'm an ex-ATC Cdt of 7 years, ex-CI of 3 years, and now a serving Airman who has been known to help the ATC out.

Some of the best times I had as a teenager were with the ATC, especially the chance to sun myself for 2 weeks in Cyprus! (Hmm, that's more than the RAF have given me! <packs his cold weather gear for his impending Falklands Det!> :}

hobbit1983

10th Feb 2006, 22:43

Ex-cadet and Ex-VRT officer here.

The ATC was fantastic when I was a teenager - I benefitted hugely from many top-notch courses, flying/gliding courses etc which influenced my subsequent career choice (civvi pilot U/T at the moment) but as an adult member of staff I found a number of my colleagues (by NO means all - I had the pleasure to work with and know a number of top men and women) were soley interested in themselves, often to the detriment of the cadets.

Also the Wing Staff often (and again I must stress that the bad apples often were far more visible than the good eggs) were living in a world of their own - which restricted some activites course etc available to cadets.

However, I believe that the Air Training Corps is a very worthwhile organisation that does a huge amount of good work with young people - and it should continue to do so.

Agree with RayDarrs comment on the identity change for the VRT - the status of the officers who, to gain a Queens Commission (with all that goes with it) have to do what they do, should be altered.

Head now below parapet....!

diginagain

11th Feb 2006, 00:38

........the Air Training Corps is a very worthwhile organisation that does a huge amount of good work with young people - and it should continue to do so.

Couldn't agree more, hence I've recently joined my local Squadron as a CI.

The staff, both uniformed and civilian do their utmost to ensure that the cadets get as much exposure to Service life as is possible, but unless more serving or former-serving personnel become involved, constraints on availability notwithstanding, there is the danger that the ATC many of us enjoyed in the past will become nothing more than a youth club, something neither the cadets nor staff would wish.

As for the debate on VR(T) status, surely this is a matter of 'gentle' education of miscreants? Compared to the days when I was a cadet, it would appear that VR(T) Officers who have served are in the minority. To expect them to understand the ethos of Service life without a great deal of exposure is a little far-fetched. There is insufficient time on the Induction Course to give more than a basic understanding of expectations.

Vidal

11th Feb 2006, 09:57

Spot on RayDarr,

As an ex-cadet of 9 years cadet service I wholeheartedly agree with your comments. Indeed I saw quite a few of the 'posers' while a cadet and in my 9 years commissioned service in the mob I've seen them continue to swank around the Mess. Don't get me wrong - there are some fine individuals out there who are in it for the benefit of the kids but their visibility is reduced by the rage-fuelling behaviour of the minority. I wouldn't be where I am now without the Air Cadet Organization and I have helped whenever possible as ACLO, but I still don't think I have fully paid up my debt to the organization.

If someone can introduce some form of 'Adult Leader' type of status rather than our rank structure it would certainly help to wheedle out the undesirables (often those who have been unsuccessful at joining at OASC). That said, consideration must be given to the fact that this may result in less visibility of the RAF for the kids (oops - I forgot the ACO is not there for recruitment).

Wizzard

11th Feb 2006, 11:07

I learnt a great deal in the ATC, especially when a unit of the Girls Nautical Taining Corps started using the drill hall next door. There can't be many PPruners who lost their virginity on an RAF greatcoat:O

FCWhippingBoy

11th Feb 2006, 15:41

PAMCC - Sadly, as some have already said in this thread, if your not part of the "in-crowd" your pushed out by the poser wannabes!

hobbit1983

11th Feb 2006, 16:13

..As for the debate on VR(T) status, surely this is a matter of 'gentle' education of miscreants?

I agree in principle - but the problem is, IMHO, that a lot of those that should be 'educated' are in positions where they cannot be. A lot of people working at the coalface, in squadrons, have become at best annoyed by posers/wannabes/etc working higher up.

Having said that though, I have encountered the exact opposite, where the people working above squadron level have been fantastic.

diginagain

11th Feb 2006, 17:15

There can't be many PPruners who lost their virginity on an RAF greatcoat:O

Er, well, now you come to mention it....:O

Now who thought it would be a good idea to share parade nights with the Girls Venture Corps (Air Wing)?

RayDarr

12th Feb 2006, 08:56

If the RAFVR(T) were to go, it could be replaced by a similar system used by the ADDC (predecessor of the ATC for the uninitiated) The adult staff in those days wore RAF style uniforms, but rank braid was (I think) black They were able to operate alongside the RAF, but were not commissioned. The previously mentioned GVC works in much the same way. Rank titles would need changing and an ATC officers cap badge would need designing, but this is easy stuff. The effect on the kids would be nil. ATC still doing what it always has, in much the same way as before. Effect on posers would be significant, as they no longer have a Commission Scroll to frame above the fire place, and are no longer able to strut around RAF bases claiming salutes from the troops. Makes accommodation at camp easier as the adult staff could be placed more easily in Sgts Mess accommodation, that is if there is any to spare. I expect the politics will still go on, but the guys at the sharp end will have to sort that out.

As for RAF greatcoats.. a fine piece of kit but likely to bring blushes to the cheeks of Mrs Darr, an ex GVC cadet, and my frau for well over 30 years .

cazatou

12th Feb 2006, 11:27

RayDarr

I think you will find it was ADCC (Air Defence Cadet Corps).

L-H

12th Feb 2006, 11:35

Ex cadet and ex Regular RAF SNCO, did the 22 year thing and am now a newly commissioned virtual reality Plt Off, who feels somewhat a fraud.

Ex regulars are indeed a minority, and if it wasn't for my enthusiasm for the RAF and ATC I wouldn't have bothered either because of the muppetry holding VR(T) rank. However it's the troops that make it worthwhile and it would not be untrue to say that for the first time in a long while I have experienced real satisfaction since committing to the ACO, something that eluded me for the best part of my last 10 or so years in the RAF.

The adult staff on my sqn are all excellent and the wing staff all appear fully committed and supportive, clearly I have encountered some real chimps but you quickly learn to tune them out and they do thin out rapidly when squared up to. When I was doing my 'Pre-Uniform Course' we had a knobber of an ex Adult Warrant Officer(AWO) that was coming back in to the ACO who had the gaul to declare that the ATC AWO course was harder than anything a regular Warrant Officer would experience. Bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzt!!

To date I haven't come across any of the 'Old Boy' mentality, although I
heard the old chestnut that RAF experience doesn't count in the ACO!:rolleyes:

As for RayDarr's suggestions, I've pondered this myself many times. For example my next door neighbour is a dedicated adult volunteer with the scouts. He doesn't get anywhere near the kind of benefits I am entitled to and furthemore doesn't want them, he does his thing because he really wants to. I wonder how many members of the ACO would too in similar circumstances?

I've just given my lovely greatcoat away to my brother in laws girly - brass buttons too!:{ However she is a classically trained professional dancer :E

POBJOY

13th Feb 2006, 00:12

I WAS LUCKY TO BE IN THE ATC BEFORE THE WOOLY PULLIES CAME IN.
WENT FROM UNDER AGE CADET TO GLIDING INSTRUCTOR (AS DID MANY OTHERS) AND HAD A GREAT TIME.THE POINT IS THAT THE ORGANISATION GAVE (AND STILL DOES) AN OPPORTUNITY TO GET INVOLVED IN ALL SORTS OF ACTIVITIES ON TOP OF THE FLYING, AND IT HAS PROVED ITS WORTH TO THE COMMUNITY OVER THE YEARS.I WINCE A LITTLE WHEN I SEE THE STANDARD OF TODAYS MARCHING, BUT ITS A SMALL PRICE TO PAY.IT IS A DIFFICULT TIME FOR YOUTH ORGANISATIONS TO GET ADULT HELPERS, AND YET THE CORPS FLYS ON INTO THE FUTURE!! GOOD LUCK.

FCWhippingBoy

13th Feb 2006, 08:14

Here here Pobjoy & welcome to PPRuNe!

Wyler

13th Feb 2006, 10:39

OK OK, no need to shout.

lumpyjumper

13th Feb 2006, 12:17

I am an RAFVR(T) but in my youth I did 30 weeks IOT ( 18 weeks and then 12 more I was having SO much fun!!!) I would agree that there are some VR(T) who are a complete disgrace but also there are some who have just never been taught.....it is difficult to teach in 1 hour the CESR lessons I learnt over many weeks.
I try and ensure that any candidate I put forward for a commission will uphold the traditions and behaviour which I hold very dear...
There are some of us out here who are trying hard not to let the side down. :(

POBJOY

13th Feb 2006, 12:29

OK OK, no need to shout.

I THOUGHT YOUR EYES MIGHT BE A BIT TIRED !!

mgdaviso

13th Feb 2006, 12:32

Ex cadet and ex Regular RAF SNCO, did the 22 year thing and am now a newly commissioned virtual reality Plt Off, who feels somewhat a fraud.
Why do you feel like a fraud?

Vulpecula

13th Feb 2006, 18:58

Okay, must admit I am a civvy through and through who was recommended by my CO to be a VRT Officer. Have bags of experience in a technical trade in civvy street and thought what the hell, give it a go. After reading RayDarr’s and other comments which I believe to be valuable, I find I am in a dilemma! Should I simply remain a C.I. or go for it?

Simple fact: When attending courses on RAF Stations in the past, I have been treated VERY courteously. Mess bill’s VERY cheap, and the best part was the conversations in the bar. Okay the price of the beer was excellent as well!!!

What I don’t want to do is trade this for a position where I would be considered third rate, and at best an annoyance to everyone from AC and above. Your thought and comments welcome…:bored:

L-H

13th Feb 2006, 19:01

FCWhippingBoy

13th Feb 2006, 20:28

Vulpecula,

It all depends on what you want to get out of it! As a CI, you have very little input on the running of the organisation, but on the plus side, you can devote more time to the kids, without the hassle of rank politics!

Also, as we used to joke, CI was the highest rank in the ATC - in theory noone can tell you what to do - they can ask you politely, but not tell you :}

I was happy to remain a CI, purely so I didn't have to get involved in the politics that seemed to come with a uniform in the wing I belonged to, but then, I had an excellent CO on the Sqn, who valued his CIs more than, it seamed, Wing did. He let us have a great deal of input at Sqn level, which was fine by me!

Perhaps someone who has taken the plunge from CI to VRT/AWO would care to give their perspective on the matter - I feal my experience is rather biased toward staying a civvi!

Edit - forgot to mention VRT Officers on RAF Camps. As a serving airman now, I have only come across VRT officers once since joining the mob, and had no problem with them at all, perhaps because I knew who/what they were. However, I do feel that a lot of the negativity within the serving ranks is due to lack of knowing who/what they really do! That and possibly the un-coolness of saying cadets IS a worthwhile organisation and not just a bunch of pesky kids that turn up once a year at summer and nick your scoff in the airman's mess!

mgdaviso

14th Feb 2006, 08:12

mgdaviso,
Dunno really, probably because I know what the selection and training process is to gain a regular commission that I feel that I've sneaked in through the back door. I'm sure that as I settle in it will pass. :ok:

I hear what you're saying. Whilst the VR(T) Commission is "real" per se, I have never tried to believe that I was a regular serving Officer, and have never had any problems whilst on RAF Stations during summer camps. Airmen (or should that be airpeople these days?) have always saluted where necessary, and they have always had a proper salute in return. I've never demanded anything, always requested, and I've found that people despite being busy with their jobs, have always found time to help and show cadets around aircraft, etc.

I guess it depends on your attitude - I know of a few VR(T)'s who like to think that they are on a par with serving Officers, but don't even come close, but these are in the minority.

I'm sure you'll settle in well - ex-regular personnel are needed amongst our ranks to help keep things focused on what our parent service actually do, and they bring gallons of good stuff to the organisation.

Vulpecula;

Do what you feel is best for you. Do not be pressurised into going for a VR(T) commission because your CO "needs you" in uniform.

The two jobs are very different.

My advice:

pop on over to http://www.aircadetcentral.net/forums where you'll find loads of information, and be able to ask any questions you like.

HTH

*Zwitter*

14th Feb 2006, 18:48

Crowborough anyone? ;)

I was in the ATC (joined in 1986) - left twice!

Mine (358) was one of those squadrons where all we did was bloody drill!

We had a right stern character for a warrant officer too - a New Zealander called Bob Taylor - fearsome bloke, but we all respected him.

Mind you - in 1990 we went to Oshkosh to marshall aircraft - stood in the middle of an airfield with a massive thuinderstorm rolling in - I was at 6' 3" t. the tallest thing for miles! We were flown from Mildenhall to Dover, Delaware in a C5! That was cool!

Chipmunks and gliding - happy days (if you ignore the drill) :)

Should be compulsory for the C-H-A-Vs to join (ACF for the real knuclkeheads!) - might give them discipline sadly lacking in the home!

brokenlink

14th Feb 2006, 18:56

All good stuff and valid opinions on here guys (and gals) but please do not forget what the "V" stand for in VR(T).
Having been commisioned for close on 16 years (statement of fact not a boast) I would agree with Raydarr that you do get the occasional numpty through the system. However having spent an equal number of years as a Civil Servant with the MoD I can catagorically state that both the full timers in the services nor the civil servants are immune from that malise nor for that matter is the outside world. The advantage that the RAF/RN & Army has is that it has a system called Initial Training covering several months in place to weed out the majority of the c*&p. The VR(T) has no such system only having 1 week IOT courses to turn a civilian into an officer. Any rough edges are then left to the individual squadrons/wings to be knocked off. You get a further 1 weeks Senior Officer training on or about the time you may take over a squadron and that is the sum of your officer training! About time some refresher course were mandated every couple of years to assist with the developement of OLQ's.
As to getting rid of the RAFVR(T), Raydarr, was your good lady proud to wear her uniform and hold the Queens Commision?
I am certainly proud to wear mine or is that a crime in your eyes sir?
If you dispense with the VR(T) you will lose a great deal of staff I fear, not because they wish to "ponce around" in messes as you put it but because they are proud to wear that uniform, be part of the RAF and to pass that pride and self respect onto the cadets.
The cadets themselves appreciate the link with the RAF and a number (whatever it is) do go on to join both the air force as well as the other services having recieved a positive impression of service life from (amongst others) the adult staff on the squadron.
If you wanted to ensure a better class of VR(T) officer I would strongly suggest a better and longer training regime possibly run over a series of weekends to avoid clashing with the day job. In addition were a condition of service that individuals took on some form of reserve liability then I suspect that some of the potential posers that have been alluded to would think again.
Happy of course to take the flack on this, but if you can't take a joke you should not have joined!
(Climbs down off soapbox)

VigilantPilot

14th Feb 2006, 20:21

Vulpecula

If you are desperate to wear the uniform, drink in the OM and collect salutes, then go for the commission. As a new Plt Off, you'll be expected to get involved more in the management side during parade nights (ie logging post :hmm: ). Also, by becoming VR(T), chances are you will have to move Sqn.

If you want to stay involved in actually teaching cadets, then stay a CI.

G-BURR

14th Feb 2006, 21:43

As an ex-cadet, I have to agree that the organisation can be ruined by the arrogance of some officers. I had the misfortune to join a Sqn run by such an officer, who it appeared was more concerned about his personal ambition of 'conquering' a mountain in every continent than anything aviation based. It is true too what is said about the 'in crowds'. During my time I found this generally to be staff members who clustered around the VR(T) officer.

chevvron

15th Feb 2006, 10:44

I was a member for some 35 years when I was 'retired' by my Wg Cdr declining to sign my tour extension. I'd been Staff cadet at a VGS, the CI, then commisioned, then Squadron Commander, finishing as a WGLO covering two VGS and 22 squadrons. My wingco then decided I wasn't putting in my 8 hours/month (it was mostly done at weekends and I didn't attend the sqdn - was no longer OC).
Problem was I'd put my wingco's back up by participating in a project to put more 'Air' in Air Training Corps by offering microlight AEF; yes HQAC knew all about it and kept stats. but my wingco didn't agree with it and took the first opportunity to give me the heave, well before I was 55!

NTS

15th Feb 2006, 14:18

Ex Cdt Ex VRT (inc Sqn Boss) Ex ACLO (posted)
Been their and spent alot of time doing and then organising air cadet activities. First things first, I could never go back to it as it is very different to the real air force (don't start shouting all you VR(T) peeps out there.). The uniform is where the similarity ends. The majority of VR(T) officers have no real idea how the air force runs BUT the majority of regular officers have no idea what goes into the running of an ATC sqn day to day. I still take my hat off to those that are there for the cadets. There are those few idiots that bring the name down but thats upto the VR(T) officers to self police. I have had to take VR(T) to one side in the bar when I was ACLO and tell them to wind their neck in but then again I've had to do that with mates as well. My latest adventure is helping to run an AEF (stictched) and some of the officers are very dis-organised (bring cadets without logbooks signed etc) but its not their primary job.
Starting to get carried away. For those who are doing a good job (and you know who you are) well done.
Finally, I had 9 of my cadets join the air force in the last year I was VR(T). The last one I saw was a RAFP Cpl out in Pristina doing the arrivals. He would never have joined had it not been for the staff on that ATC Sqn at the time giving him the help and advice he needed then. (If he ever does me for speeding on a station I'll remind him what he used to be like!)

batfink2

15th Feb 2006, 16:30

My advice:
pop on over to http://www.aircadetcentral.net/forums where you'll find loads of information, and be able to ask any questions you like.
Spot on advice their ;)

Squirrel 41

15th Feb 2006, 17:10

Evening everyone...

I was a cadet and I'm now in RAuxAF and would be happy to teach some aircraft recognition for the local Sqn, if they would find this useful. Could someone PM me with a number for the OC of the Barnes or Richmond Sqns? I found the air cadet website pretty unhelpful.

Thanks

S41

Vulpecula

15th Feb 2006, 18:07

Peeps,

Many thanks to you all for your thoughts and comments; I will certainly take them ALL on-board as I have decided to accept. I am sure further comments will be made on this, and I shall keep a keen eye on the future developments on this discussion line.

My thought’s on this matter are; I wouldn’t dream of collecting salutes, annoying regular forces or even “uniform posing”, and I can see very clearly that the VRT is far removed from the regular forces. In RayDarr’s comment regarding a different uniform and not holding a Queen’s commission I agree. I would also agree that a figurehead in a squadron is also needed to keep discipline and order. I would only consider leaving if the changes enforced little or no Royal Air Force involvement or it becomes a youth club.

Oh, and I am only desperate to win a lot of money, retire to somewhere warm, and drink iced beer with Mrs Vulpecula…

Just for the record, I again was a cadet of over five years and have a lot to thank the forces for. The enthusiasm for the Royal Air Force is as strong then as it is now.

chevvron

16th Feb 2006, 06:15

Picture this. RAFGSA club at an RAF airfield. ATC open up for an operational movement, and instruct the GSA to suspend operations temporarily. Member of GSA goes to ATC and sees Fg/Off as duty controller, and says 'my rank is Wg Cdr and I want to keep the gliders flying longer'. In fact he's RAFVR(T), which means he's substantive Fg/Off, which duty controller is well aware of.
This actually happened, and it's the sort of thing gets VR(T) a bad name.

background

16th Feb 2006, 07:03

Erm, you don't get VRT officers in the GSA!

boswell bear

16th Feb 2006, 07:08

Erm, you don't get VRT officers in the GSA!

Yes you do

chevvron

16th Feb 2006, 08:04

Nothing to stop a VR(T) officer joining the GSA. This guy was OC of an ATC wing.

Tiger_mate

16th Feb 2006, 09:44

It wouldnt have mattered had the local controller been a Sgt, if he says the airfield is shut then shut it is. Less his supervisor wants to assume the role.

It is silly things like this that stick forever, whereas the "good" is easily forgotten. .........and the VR(T) OC who boasts how he is a real officer (Queens commision) compared to Lord Lt Commisions in the ACF has no idea how silly he is making himself. You know who you are!

If you didnt go through OASC, and graduate from IOT you can pretend all you like, you will never be the real thing. Being a VR(T) Officer has an analogy with the SAS, the real thing has no need to boast, and therefore wont!

aluminium persuader

16th Feb 2006, 09:53

Hi all.

Some very interesting stuff here. Here's my ha'pp'orth;

First and foremost, the ATC is for the kids, not the staff. It is meant to foster a spirit of adventure (Venture Adventure?) and air-mindedness in them, not to mention responsibility & citizenship. To get all this through to the cadets is incredibly hard work, week-in, week-out, year-in year-out, unpaid and unthanked. The job is much harder than anything anyone reading this does, believe me! The uniformed staff, especially the officers, deserve a lot of respect for the work they do. Of course there are some numpties and some to whom the uniform give delusions of grandeur but these are a minority. When you meet them give them help, not ridicule. Change their attitude, don't berate it. Most RAF servicemen & women are ex-cadets and whether or not they realise it owe a lot to these volunteers.

I would also like to see the demise of the VR(T) branch, but only because it emphasises a gulf. Rather, I would like to see air cadet officers badged as RauxAF and given more training, not less. A basic fitness level would be a start, and perhaps educational minima, but most importantly some training with regulars. Most civvy occupations have some equivalency in the forces - why not offer some "work experience"? Why not get ATC sqn adj's to spend time with regular sqn adj's, OCs with OCs? It would work the other way too - couldn't those personnel on careers office postings also be seconded to an ATC sqn? When I was an ATC sqn boss I had no adj and nearly sank under the paperwork. I would have given anything to have an admin/sec type to help me. If you're a regular reading this, I urge you to find an ATC sqn & offer some help. I know with postings & OOA commitments it can be hard, but please do what you can. One caveat, though; remember that there are laws applying to the care of children which must be borne in mind, & try not to let your enthusiasm run away with you!

For what it's worth; I was (very briefly) a cadet, only joining at 18. Then a CI, VR(T) & eventual sqn CO. I "retired" a few years ago because my mife & I both work shifts & the arrival of small children left no spare time at all. Albeit civvy-licensed, I am an air trafficker on a military base working to RAF rules & regs. I have even been seen once or twice controlling in uniform with VR(T) tabs. That made the aircrew raise an eyebrow or two!!

ap.

incubus

16th Feb 2006, 15:05

Another one here to 'fess up and show my true colours as a member of the ATC, but not VR(T) :cool: - more on that later.

I totally agree that more training should be available for Air Cadet staff but I'd put forward that it needs to be self-provisioned. Realistically, there is very little to gain from the work experience you mention as the similarities between the role of a CO on a cadet squadron and a CO at an RAF unit can be pretty marginal (you will be aware of this, AP; others may not.) The ACO is not merely a little air force but it is a very different beast. In fact, some of the trouble we see is because ex-shineys are appointed to high level posts with little or no understanding of what it is to be a volunteer and to help run a squadron full of actual cadets. Whilst fitness should be encouraged (as in any company), we aren't required to be combat ready and having a basic fitness requirement beyond breathing and mobile is an unnecessary limitation ;)

Having the VR(T)s there helps to keep the link between the ACO and the parent service and I think is a valuable thing. Unfortunately, there are nobbers who are in it for the ego (same as the RAF ;) ) but there are many more good souls and I echo the sentiment that the focus needs to be on the cadets.
That link would still be there as oggies (and it would be easier to integrate my own branch...) but are there not other complexities that go with being a member of the RAuxAF? If we can just beat the offenders with a stick until we readjust their attitude, we would achieve the same with less hassle.

My branch? I am an Adult Warrant Officer (part of the the Adult SNCO side of the ACO which now includes ASgts and AFSs) - I'm curious to know if they cause confusion or hassle to the regulars or if we are on the whole a little more well behaved. We aren't VR(T) or auiliary - we are actually in the ATC in the same way as the cadets themselves are - effectively civilians in RAF uniform.

hobbit1983

16th Feb 2006, 15:16

Rather, I would like to see air cadet officers badged as RauxAF and given more training, not less. A basic fitness level would be a start, and perhaps educational minima, but most importantly some training with regulars. Most civvy occupations have some equivalency in the forces - why not offer some "work experience"? Why not get ATC sqn adj's to spend time with regular sqn adj's, OCs with OCs? It would work the other way too - couldn't those personnel on careers office postings also be seconded to an ATC sqn?

Bearing in mind that a lot of VR(T) officers can struggle to get enough time off work to do annual camps anyway - they have to get time off from work in the first place, leaving less for the family, and an employer's attitude can vary and any extra (almost certainly) unpaid leave would be at their whim.

It would be a very good idea! but IMHO would not work due to VRTs not being able to commit to it. Plus, would they have a call-up commitment? Whether that would be a good thing or not, it would probably put a lot of people off.

batfink2

17th Feb 2006, 15:19

Rather, I would like to see air cadet officers badged as RauxAF and given more training, not less.
Very true! But, as hobit says, the caveat to release them from call-up duties! With regards to training - absolutely! It's well needed - but amongst all staff - not just VRTs. At present I'm a CI doing the job of Training Officer, but also part-time Squadron Adj too. Do I get training in this? Not until I put on a Blue suit - but right now, I'm simply not ready for it - yet I'll continue to fulfil these executive officer roles because of the Corps being so short staffed!!

It's true that many VRTs & SNCOs struggle to get time off to do activities as it is. The Corps is driven by volunteers who normally have to give up their own holiday to do these events. For VRT's & SNCOs they can claim pay - but employers rarely support leave for "youth clubs". A simple, if slightly dubious way forward, would be transferring the VRT stream so that they are eligible for full Reserve Forces leave under SaBRE - something which more employers will recognise than a simple "Air Cadets" statement.

A basic fitness level would be a start..
I thought you were trying to encouarge people to join! I can see a great many deaths if we ever try and get half the VRT's I can think of to do a squat thrust - let alone a BFT!!!
Mind you - in this respect I have heard a couple of rumours from Cranditz regarding some people being rejected from DI's courses because of their tubby tummies! To be a DI you need to command the respect of the troops - and they simply don't respect fatties... or so I'm told!!!

and perhaps educational minima, but most importantly some training with regulars. Most civvy occupations have some equivalency in the forces - why not offer some "work experience"? Why not get ATC sqn adj's to spend time with regular sqn adj's, OCs with OCs? It would work the other way too - couldn't those personnel on careers office postings also be seconded to an ATC sqn? When I was an ATC sqn boss I had no adj and nearly sank under the paperwork. I would have given anything to have an admin/sec type to help me.
I think cross-training with regulars would be hugely beneficial at all levels. One of our Sqn VRT's is going away with the Rockapes shortly on a cross training course - trying to learn about fieldcraft, the roll of the rockapes and doing some practicals with them. This sort of activity is essential in allowing us to accurately inform the gadgets about the RAF.

At present your uniformed staff need only present themselves at Cranditz for a single week long course in order for them to pass their course. This is the only time which they are REQUIRED to set foot upon an RAF Station. They might spend the next X years mincing around the Corps without even seeing an RAF Station! How is this kind of person meant to enlighten and enthuse an Air-minded young person when they have only 1 weeks experience of the Air Force (when even that is in the vacuum of RAFC Cranwell!).

Although, as Hobbit points out, this can be scuppered and crippled by peoples lack of leave. However, I would imagine that there are as many people that would jump at the opportunity as there is those who will have leave issues!!!

RayDarr

17th Feb 2006, 22:01

A vey old joke tells me that a Regular officer, is an officer trying to be a getleman, a RAuxAF officer, is a gentleman trying to be an officer, while a VR is neither trying to be both. How rude!!!
I am sure that if any member of the VR(T) would like to join the RAuxAF, even for 5 years, the experience passed on will be very useful. It is possible to be in both organisations as neither cut across the needs of the other. However, as pointed out below, the RAuxAF are subject to call up, and if the letter falls on your mat, it is too late to resign. You go to the RAF, or to jail.
Just for info, most Sqns (can't speak for all) will only bring a new entrant in as a direct entry officer, if they have held commissioned rank in the RAF. Everyone else joins in the ranks, irrespective of their qualifications. After they have served 18 months or so, and have demonstrated their committment, they are invited to apply for a commission should they wish. From then on, we follow much the same process for selection for IOT. Applicants, then complete a "distance learning" course, and follow it up with 2 weeks at Cranditz before returning for a final long weekend for final exams. The whole deal takes about 18 months, and is by no means an easy option. Our people then follow standard RAF professional training courses, but in weekend sized chunks. It takes a long time, but our trained people should be able to do much the same job as a regular serviceman, given a short refresher, and orientation into the station to which he/she is sent.
I am sure the RAuxAF would welcome as many ex cadets, or members of ATC adult staff who might want to come along.

chevvron

18th Feb 2006, 13:52

Ray Darr: you forgot to add that policy in your local wing was to post new officers to another sqdn when they become commisioned.

tmmorris

18th Feb 2006, 16:13

Can I just stick my head above the parapet and put a good word in for CCF RAF sections? I know the CCF is tiny compared to the ATC (though we are older), but it does seem to have fewer wannabes - perhaps because few of us are true 'volunteers', having been press-ganged by a headmaster desperate to fill the post. Admittedly this can lead to some poorly-motivated VR(T) officers, but they can be weeded out on the one-week course (yes, people do fail this - one did on mine). So far, all the CCF VR(T)s I've come across do a good job and are not in it for the imagined kudos, or the posing around in uniform or in the mess.

Some of them can be spotted as a teacher at 100 paces, mind you...

Tim
(CCF VR(T) Fg Off)

mgdaviso

20th Feb 2006, 15:56

I am sure the RAuxAF would welcome as many ex cadets, or members of ATC adult staff who might want to come along.and where the heck would we find the time in between running the country's finest youth organisation, earning a living, and satisfying the needs of the family?
In reality, the RAFAux are training for War, we on the other hand are doing a completly different job. Yes I can see a benefit of sharing admin/sec and regiment stuff, but other than that ????
I would like to see the RAF VR(T)'s initial training regime come more into line with the RAFAux's as previously described in RayDarr's post.
Ray Darr: you forgot to add that policy in your local wing was to post new officers to another sqdn when they become commisioned.
Was RaYDarr not talking about RAFAux Sqn's?

Batfink2 - is that batfink from ACC? If so, Oz Here.

batfink2

20th Feb 2006, 15:59

Batfink2 - is that batfink from ACC? If so, Oz Here.
Roger that... thought it about time I got some grown up banter! :}

Postman Plod

20th Feb 2006, 16:18

Sheesh - get back into your own playpen boys - the mods on ACC might get upset with you using other forums!!!! :p

Have to agree with mgdaviso/oz, I cant see the RAuxAF being a suitable umbrealla for the ATC - we do 2 completely different jobs, and I cant see where the time be available to fit in both. 2 parade nights a week, plus RAuxAF commitments? Call up? Fitness? Remember what your stereotypical VRT Officer / NCO looks like....!

To be fair, I dont think the VRT are pretending to be anything other than uniformed youth leaders with attitude - well not generally anyway... If we were auggies, you wouldn't know where we stood within the organisation. As we are VRT, you know exactly what we are and what we do.

mgdaviso

20th Feb 2006, 16:32

Remember what your stereotypical VRT Officer / NCO looks like....!Speaking for yourself there mate?
To be fair, I dont think the VRT are pretending to be anything other than uniformed youth leaders with attitude - well not generally anyway... - Nope that's the Army Cadets

BigGrecian

20th Feb 2006, 16:41

Please do not forget that according to MOD figures 60% of Commission Holders and 75% of Non Commissioned personnell are ex-Air Cadets. So step out of the closet and be proud of your past!

Not a recruiting organisation as well - I recall being told at a training establishment not too long ago.
Oh and don't forget the CCF - believe they have a higher commission uptake but that's probably by virtue of where they're placed.

tmmorris

20th Feb 2006, 16:51

Oh and don't forget the CCF- believe they have a higher commission uptake

Historical - most CCFs started out as OTCs and were expressly for the training of officers. This, of course, is the root of the long-standing animosity between us and the ATC, plus the fact that we're older...

Tim

Postman Plod

20th Feb 2006, 17:21

Errr, I hate to be the person to say this, but thats got nothing to do with the animosity between the CCF and the ATC! :p

chevvron

20th Feb 2006, 17:28

Animosity between CCF/RAF sections and ATC is because of the perception the CCF get more 'perks' eg helicopters for big exercises plus they get an experienced regular SNCO who does all the Camp Commandant work for them at camp (and bl**dy good they are too - I took a handover from one at Manston once and he'd done a splendid job, whereas the CCF Sqdn Ldr who should have been CC really hadn't done much at all).

incubus

21st Feb 2006, 10:18

That may have been the root, but I think it is long lost in history.
The main reason for the animosity is because the ATC normally have to pick up the pieces when we follow a CCF(RAF) section onto a summer camp :)

In the end, they all do pretty much the same thing, are part of the same organization and are equally likely to put the regulars' noses out of joint.

tmmorris

21st Feb 2006, 17:04

I'd love to disagree with the last two comments, but sadly there is something in them...

Though I'd like to think that we don't leave that much of a mess - we did follow on behind another CCF camp last year, though, which was evidently a disaster!

Tim

The mother alligator

21st Feb 2006, 20:30

Regardless of ranting between the two organisations, both are an asset to modern day society! The amount of kids that, instead of standing on street corners drinking white lightning and abusing old women, are doing something worth while, whilst frequently helping out with local organisations and charities.

I was a cadet for 7 years, before going on to much better things (getting paid to fly!). I will always have a soft spot for the ATC as it was through activities participated with them that put me where I am now - as I hadn't been on a UAS at the time of my application.

Staff wise there are some total idiots out there. I can name several right here and now. However we shouldn't use them to bring the whole ACO down. I know guys who when on a station feel embarrassed to be saluted by WO's with several decades of full time experience. To be fair, quite rightly so!! I would be!! However there are those who abuse that, and make themselves and others that wear the VR(T) look like total tw@ts.

Just my pennies worth, long live the ACO.

TMA

RayDarr

22nd Feb 2006, 08:46

The Mother Aligator is dead right, and that is the reason I feel that Air Cadet officers should not hold commissions. They are youth leaders, and no more than that. Instead, if they had a sudo military uniform and status as I have suggested earlier, they would still be able to do the job they do in the same way they do it now, but the hangers on would soon leave, and the remaining excellent majority would be able to get on with the job. When on annual camp, or other visits to RAF stations, our people would give them respect, help and advice as they do now, but without the niff naff and trivia that tends to cause the problems many of the previous posters have stated. More power to the Air Cadet organisation, but let's have the reforms suggested to improve it for the 21st century.

background

22nd Feb 2006, 09:27

Raydarr, do you think VGS instructors should still get a VRT commision or are they "youth leaders" as well?

Skytrucker

22nd Feb 2006, 09:54

I don't think you can ask people to run the organisation without giving them the authority to do so. Authority in the military boils down to to a piece of script compelling the holder to act in accordance with his Commission. There is nothing else other than a Royal Warrant which carries some weight plus the respect serving individuals afford the holder. The Air Training Corps is a military organisation with the flexibility to embrace many modern aspects of society, it does not need to be watered down and the VRT must retain its status to function.

Postman Plod

22nd Feb 2006, 10:16

Hold on a sec.... what about the ACF? Or the SCC? They dont have a full commission do they, yet they get the job done? Having a Royal Warrant means nothing in all honesty - as you say, its a bit of paper! Its how you work on the ground, how you interact with the regular Air Force (or Army, or Navy), and how they perceive you that matters. If you are seen to do a good and worthwhile job, then you'll get the help and respect you deserve. If you are seen to be an oxygen waster first class, throw your rank around, and wind everyone up, then you have to expect the flack and lack of co-operation that would go with it!

As for VGS instructors.... Why do you feel you need a VRT commission?? What does it honestly give you that a lord lieutenants commission wouldn't? What would you lose if you were simply a civvy? You'd still get the flying suit and shades....?

aluminium persuader

22nd Feb 2006, 10:32

I agree with Skytrucker. I think that changing the structure away from the RAF would place the Corps in very real danger. It would have implications for provision of accommodation, insurance, travel, uniform... the list goes on and on. I may not like absolutely everything about it these days (far too much useless paperwork & political correctness to start!), but I still very much want my kids to have an ATC to join. I might even be persuaded to climb back into a blue suit at the time.

Tim - for what it's worth, I have never had much trouble with CCF (& trust I've not caused them any!).

And to everyone who has added to this thread - the real tragedy is that the people who are causing the grief are not here. They're out there somewhere busily not listening.

One thing before I go - a few years ago the ACF had a TV, poster & (I think) cinema campaign for staff & cadets. Wouldn't it be great if HQAC would do something similar...?

:ok:

edited to add....
Plod - some ACF apparently hold a Queen's Commission in the TA. Not quite sure how it works though. Sea Cadets I've heard get very little support from the Navy in any way, shape or form (of course happy to be corrected). ACF units are affiliated to a particular regt/corps & often have TA help too. ATC unless I'm mistaken are a part of the RAF.

Postman Plod

22nd Feb 2006, 10:54

Please dont get me wrong here - the ATC NEEDS to be closely associated with the RAF, and yes, part of its structure. But why place so much emphasis on a queens commission? Do ATC SNCOs really have more of a problem interacting with the RAF than VRT bods do? Same uniform, same ranks, but not part of the RAF? What would we lose by being ATC officers rather than VRT ones? Does the uniform make the difference, or is the attitude of the person IN the uniform the key to better support and co-operation?

Where am I coming at this from? I'm a commissioned VRT Officer. I've got no axe to grind here, and I take my rank and position seriously - I am sadly very proud to be an officer in the VRT! I'm not pretending to be anything other than a VRT officer though, and as you've said AP - none of those types appear to be on here!! Shame - they'd probably learn something if they opened their ears.

RayDarr

22nd Feb 2006, 11:04

The ATC is run by an RAF Air Cdre who is AOC Air Cadets. He has a small HQ staffed by uniformed reservists . These guys are full time ATC admin. This then works down to Regions, each with a uniformed, but retired (therefore also reservist) Group Capt. He and his small admin staff look after the Wings which have a VR(T) Wg Cdr and a J class reservist Sqn Ldr and a couple of civi staff. The rest of the Wing staff are VR(T) as are the Sqn staff, assisted of course by Civi Instructors (CI's) At Sqn and Wing level (maybe above that, but not sure of my facts on this bit) are Civi committees, run generally but not always so by parents of the cadets. No civi committee means the Sqn has to close, so these are important groups. They raise the funds that all ATC Sqns need, but which fall outside the RAF input.
In this half sevice, half civilian organisation, the work gets done, and very efficiently too. Why therefore is it considered a problem to make it all civilian, with a sudo military rank structure. There are pleanty of civilians running the RAF these days (SERCO etc) so why will it be a problem if the VR(T) loose their commissioned status?

Postman Plod

22nd Feb 2006, 11:18

RayDarr - you've forgotten a major component of the ATC squadron structure - the ATC SNCO's. They are not part of the VRT, and I suspect would fit nicely into the category you are describing...

However, coming at this from another direction now... personally I dont see a problem with us being VRT officers - has worked, and still works. Were we to go ATC, again I would see no great problem - I'm doing this for the cadets, and for my own enjoyment - NOT for the uniform... my wife hates it..... :sad: But why so worried about whether we are VRT or civvy? Nothing as such would change - uniform, ranks, etc. We just wouldn't have a bit of paper... What other effects do you see such a status change having?

RayDarr

22nd Feb 2006, 12:04

Postman Plod,
Yep, I forgot about the new SNCO structure. Our local Sqn dosen't have any as yet, but I was aware.
Now, the threads below have pointed out that these is a small, but very obvious, section of the VR(T) who like to swan about the place being "Orfficers" This annoys the parent service, especially the airmen who have to grit their teeth and call these people sir, salute and so on. It also annoys the good guys in the VR(T), of whom I freely admit, there are many who see these people doing all they can to promote their own position at the expense of the cadet movement and their peers. My solution is to remove their power base i.e. the commission they so obviously relish so much. The average Sqn Cdr or Sqn Officer is doing what he does for the benefit of the cadets, therefore he/she won't care at all . The RAF, while still being polite, will now be spared the bulls**t, and the poseurs, having nothing left to pose about, will go and find something else to do. The expected result is that the wasters go away so allowing the Air Cadets to do what they do best more efficiently, and with more fun. I strongly believe that saying we can't get volunteers of the right calibre, or "The training is not good enough" is not an excuse (paraphrased from previous threads). If they are not good enough, don't take them, and if the training is poor improve it. Getting in the wrong people trained to the wrong standard is bad for the kids.

Oh yes, some VGS bod wanted to know if this applies to them as well. Well yes of course it does. I am not aware of any theory of flight which prevents gliders working unless flown by people with VR(T) commissions.

By the way, we have 3 of these pieces of paper on our wall. My regular RAF one, my RAuxAF one and Mrs Darr's VR(T) one.

background

22nd Feb 2006, 12:57

I totally agree with you RayDarr, Im not a VGS officer I'm a CGI and in my experience some of the worst culprits for swanning around have been VGS officers!

Flying suits and sunglasses have a lot to answer for. There are of course some good eggs as well.

scroggs

22nd Feb 2006, 13:26

Without interrupting the conversation, I'd just like to add that I was a CCF Cadet Flt Sgt who joined the RAF and had 22 excellent years flying many of Her Majesty's finest airborne toys. In that time I never had occasion to complain or moan about any ATC/CCF staff. I think that's a pretty decent record.

I would love to be involved in my local ATC, but sadly Mr Branson's airline's rostering makes my free time totally unpredictable. But big respec' to those of you that do give up so much of your spare time to help the kids understand and enjoy aviation and its associated skills. I very much hope that my own children will be able to take advantage of your generosity when they're old enough.

Scroggs

airborne_artist

22nd Feb 2006, 14:01

Scroggs

I'm sure if you made contact with your local squadron they'd still welcome even the odd appearance. My daughter's squadron has a number of serving NCOs who pop down when they can (ie when not in sandpit) and help with lessons etc. and their irregularity is never a problem.

Cat5 in the Hat

22nd Feb 2006, 14:06

Raydarr, do you think VGS instructors should still get a VRT commision or are they "youth leaders" as well?

Why single VGS staff out? What about AEF Staff Pilots?

background

22nd Feb 2006, 14:17

Totally different kettle of fish as AEF instructors are all ex real officers!

diginagain

22nd Feb 2006, 14:42

Totally different kettle of fish as AEF instructors are all ex real officers!

Not quite all; I am aware of at least one ex-AAC SNCO QSP.

RayDarr

22nd Feb 2006, 14:56

I am not looking at the job the VR(T) do, I am suggesting that the whole VR(T) be disbanded. That includes AEF, VGS and any other set of initials you care to bring up. I am sure retired Air Chief Marshal Bloggs, who is now FgOff acting Flt Lt Bloggs VR(T) won't care a damn that he is no longer commissioned in the VR(T). It won't affect his pension, nor will it prevent him flying his AEF aircraft. He might now be "Third Officer Bloggs of the ATC or some other name, and he will still wear his RAF uniform with a different set of rank braid, and a new cap badge. We will even let the cadets and his ATC juniors call him sir ( I would also call him sir, but because he is a retired ACM, not an air cadet AEF jock). So what's the problem??

By the way. I know of several Verrry senior ex RAF officers who fly/flew air cadets in various AEF's. Fun to see them at ATC Guest Nights in a FgOff No 5, with God knows what stars and gongs all over their chest.

mgdaviso

22nd Feb 2006, 15:59

I strongly believe that saying we can't get volunteers of the right calibre, or "The training is not good enough" is not an excuse (paraphrased from previous threads). If they are not good enough, don't take them, and if the training is poor improve it. Getting in the wrong people trained to the wrong standard is bad for the kids.

I agree entirely, and if the above is fixed (ie: don't take the crud, and improve the training), you won't have any wasters or hangers-on.

This IMO, is no reason to disband the RAF VR(T). I'm proud to hang a piece of paper in my Sqn Office, proud to put on the blue suit, and stand my round at the bar when visiting a Mess. I'm also proud to be associated with the finest Air Force in the World, and the finest youth organisation in the World.

Lets just leave it as it is, and fix the recruitment and training problem.

Postman Plod

22nd Feb 2006, 16:37

I'd suggest:

Get rid of the rank structure = scouts = lack of credibility
Get rid of the uniform = youth club = lack of respect and credibility

in both cases, you'd lose respect and credibility from cadets, staff, and the parent organisation. ACF and SCC have maintained a adult military rank structure without any great problems - I dont think this really is a problem as such.

Additionally, you're going to struggle to have anything differentiating you from other youth groups, and people just wont be inetested if you aren't credible - maybe for the wrong reasons, but it would happen. Its also not going to solve the hangars on or wasters - you get those in all organisations. It may solve the "Walt" problem...?

Maybe we just need to be told we are not part of the RAF, but ARE part of the ATC? I'm with mgdaviso here though, we need to sort recruitment and training (and maintaining standards) rather than change the structure as a whole!

RayDarr

22nd Feb 2006, 17:19

Postman Plod,
We are agreed that the uniform and rank structure should stay. My view is that the rank structure should be different, along with the cap badge, but all the rest should be much as is the case now. I have still not heard a case for the commission being an essential requirement to do the job. There is no part of the ATC that will fall by the watyside if the VR(T) was to go and be replaced with uniformed adult leaders along the lines of the pre war ADCC. Still call them officers if you like. Let them and the cadets salute each other if you like. I would even salute their seniors (but out of common courtesy and not because I had to)
This is the whole point. As a cadet organisation, why should their officers have an implied power over our airmen which is displayed by the fact that VR(T) officers wear the same uniform and rank as the "real" RAF. It is a little more than saluting and calling people "Sir"

mgdaviso

22nd Feb 2006, 17:49

As a cadet organisation, why should their officers have an implied power over our airmen which is displayed by the fact that VR(T) officers wear the same uniform and rank as the "real" RAF. It is a little more than saluting and calling people "Sir"

So when we're on summer camp and the drunken airmen leave the pub and start harrassing our camp and cadets, we can tell them to **** orf or I'll have you arrested.

RayDarr

22nd Feb 2006, 18:00

mgdaviso,
Yep, that's exactly what you do. Don't need a commission for that. Your CI's can do that just as easy as you can. A quick call to the RAF Police from any member of adult staff will get the drunk locked up Try harder.

mgdaviso

22nd Feb 2006, 18:09

What RAF police? At a certain Yorkshire Station two years ago, there was one snowdrop for the entire camp overnight, and he didn't even have a dog to tell him what to do - everyone else was in the sandpit. But that's probably for a different thread.

I'm sorry - I'm sticking to my mantra, because it's what I believe in.

Fix the recruitment and training.

RayDarr

22nd Feb 2006, 18:19

Vulpecula

22nd Feb 2006, 18:22

Very interesting points made by all on this thread, what would the next step be? Put all points of view into a pot and send it off to someone that will make a decision?

Working on a squadron over the last three years, has been extremely challenging for me, especially as I have a very demanding roll (which I am sure that the rest of you balance quite comfortably). The ATC has released skills that I thought I never had. For one I have a lot more time and respect for teenagers! NEVER thought I would say that! And for another I have a lot more patience with said teenagers! NEVER EVER thought I would say that!! In the end I am pro the "work with the cadets" point of view.:ok: But would agree with the "more training" - I would like more as you are better informed for the cadets, but would agree that even corporation HR departments don't like the idea of a "Youth Leader", would have no problem however with a Reserve status.

I have also had the pleasure of working with regular service personnel, that have given me enthusiasm and encouragement to take the plunge into the VR(T) – And at no time have I ever heard a bad thing said about the ATC, CCF or even VR(T), until viewing comments on this site… I must admit though I have seen some daft and some unforgivable situations occur at the hands of VR(T) officers.:eek: :ouch: And I am trying to be one... Well if I do eventually get there I have now the knowledge of everyone's thoughts on the subject! Must make me a better person - Right?

mgdaviso

22nd Feb 2006, 18:25

mgdaviso,
OK, no plod, I can see that is quite likely, but there is a duty Sgt, and Orderly Officer, and a bunch of guys in the guard room. Same thing applies. You don't need a commission to get a bunch of drunks to go away, just common sense. I rather expect that if your VR(T) bloke had relied on his commission to get a drunk airman to leave his cadets alone the "orficcer" wouldn't have got past first base.

There was a MOD police man on the gate, a guy on stag operating the barrier, and the single RAF copper. end of.

OCA solved the problem - he closed the pub. :}

NB: this was due to ongoing problems, and not just the problems caused my the idiot minority to the cadet camp.

I suppose that would then depend on the size, stature, and presence of the orficer.

and in re-reading your posts - what is your hang up with the VR(T)?

Have you met too many idiots, and not enough of the good guys? You've got to look at this in proportion - it's always the small minority that spoil it for the rest (a la Iraq beatings)

RayDarr

22nd Feb 2006, 19:34

When it was formed in WW2 as a pre service orgaisation, the VR(T) was valid. Later, that role continued through the days of conscription, again, a valid need for the VR(T). However, the ATC?CCF are no longer pre service organisations. Now, there is as much, if not more emphasis on "Citizenship" as there is on drill, theory of flight, and the other "air force" subjects. Why therefore do we need a reserve members of the RAF running this youth organisation? The Girls Venture Corps, now small but still functioning, is uniformed, has a rank structure, and works well; but they don't give a commission to their adult staff.
Some years back, the RAFVR was absorbed into the RAuxAF. These reserves train for, and are called up to augment the RAF. their officers complete an exacting course before they are granted their commission, involving distance learning over several months, and a 2 week running around Cranwell course. They are required to return to Cranwell for a weekend of exams before their commission is confrmed. This process takes up to a year, and reflects the fact that once in uniform, the reserve officer must act to the same standards, with the same knowledge as their regular counterpart. Can the VR(T) officer say the same? No he can't, unless he/she has been regular or active reserve officer in the past. Why therefore should a VR(T) officer wear the same uniform, and aspire to the same privilages as a regular/active reserve officer? He/she does a different job, has a different knowledge base, has no call up committment, does not do CCS, fitness test or anything more than a week reading and writing course. It is not the same thing at all.

The ATC/CCF, does a very important job, and I while I would welcome their officers into my mess, squadron or unit, I still do not see why they must be part of the RAF. Parallel to, but no longer part of.

Postman Plod

22nd Feb 2006, 20:10

but... nobody is pretending its the same thing, apart from a few walts...? Anyway, surely the 3 letters VRT differentiate us from the Auggies or regulars? Just like the Wavy Navy for the SCC?

RayDarr

22nd Feb 2006, 20:28

Postman Plod,
You make my point for me. The Wavy Navy rank is only used in the SCC. I am suggesting that ATC/CCF Officers wear RAF uniform with an equivalent "Wavy Navy" rank. Then you can have an Air Cadet commission, given out by the Air Cadet organisation to stick on your wall, and everyone will know you are an Air Cadet Officer. (Yes, we know that is what the VR(T) means, but while your people hold the same commissions as our people, some of your people will continue to expect our people to fall over backwards for them) As I have said before, parallel, but not part of.
And by the way it's Oggies not Auggies

Postman Plod

22nd Feb 2006, 20:54

Terribly sorry - easy mistake to make!

I'm still not quite getting this - I see the point you are trying to make, but surely same rank, same braid, different organisation solves the problem? Or are we actually kind of saying the same thing? Is it purely down to a bit of paper - the commissioning scroll? What if the VRT transferred to the ATC and simply lost the bit of paper and had ATC instead of VRT?? Same as the ACF (in most cases)?

RayDarr

22nd Feb 2006, 21:15

Almost there Mr Plod. However, same uniform and same braid means those who would spoof our regular airmen into thinking they had more power than they in fact do, would still get away with this.
Try same uniform but different braid and cap badge. ATC/CCF officer now obviously not RAF, but the adult leader of the cadet group visiting the Station this week etc etc etc.
You can give them an ATC Commission signed by the AOC Air Cadets or whoever you like, but it is not the same as the existing item, and would show authority only within the Air Cadet organisation.
ATC Adult W/O's wear "ATC" collar tags, you could give these to all adult ranks instead of the VR(T) which would be consigned to history.

The aim of all this is to preserve dignity and rank structure within the adult staff in the Air Cadet organisation while making it obvious to all ranks in RAF/RAuxAF that these uniformed guys are exactly what it said on the tin and have no authority over RAF personnel in any way at all.

diginagain

23rd Feb 2006, 05:31

have no authority over RAF personnel in any way at all.

Sorry to drag this saga back to the top, but I'm sure that RayDarr's last post should have included the caveat that in the event that the safety of the cadets is compromised, the Adult Staff hold the authority over anyone. We, and by that I mean any member of the staff, be it CI, ANCO or VR(T) are responsible and accountable for our cadets.

Perhaps in this we find the crux of why, whilst the VR(T) commission is contentious, it remains in place.

RayDarr

23rd Feb 2006, 07:55

Diginagain,
Of course the adult staff are responsible for the safety of the cadets. As are scout leaders responsible for the safety of scouts in their charge, and the GVC leaders, and so on. Should we commission all these as well then?
No, sorry, you do not need a commission in the armed forces of the crown to discharge this responsibility.
While cadets are in the charge of the ATC adult staff, the Senior RAF officer of the establishment they are visiting must ensure through Risk Assessment that those visiting his/her station remain safe. As cadets often get involved in minor tasks on stations while at camp, this could be argued to be a "Work Experience" placement, and therefore a Young Persons Risk Assessment should be carried out. These assessments should be forwarded to the parents before the work Experience begins. How many of those get completed? Not many I bet. How many Air Cadet Camp Commandants ask for them? Under the Occupiers Liability Act, visitors to an RAF unit must be kept safe by the occupier, in this case the RAF. so if a cadet has an accident on an RAF establishment, the Service, may well be liable for compensation, irrespective of the role of the ATC/CCF Adult staff.
The senior member of the RAF present at a cadet activity on a RAF station, could be a humble airman who may because of his training and knowledge see that a cadet activity is standing into danger. Even though the activity may be supervised by a VR(T) officer, who while commissioned, may not have the experience required in the activity being undertaken. the airman has the authority and duty under Health and Safety at Work law to stop the activity at once. However, the presence of a commissioned officer even though he is VR(T) may confuse the airman, and so prevent him from getting involved and stopping a potentially dangerous situation. For this reason, ATC/CCF leaders should not be commissioned into the RAF, but should be readily identifiable by cap badge, rank braid and rank title as a youth leader, who while affiliated to the RAF is not part of it.

incubus

23rd Feb 2006, 08:39

I'm sorry - I'm sticking to my mantra, because it's what I believe in.
Fix the recruitment and training.

I'm going to put another spin on this - the background is for the non-ACO people here :)

Up till 3 years ago, the uniformed adult staff consisted of AWOs and VR(T). VR(T) outnumbered AWOs by a considerable number. The AWO was seen as concentrating in dress, drill and discipline, CIs with teaching and VR(T) with the organizing and running bit, though the nature of the beast means that the jobs are not that clearly defined in reality and you have CIs running units, VR(T) teaching drill (shudder!!) and so on. The whole of the ATC was very top-heavy.

However, a change to the structure in 2003 means that we now have a range of Adult SNCOs: ASgt, AFS, AWO. The opportunity is there to skew the rank structure in favour of the ASNCO and limit the numbers of VR(T). You can then be more selective and apply higher standards, thereby weeding out most of the twats (remember that some twattish traits are seen as desirable by some senior officers :D )
It ought to be easy enough to require a level of previous service (either regular or ASNCO) before being commissioned in the VR(T) and training in sensible man management techniques would be essential.

I support the VR(T) - I like the level of ties it gives us to the parent service and I have seldom seen it cause actual problems but I do acknowledge that some people take it way too seriously. Personally speaking, I won't go the route of VR(T) because it is a Kelloggs commission - I've missed my chance of getting a real one and would feel like a cheat, but that is a personal opinion and not condemnation of the whole concept. Good VR(T) officers never forget that they got their commission with their cereal and only had to do a 1 week course some time afterwards and will concentrate on their role as a leader of cadets. The waving about of rank on an RAF base is seldom necessary and seldom helpful.

Cat5 in the Hat

23rd Feb 2006, 08:44

The Wavy Navy rank is only used in the SCC. I am suggesting that ATC/CCF Officers wear RAF uniform with an equivalent "Wavy Navy" rank. Then you can have an Air Cadet commission, given out by the Air Cadet organisation to stick on your wall, and everyone will know you are an Air Cadet Officer. (Yes, we know that is what the VR(T) means, but while your people hold the same commissions as our people, some of your people will continue to expect our people to fall over backwards for them)

The RAFVR(T) do not profess to be the RAF or the RAuxAF, or indeed "hold the same commisions as our people [RAF/RAuxAF]". The RAFVR(T) are not commisioned officers in the RAF, or the RAuxAF. They are commisioned into the RAFVR (as per wording on scroll).

As you point out, the SCC have wavy navy bands to differentiate them from the Full Timers. The RAFVR(T) have gilt VRT badges on their rank slides to differentiate them from the regulars. Fairly simple eh?

I suppose you'd better disband the RAFVR(UAS) too. You don't need to be in that to fly and drink beer?

I'm interested as to the source of your animosity towards the hard working, guys who put in alot of time to the corps. Did a VR(T) steal your lolly when you were younger?

dinoorin

23rd Feb 2006, 09:08

Having sat here for a while and read this thread. I have now decided to add my thoughts.
1. Your's, our's, their's, plastic, fake. I think are some of the words being banded about here.
Why does there need to be a them and us. Everyone wears the same uniform (given some have VRT on them). I suspect this has a lot more to do with axe and personal than a constructive look at how the organisation should be run.
2. Whilst the air training corps is not a recruiting tool. It does report to the RAF and does give these youngsters a good start for a service career.
Therefore the staff should be in uniform and should be part of the service. I do however think that the training should be increased (not easy with peoples home / work commitments)
3. I am ex reg (army) and now VRT. I was a CI for about 4 years before being invited to apply for the VRT commision.
I do feel odd that 30 year WO's salute me. But having said that they are not saluting me, they are saluting the queen (unless things have changed drastically since I left the reg's). I think this is a point people are missing, it also makes me wonder if some of these old reg officers are missing the point about the salute.
4. VRT is here to stay, unless of course RAYDARR you are MRAF and about to change things. Therefore lets get this thread back to the original question / answer - yes it would appear that quite a few ATC peeps use view this thread.
5. Finally, I am very proud to now be a part of the RAF. I would like to think that I uphold the ethos of the service to both the staff (reg and ATC) and the cadets. I think that perhaps people should put down their baggage and look to suport this small number of people that do a lot more for the RAF in the public than individuals are alluding to.
I await some constructive

RayDarr

23rd Feb 2006, 10:21

Those holding VT(T) commissions do not do the same job as those in the RAF/RAuxAF. They do not hold the same committment, have not received the same training and are not required to reach the same standards. This does not mean they are less worthy, but it does mean they are different. Why therefore should they wear the same uniform and rank. A youth organisation is not a fighting force so why give the people who run it commissions in a fighting force. The fact that the kids are taught air related subjects in a disciplined environment is no reason for youth leaders to hold rank over serving members of the armed forces. Why do it therefore?
Numbers of people on this thread have agreed that they do not feel commissioned, that their commission comes with the cornflakes, that they do not have the confidence to act as officers on RAF stations etc. However, the commission given is the same as that given to our best fast jet pilots. I believe this devalues the purpose of a commission.
I have still not seen anything posted by any person which would show that the ATC/CCF would be any worse an organisation if the VR(T) were to be disbanded and replaced with something else. Keep it uniformed if you like, but give it a different identity so that it is no longer part of the armed forces.
If people want to wear an RAF officer's uniform, fine, join the RAF or the RAuxAF, go through OASC, do the training and wear the uniform with pride. Take the risks regulars take, get called up if a reservist. I have no problem with that. Obtaining a Kellogs commission as one contributer called it is no longer acceptable in the modern era, no matter how well intentioned or motivated a youth leader you are.

Maple 01

23rd Feb 2006, 11:26

If people want to wear an RAF officer's uniform, fine, join the RAF or the RAuxAF, go through OASC, do the training and wear the uniform with pride. Take the risks regulars take, get called up if a reservist. I have no problem with that.

Ok Ray, but as a recent retiree who's not allowed in the RAuxAF (med cat) and has just joined the ATC as a CI I'd like to think I'm still part of the RAF Family - and I was happy to take the risks for 22 years. You seem to want to sever the links completely and turn us into 'just another youth group'.

The RAFVR (T) I have come into contact with over the years have been mainly good blokes/lasses with a few to**ers and social climbers thrown in along the way - much like our own dear Airforce. I mourn the passing of Adult WOs who were almost exclusively ex-mob and am not sure how to rate the 'civilians with stripes' I expect the majority are good with a few Walts thrown in.

Point is although the ATC isn't supposed to be a recruiting ground for the RAF it is so how about looking at it like this:

Before = ATC (and therefore led by the VR(T) Officers, 'Plastic' if you must)
During = Reg
After = RAuxAF

Where's the problem? Most know their place in the grand scheme of thing.

Now as to why those CCF bu@@ers wear RAF capbadges........

Postman Plod

23rd Feb 2006, 12:02

Hmmm I dont think anyone on here has said they dont feel commissioned, wear their RAF uniform with pride, or have the confidence to act as officers on station? Any that have are probably ATC SNCO's! :p

Yes, it may be a cornflakes commission, but I think the vast majority - even the walts - take the responsibility seriously! How often do we need to act as an officer on station above and beyond officerly conduct, giving / returning salutes, not taking the piss in the mess, and respecting the uniform, and those around us? Even the lowliest serving airman knows what our status is, and knows perfectly well that we are civvies in uniform. Even the Walts I am aware of have never been seen ordering a regular around, so I'd guess you really have had a bad experience with the VRT in the past....?

I still have not seen anything posted by any person which would show the ATC / CCF / RAF would be any better off if the VRT were disbanded, and re-uniformed / ranked / branded at expense to the defence / public purse. Keep it VRT if you like, as it already has a distinctly different identity to that of its parent service. Dont get me wrong, I dont hugely disagree with what you are essentially saying, but you seem to be suggesting change for changes sake (with costs and disruption involved), where there are other significantly more pressing problems which need addressing in the Corps.

FormerFlake

23rd Feb 2006, 12:08

The fact that the kids are taught air related subjects in a disciplined environment is no reason for youth leaders to hold rank over serving members of the armed forces.

The ATC Officers may wear the rank, but they have NO authority over anyone other than ATC/CCF Cadets. All the rank really does is set the pay grade for up to 1 months pay when on sunmer camps etc. To this end the ATC WOs are better of than the Junior Officers as they get more cash!

dinoorin

23rd Feb 2006, 12:37

To this end the ATC WOs are better of than the Junior Officers as they get more cash!
Well as my old hairy bummed sergeant used to say. 'I work for a living'. Guess thats why the WO's earn more than the lower echelon Ruperts.

RayDarr

23rd Feb 2006, 12:54

So, the ATC officers wear the rank but have no authority over anyone other than ATC cadets (FormerFlake). Why then do they need the rank. surely not in order to walk around and give the impression that they are officers. Sorry, that won't do, if you wear the rank, you are an officer, if you don't have any authority you shouldn't wear the rank. Therefore do the same youth leader job with a new non RAF rank. However, seeing as you are all good people doing a worthwhile job, you can come and stay in our mess, and visit our stations, but as civilians in a uniformed youth group.

Yes it may be a cornflake commission (Postman Plod) Your commission is the same as those that I have, but my regular and RAuxAF commissions are most certainly not "cornflake" if the VR(T) get them so easily, they devalue the real thing for those who earned them the hard way. Therefore, to preserve the value of the commission, remove them from the VR(T) and reinvent the branch as a uniformed civilian youth group. Which is in effect what it is already.

If you want a months pay, be uniformed civil servants, but not with service rank. For those who have left the active armed forces. Remember the magic word is "left" if you want to keep the link going, join the British Legion.

Grand Fromage

23rd Feb 2006, 12:56

Postman Plod

23rd Feb 2006, 13:21

RayDarr - why not just get it out - what have the VR(T) done to you? This is more than just a niggle or an observation, I'm really interested in what has made you come to this pretty forthright conclusion? I could be swayed either way, but I'm just not sold by your argument.

As someone said earlier - my commissioning scroll tells me I'm appointed to be an officer in "our" Royal Air Force Volunteer Reserve... does yours?? Same bit of paper, different words... Cornflake Commission were the words used by someone else, repeated by yourself, and I thought I'd stick with the theme. To me its far from a cornflake commission. I know I haven't gone through the same training or crap that a regular or auxiliary has, thats why mine says Volunteer Reserve, not just Royal Air Force. Isn't that distinction enough?

As for the Wavy Navy, isn't that (or wasn't that) the equivalent of the VRT, only instead of wavy officer braid, we have a gilt badge? So whats the difference - a bit of paper, which IS different to that of a regular?

L-H

23rd Feb 2006, 13:21

Right then, getting a tad peeved here.
RayDarr, you clearly have an axe to grind and it took you nearly four pages to finally nail your colours to the mast. From my view point you come across as a status anxious little twit who seems more concerned over the perceived value of whatever reservist commission you hold. How about you act like the officer you claim to be and accept the staus quo and instead of being an @rse embrace what it is the VR(T) are doing and appreciate that we all have a role to play.
When I joined the ATC as a cadet all those years ago it was precisely because it was closely affiliated to the RAF and the rank structure mirrored the parent service; fast forward a couple of decades and the same motives apply. Also the parents value the discipline and structure the ATC provides, much preferring to bring their offspring to a well established credible and readily indentifiable organisation. Furthermore it is because units are run by Volunteer reservists that parents are drawn in.
By disbanding the VR(T) you will devalue the whole concept of the ACO, disbandment will undermine it's core values which in time will prove ultimately destructive. To justify your argument you use the GVC as a model, mate you have no idea. The GVC is all but dead and held in very poor esteem, in fact the only function it seems to provide is as a holding pool for enthusiastic girls intending to join the ATC who are under the enrolment age. Army cadet Officers hold TA commissions - you going to have a pop at them too?
As an ex regular SNCO with over 22 years under my belt who is now a VR(T) JO I find your comments insulting, divisive and of no constructive value. if the central core of your argument is that the VR(T) is not war appointable then you need to go out and have a word with yourself, I recall up until very recently that the RAuxAF was held in equally low esteem by us regulars. Nothing more than an officers social drinking club populated by social climbing lower middle class suburbanites that were never to be trusted within 25 yards of anything. Things have clearly moved on and the oggies are now a well respected and credible part of the RAF. I put it to you that the VR(T), although non war appointable (mores the pity I may add - Civil Defence anyone?) has just an important part to play in the big picture and with the right leadership and updated training, do the reserve officers course at Cranwell for example, will move forward and itself become more credible.
Whatever it is that is stressing you out - get over it man!

Cat5 in the Hat

23rd Feb 2006, 13:23

FormerFlake

23rd Feb 2006, 13:30

Do VR(T) Officers have any power outside of the ATC? As a regular Fg Off this question is one that often comes to light amongst colleagues who have been redressed by VR(T) Sqn Ldrs for not calling them sir at the end of every sentence (once even after holding a door open) and more confusingly from Plt and Fg Offs who have been pulled up for not saluting VR(T) Flt Lts.

As with anythinge else you salute the commision, not the person but no reason to salute a Flt Lt!! Politeness kills nobody, but common sense should prevail.

RayDarr,

If had met VR(T) officers and SNCOs who hold down busy full time jobs, have families in still put hundreds of hours in to the ATC. Give these guys some credit, you except credit in your ACR for your secondary duties, these guys get to wear a uniform instead. Would you work for free like they do?

pwwuk

23rd Feb 2006, 14:26

I have dyslexia and am sorry if you find this difficult to read, but sorting out the syntax would hardly be good use of my PA’s time ! Also for the record, I’m not a VRT officer.

Now here is a question:-

a) The RAF has a cadet organisation, of which it is proud, called The Air Training Corps. It had the same uniforms (but with clear differencing flashes for cadets /staff) as its parent body and has standards of appearance and discipline appropriate to a forces cadet organisation. (note the words cadet organisation)

or

b) The RAF loosely lends its support to a youth club, that just happens to fly on its airfields, and from whom a high percentage of staff happen to have belonged, but does not expect standards of dress, drill and discipline appropriate to a forces cadet organisation, called the Flying Youth Club. Thus is dressed in pink rather than green CS95 , and red rather then blue dress uniform, in case an enemy force get mistaken in times of conflict.

I think the answer from the top down within the RAF would be A. It is clear from the letters VRT that the officers are officers commanding cadets, not commanding regular or auxiliary forces.

‘I’ve just seen a guardsman on a gate salute a former VRT officer, how wrong, now they are called Flying Cadet Youth Coordinators, everyone knows the correct response should be to give then a single finger gesture ‘

Firstly – a Good ATC = Good Staff

The ATC benefits from a significant group of VR(T) officers whom in civilian life usually have a high standing in society. Why would an airline pilot, senior customs officer, management consultant or DCI in the Police Force (all examples of serving VRT officers in my immediate vicinity) volunteer huge amounts their time, skills and effort, to go on camp and not expect some level of respect..

‘They could easily be accommodated in the sergeants mess’ I think you said, well that just shows that as you clearly don’t respect the VRTs, you don’t seem to care much for your SNCOs also if you feel that the youth workers would find the appropriate accommodation along side the WOs and Sgts, for the handful of VRTs who actually manage to get a place on a camp after their years work. The fact is they work in small huts on rainy nights year round, this is not a good place to attract glory or salutes, but yet ‘do the work’. Perhaps the adult staff are not worthily of a cadet salute in your mind, and if they are fit, then which level of youth worker would you have the cadet salute sir, lead flying cadet supervisor (adult) ?

The argument that they need a different uniform and rank structure misses the fact that they have VRT in large letters just about obscuring the rank tabs. There is no doubt that VRTs are just that, not RAF nor RauxAF, but are part of the RAF’s cadet organisation. Proud to be a close part of the RAF family.

Now lets make them youth coordinators as per your suggestion. How will they fill out the forms that require x rank to approve, the whole admin, identification / security and authority systems would need to be changed .. and whilst we are there, we would have to do the same to the Army & Navy cadets (as the the cadet organisations operate across each others facilities (just pop in to Pirbright ot Ash Ranges)). Now we have just wasted a huge amount of money, issued lots of new uniform and badges, re printed just about every document in the RAF and ATC, confused the cadets who are learning discipline and structure of the RAF for their BTEC, and for what ? To show who has and who has not done basic officer training ? when everyone already knows ! Now we have to take apart the TA who may only ‘train’ for two weeks per year etc etc. (I know in fact the TA and RauxAF train much more than the minimum, I have great respect for the bank managers and bus drivers that find themselves on the front line irrespective of their acting rank, they need training appropriate for their volunteer duties.)

RAF flightier command is not going to launch off a wave of attacks on the say so of a senor officer in the personnel section nor on the say so of an senior officer in the cadet organisation, so the risk of a VRT Wing Commander sending us to bomb the French , I am happy ¿ to suggest, is nonexistent , so your fears are unfounded.

Second - Parent Organisation

The argument that the ATC should be more like a youth club fails to recognise one key element; this is a military youth organisation. The cadets uniform must be pressed, footwear gleaming, standing in silence to attention on parade. Why .. the RAF is the parent organisation, should the senior cadets not be sergeants in case they are confused for an regular sergeant, no they are part of a military cadet organisation, and as such have a rank.

Having watched this for a which, I took the opportunity to get the views of serving personnel. I have just returned from a RAF station overseas and everyone I met could not have been more supportive, respectful of the volunteers and enthusiastic in support of the ATC (even in the AAA bar at 2am with beet goggles on I could not unearth the resentment you suggest) . Not one person mentioned of any feeling that any staff accompanying the cadets should not have access to the facilities that accompanies their VRT rank (Subject to operational capacity) nor indeed any problem with their rank.
There was much debate about respect between levels in the regular force and between Army and RAF staff who find themselves working in combined units, but that another story.

My conclusion they support the ATC, may well have served or have worked with, like having cadets on camp as long as they are well disciplined, which they usually are. As to the status of VRT officers, everyone understood that they commanded cadet squadrons, or gliding facilities (The AEF officers are all commissioned or ex commissioned forces pilots (with some SCNO pilots from the Army who on finding themselves eligible for Flying Officer status must leave their years flying helicopters in combat situations and make a mad dash for the glory .)

Bad apples.

I have seen appalling low standards of command by regular service officers, but that is rare. I know of several VRT officers who I would not wish to be associated with, and the level of sub optimal standards may well be higher in the ATC than in the regular and other reserve forces (although I could point to a 1000 similar threads relating to the regulars’ distain of the territorial army officers), fact is that if you took away the reserve forces, we would be have a fighting force. Recruiting good staff is important and the forces cadet organisations are key here, it costs a fortune to train a pilot or tradesman and the cadet organisation is good at giving at insight that that may be great or totally wrong career choice for that young person.

The answer to the problem if it is a significant one ? A programme of continuous improvement. . Better selection, training and ongoing development, and of course getting rid of the bad apples. If a regular officer where to report conduct below standard to the station commander, I can be very sure that the VRT officer would have to work hard to rectify this or would loose their commission.
.
IF YOU CARE about this subject, get involved with an ATC squadron, service helpers (that would be your title) are extremely valuable in providing real life insight in to the service, away from camps / visits / AEF and VGS days. And do make a positive impact across the board. A service helper may well find themselves at wing or region level before not to long.

With a significant proportion of serving personnel in the RAF being Ex. cadets, it would appear that the VRT officers who introduced them to the RAF world must be doing something right.

Support, encouragement, training, improvement and oversight are what the adult managers in the ATC need, not to be placed in exile

Final words from me If you care get involved and make a difference .. if you don’t . xxxx xxx xxxx xx (and they are not kisses)

P.

airborne_artist

23rd Feb 2006, 14:33

So it seems to come down to that age old problem - my willy is bigger/faster/more expensive/more important than yours :ok:

Cool_Hand

23rd Feb 2006, 15:14

This is from POBnowFOB who is having difficulty logging on...

"RayDarr, maybe you should stop looking at the difference between the RAF and RAF VR(T)
And look at the difference between civvies and the Air Cadet Org.

Can a VGS fly military registered aircraft without a military CO?

Can shooting in the ACO continue without SA(B)90 qualified personnel?
(SA(B)90 qualified people teach the instructors, I think you need to be a member of HM forces to hold this. Hence ATC adult NCOs can't hold this qualification)

And there are other reasons why shooting in the ATC needs to be controlled by the RAF, but I probably shouldn't go into them here."

RayDarr

23rd Feb 2006, 15:29

Well done folks, if you can't win your argument by reason then be abusive. Read the past posts people, you will see that I have great respect for those who run their ATC Sqns well. They do it for the kids not the glory. I see a number on here who seem to be more interested in glory than the kids.
Notice the regular guy complaining that VR(T) Sqn Ldrs insist in being called "Sir" at every other word. and notice the VR(T) guys saying we salute the Queen not the man. Quite right, but it is interesting how often the man requiring the salute is an Air Cadet officer on an ego trip.
I am not involved directly in the ATC, my RAuxAF work keeps me busy enough, but I am indirectly associated with a number of units, as are others in my circle. I, during my last mobilisation, spent 6 months at a UK station and supervised ATC annual camps during my off duty time. I have seen the organisation from the inside and out, and like many others are not impressed with some (not all) of the staff
Why should the RAF make allowances for those who do not (but think they know) how the service works, and who wear the uniform of an officer. The collar dogs make little difference as the uniform and commission hold the key. Whatever you guys think, if you walk around with your rank showing, you ARE an officer, and you must be shown the correct respect. If you can't do it properly, loose the uniform and rank.
The VT(T) should go and be replaced by a parallel organisation of ATC officers without formal commissions. You can spend all day saluting each other and called yourselves sir, but the time has come to step back from the armed forces.

dinoorin

23rd Feb 2006, 15:52

Notice the regular guy complaining that VR(T) Sqn Ldrs insist in being called "Sir" at every other word. and notice the VR(T) guys saying we salute the Queen not the man. Quite right, but it is interesting how often the man requiring the salute is an Air Cadet officer on an ego trip.
.
As far as I was instructed when I went through initial training. All JO's are to call senior officers Sir (ie Sqn Ldr or above) at all times. Maybe things have changed with modern training.
As regards saluting. As an officer you should expect to have the commision saluted. Certainly if this does not occur it mearly shows that the transgressing individual has no respect for the crown to which they serve. Any officer be it reg, aux or VRT should challenge this transgresser. Again unless the modern training has changed that much.
We all wear her majesties uniform however have hugely differing roles.
This whole thread has now become one of 'I am superior / better than you'. Very tiresome and to be honest very dissapointing to hear from an ex professional.
Clearly from this anyone that is not in your club would appear to be tarred as inferior.
Oh, by the way. Unless things have radically changed in the last few years - I would not say wearing a military uniform is glory hunting. If anyhthing with the modern view of all things armed forces, it is probably seen as very uncool. A sad state of affairs but indicative of the world we now live in.
Can we now stop the bickering and all agree to disagree without further washing laundry in public.

pwwuk

23rd Feb 2006, 16:00

"argument by reason ", I'm sorry I spent so long on my post, either you lack consideration or comprehension.

Hope you get all the respect from the regular officers that you deserve. As you "can do it properly", and thus as the VRT "can't do it properly" :ugh:

I am very sorry to inform you, that what ever you may wish for, there are regular three star officers, at the very heart UK forces command, who support the tri-service cadet forces and their officers, as they are.

As a reservist you will never get the opportunity to effect policy, and of that I am glad.

Regards P.

PS

And I have never come across a 'pompous' RauxAF Officer ? well sadly I have, and how did I deal with it, a quiet word in the appropriate ear, no one is perfect, and where fault exists there is opportunity to develop, given the correct support. The RauxAF is indeed going well, and I know that VRT officers can equally do the uniform justice, as many do, given our support.

david clark

23rd Feb 2006, 18:01

There is nothing at all wrong with the VR(T) and those commissioned within it. Yes, there is probably a minority of issues and bad apples - show me an organisation regular or volunteer where that isn't true. Unfortunately, it is very easy for those who are not in a position to work with cadet organisations anymore to stand outside and throw stones in. It is terribly sad that the internet gives idiots with an axe to grind such a visible voice - before bulletin boards they would just be some sad chuntering individual left to bear their chips alone.

RayDarr

23rd Feb 2006, 18:48

It is a shame that some of you can't throw you opinions into the ring without being rude. Perhaps this is how the VR(T) works these days. I am confirmed in my view that the VR(T) no longer serves a purpose, and that the sooner it is gone the better.

hobbit1983

23rd Feb 2006, 19:06

It's a bit redundant anyway, since the VR(T) appears to be here to stay regardless!

I think, having read all of the posts above, that the general consensus is that the VR(T) as it stands now, is on the whole doing a worthwhile job - but with a few useless "walts"/posers.

On the whole then, it could be a lot worse - there are 40,000 or so children and young adults who benefit hugely from the ATC and it's VR(T) leadership. I would argue that that is worth putting up with a few idiots.

To clarify on my personal opinion: I think it would be a good idea to change NOT the uniform - but the rank. "Wavy RAF" would work well IMHO - same uniform (maintaining the valuable link) but a clearly different type of officer.

If it works well for the SCC then why not - but again, not going to happen and there is probably not an urgent need for it.

Ops and Mops

23rd Feb 2006, 20:04

Having read this thread and bitten my lip thus far, I now feel I must add my £0.02..

Having been fortunate enough to hold a commission in all three of Her Majesty's Royal Air Forces (Firstly RAF, then RAFVR(T) and currently RAuxAF), I feel I can offer at least a balanced opinion.

1. The RAF is full of good guys and w*nks. The w*nks stand out more, however there are more good guys to deal with them - hence the good guys win.

2. The RAuxAF is full of good guys and w*nks. The w*nks stand out more, however with the good guys on the squadron, and regular interaction with the Regular Air Force on exercise and War Appointments, there are more good guys to deal with them - hence the good guys win.

3. The RAFVR(T) is full of good guys and w*nks. The w*nks stand out more, but because they are in much less contact with good guys within the VR(T), RAuxAF and the RAF, they get away with it. Then when on Camp or a Station visit, the good guys bring the w*nk into check, bubbles are burst and things get blown out of proportion.

The problem with the VR(T) is that because it is quite insular, the w*nks find it easier to get into a position of responsibility, get little or no training in command and therefore get the rest of the VR(T) Officers tarred with the same brush.
I believe the answer is not to disband the RAFVR(T), but for Regional Commandants and OC's Wing to get out on the shop floor and get a grip of their staff. The only reason the people get away with it is that local commanders are not enforcing rules and standards for fear of losing an already low staff base, or are themeselves one of the w*nks mentioned above. Catch 22.

RayDarr

I don't believe your VR(T) "bashing" is coming across in the manner you have intended. I feel you seek to look at the ethics of whether a VR(T) Officer, by virtue of his/her commission, requires to be authorised "....to exercise and well discipline in their duties such Officers, Airmen and Airwomen as may be placed under your orders from time to time and use your best endeavours to keep them in good Order and Discipline." This is valid since there are no Airmen or Airwomen in the RAFVR(T).
Furthermore the paragraph stating "And We do hereby command them to Obey you as their superior Officer..........according to the Rules and Discipline of War..." serves no purpose to an RAFVR(T) Officer.

I agree that the authority granted by the commission itself could do with being changed, however I see no need for a change in uniform as long as ASNCO's, AWO's and ACF Officers/SI's continue to wear regular pattern uniform and badges.
A solution could be to change the Royal Air Force Volunteer Reserve commission in toto as the APO's of the RAFVR(UAS) also do not require the above authorisations.

The part that states "...and you to Observe and follow such Orders and Directions as from time to time you shall receive from Us, or any superior Officer....in pursuance of the Trust hereby reposed in you" should remain in order to give Senior Officers and Commanders from The Air Force Board downward, a legal right to issue orders to what would otherwise be civilian volunteers.

As far as "levels" of commisions, the authority granted to a holder of a VR commission (no such thing as a VR(T) commission as the (T) is a branch Indicator), RAuxAF or Regular Commission are effectively the same, however the seniority of authority for each is laid down in QR's. It is up to those who train Officers of any of our Forces or Cadet Forces to ensure that Officers are aware of their responsibility to be familiar with QR's, especially those that relate directly to their office.

None of the above takes away from the fantastic work that the Air Cadet Organisation as a whole undertakes!

chevvron

24th Feb 2006, 13:04

It's all down to accountability. VRT's flying HM planes or shooting HM guns can be held accountable for any cock - ups which occur, while a civvi couldn't be held accountable.

tmmorris

24th Feb 2006, 13:47

Now, there is as much, if not more emphasis on "Citizenship" as there is on drill, theory of flight, and the other "air force" subjects.

Not in CCF, there isn't. We do citizenship anyway, in school; we don't need to waste parade time on it.

RayDarr - you are massively missing the point about a VR(T) having the authority and responsibility to protect cadets. First, we are told in no uncertain terms during IOT, and regularly reminded, that this is the case, and that no matter how senior the regular RAF person who is putting cadets at risk, we must intervene - and have the authority to do so. And secondly, it's not mostly about health & safety, it's about child protection, about which 99.9% of the RAF know absolutely b@gger all, and on which we (particularly CCF, where we are almost all professional teachers) are experts.

And CCF wear the regular RAF cap badge because we've been around longer :-P

Tim

background

24th Feb 2006, 23:09

obviously raydar has no mates so he will pick on staff and cadets from the VRT!

Lighten up mate and remember VRT are here to stay!!!

Get over it and don't take out your shortfall in the RAF on VRT's that give up their time voluntary!

END of!!!!

AerBabe

25th Feb 2006, 18:49

Not wanting to join in the fight ... I'll just add quietly that I've been a Civilian Instructor for three years (one year with Surrey wing and two with Essex), and have my regional board on Thursday. :uhoh:

mgdaviso

27th Feb 2006, 13:22

Good luck AerBabe - we need more wimmin joining up.

Just be yourself, and maybe consider popping over to

www.aircadetcentral.net/forums

to tell everyone about it when you've passed. You'll be made very welcome.

AerBabe

27th Feb 2006, 20:47

Thanks ... I've signed up at 'Widget' - my non-aviation forum username. It should be very useful!

L-H

28th Feb 2006, 09:04

Please whatever you do don't bother with 'mickeymousecentral.net......'. I made the mistake of perusing that awful site and reading the dross that is posted there very nearly prompted me to withdraw my application for a VR(T) commission.

Bunch of muppets the lot of them.:mad:

mgdaviso

28th Feb 2006, 09:33

compared to the sh1te that's posted on here?

Postman Plod

28th Feb 2006, 09:36

L-H, would be very interested in a more detailed assessment of the website you mention... Fancy dropping me a PM?

L-H

28th Feb 2006, 10:08

PP check your PM's.

mgdaviso,

At least the sh!te here has some relevence unlike the status anxious twaddle that is ACC.

mgdaviso

28th Feb 2006, 10:39

ooerr - handbags at dawn - I won't grace YOU with any further replies as you've obviously got a huge chip on your shoulder.

L-H

28th Feb 2006, 10:44

You must be confusing me with someone who gives a sh!t!

incubus

28th Feb 2006, 13:00

Shame about the "very nearly" there, L-H. Not to late to pack it in. :yuk:

Actually, that may be unjustified but your manner makes you come across like one of the bottom-feeders that the ACO would be well rid of. You talk the talk, but do you walk the walk?

Grandslam

28th Feb 2006, 16:55

incubus, I happen to know L-H personally, and I can assure you he can certainly "walk the walk". A commited volunteer if ever I met 1.

incubus

28th Feb 2006, 17:42

Glad to hear it - more of the same please :)
Shame he won't persevere with ACC. We need more grounded people there.

Tourist

28th Feb 2006, 18:59

Oh my god.
Will you all please go away?
Read the bit top left and take the hint.

Postman Plod

28th Feb 2006, 19:58

Tourist, if you dont like it, then you dont have to read it, and posting would mean you actually CARED! :}

Despite some rather pointless argumentative posts, and a few people with issues with the ATC/VRT/mis-spelling of Oggies, this has been a very encouraging thread, and to be honest, even the negative posts give us food for thought. Like us or loath us though, I think we'll be around for a while. The reason this thread is here I guess is to make sure that you guys know who we are and what we do, get a bit of support, encourage you to help out, and to make sure that WE know what you expect from US! We dont want to piss you off, so we'd rather know what we're doing wrong, and either put it right, or try to explain why it happens, or why we can't do a thing about it!

L-H

1st Mar 2006, 07:13

Grandslam - :ok:

Wizzard

1st Mar 2006, 15:06

AerBabe,

D'want to buy a greatcoat?

One careful owner. Offers?;)

Wiz

AerBabe

1st Mar 2006, 15:22

Having heard my CO preaching about the wonders of the greatcoat, I'm almost tempted! :D

Circuit Basher

6th Mar 2006, 12:45

Have kept quiet about the foregoing (have been absent from PPRuNe due to new baby, moving house, etc).

I'm ex-regular (seem to have been in similar position to lumpy jumper!) and try to uphold the standards of the regular RAF. I have been OC of 3 units in all and have maintained contact with the ATC over a period of 34 yrs (including cdt service). Fully agree that there are plenty of oxygen thieves around, but all in all, the Corps survives on the goodwill and efforts of many regular servicemen/women and volunteers. I've not got the time (or the inclination) to enter into the widdling contest that this thread seems to have become.

I would, however, not be motivated to take the cr@p that being in command of an ATC Sqn without a VR(T) commission. This is not because I feel good poncing around in an RAF uniform - it is an indication that we are a part of the parent service and provides us with the structure and responsibilities of QRs and MAFL. If I wished to be a Scout leader, I've have joined them.

End of message, End of broadcast!! :\ :ouch:

AerBabe

19th Mar 2006, 10:49

Regional board having gone successfully, I now find myself faced with a formal dinner in two weeks time. There is a distinct lack of female officers in my Wing to ask for advice. The only one I know reasonably well is a Sqn Ldr, who suggested I try Snaiths for uniform. Circuit Basher sent me this link to North West Supplies (http://www.northwestsupplies.co.uk/military/dress-uniform/?page=0), who sell Snaiths uniform, and "Messkitonline" (http://www.messkitonline.co.uk/messdress.asp?Regiment=Royal+Air+Force&Submit=Select+Regiment). Googling hasn't revealed anything else and there's nothing on Ebay. Does anyone know of anywhere that might be able to help?

HEATHROW DIRECTOR

19th Mar 2006, 12:08

Only just seen this thread... Yep.. served as erk, NCO and Civvy Instructor with 43(F) back in the 50s/60s. One day some strange-shaped erks arrived - the WJACs had been ejected from their meeting place and were to share our hall with us. Of course, us lads protested vehemently for a good 10 nanoseconds...... I got on fairly well with one of the girls - we're still on our honeymoon after nearly 39 years.

AerBabe

19th Mar 2006, 12:20

Dunno if it's still an option, but there used to be a reasonable supply of uniforms at Cranwell from cadets who had failed DIOT. [...] There's one here (http://www.uniform4sale.co.uk/raf_main.htm), 38" chest, 5' 5" tall, a snip at £275!!

[Go on, say it's too small.....:E ]

AFAIK, the uniforms held at Cranwell are only likely to be No 1s. I will phone though, in case they know of someone.
I had spotted the one you mention for sale and yes, it's too small.

I'm 5'7". :}

ibbi

19th Mar 2006, 15:58

AerBabe,

The Taylors at Cranwell do also have Number Fives as well.

As an aside, if you only did passed your Region Board in the last week, you may find that you won't be able to attend the dinner in uniform. My understanding is that even though you have passed the Region Board, you still need to wait for your Commission to be confirmed by HQAC - a process that can take up to six weeks. Until you have that confirmation, you shouldn't be wearing anyform of uniform or using any of the priveledges associated with a commission (use of the Mess, Claiming Pay etc).

Feel free to PM if you want more information.

tmmorris

19th Mar 2006, 17:18

I think Ibbi is right - in fact, in CCF (not sure about ATC) there is a rule that if attending annual camp before completing CCF IOT you could not attend in uniform (though would be paid). Check with HQAC as your commission will in fact be backdated to the date of your board.

messkitonline did mine and are excellent (quality superb) except (a) evidently they smoke, which means the uniform comes pre-impregnated, and (b) they had no idea where to put the VR(T) badges - better to order them separately and put them on yourself, in my experience...

Messkitonline is made to measure, and therefore £600 against Snaith off the peg £500.

And sadly, no, you can't get it at the 'issue' price...

Tim

L-H

19th Mar 2006, 18:21

Aerbabe,

I concur with both posts below. Until you have a piece of paper from HQAC confirming your commission you are not commissioned and ergo not entitled to wear the uniform, rank et al. I understand your desire to don a blue suit as quickly as possible but I would caution you not to act prematurely because otherwise you are in danger of putting up a serious 'Black'.

In my case the confirmation of my commission was one month after my Regional board, and I was not officially informed for a good two weeks after that date!

My advice to you is to go to this wing dinner in appropriate civilian attire.

Cat5 in the Hat

20th Mar 2006, 08:45

Get the 5s anyhow, and get them ranked/badged etc. You may find that your paperwork drops in time. You're bound to get wear out of them over the years either way.

Cat5

AerBabe

20th Mar 2006, 23:01

I've been given the go-ahead from Wing to wear uniform at this event. Sorry if that wasn't clear...
Having phoned around a bit, I'm off to the station tailors at Cranwell on Weds. :ok:

Postman Plod

12th Apr 2006, 23:19

Taken the conversation "outside" from http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?p=2515071&posted=1#post2515071
to here, which seems a little more appropriate.... Maybe I'm over-analysing what you said... but....

I'm quite aware of what my commissioning scroll says, and how it related to everyone else in the RAF thankyou! I'm quite aware that I am an Officer in the RAF, and I'm damn proud of that fact. I go out of my way to try to make sure I uphold the standards and traditions of my parent service.

But I've spent a total of 2 weeks (thats 10 days) at RAFC Cranwell, of which 5 of them were on a Senior Officers course. The training was almost ENTIRELY aimed at how to run a squadron of cadets, the rules and regs for such things, and the pitfalls. We had 1 day of leadership tasks and training. I had a great time, learned a lot, but pretty much bugger all about the RAF, how it operates, what it does, who runs what, etc etc, because I didn't need to know that. I learned how to look after my cadets properly. I knew enough beforehand that I wouldn't look like a tit in the mess, how to wear my uniform, who/what/when to salute, and hey - yes - I already knew something about the RAF because I'm interested.

I completely understand why some regulars have a problem with VRT officers (I do too sometimes), but thats not my problem - I am one - they can deal with it as they wish. I'm just going to make damn sure that they can take me seriously in the job I do, which is look after my cadets on their base. I'm not going to demand anything from them because I'm an officer and they're of a lower rank than me, or act like an arrogant sod who knows everything and doesn't need advice. I have no expectations when I'm on base - if we get a tour of a section, or a flight, then I'm grateful - I have a pretty good idea how busy the RAF is at the moment. I even know that some sections of the RAF have little or no respect for VRT officers bcause they've had a bad experience in the past - my aim is to make it as painless as possible for them and try to leave a positive impression. :yuk:

So does that make me a bad officer? Believing that I'm not really a regular at all? Knowing my limitations? The spec for this job, over and above the basics, is an ability to observe and learn, liaise with the regulars, apply common sense, decency, and manners, a rapport with teenagers, a willingness to do a job for no credit, and to do jobs that need doing. Isn't this what the Regional board should be looking for as a priority, rather than stuff that can be learned?

I knew there was some point to what I was saying! :zzz:

Just remember that the RAFVR(T) is not just held by staff of the ATC!
I know - I didn't say it was?

PhoenixDaCat

13th Apr 2006, 07:03

You can spend all day saluting each other and called yourselves sir, but the time has come to step back from the armed forces.

If it's time to step back from the Armed Forces, why for the first time in it's history, did the ACO make it on to the top 10 priority list of the RAF last year?

Maybe it's because RAF studies have shown they would have to spend far more on recruiting than the approx £10 million the ACO gets from the public purse, were it not for the ACO.

My source of that information? Gp Capt Cross, Chief of Staff at HQAC, speaking at an ATC Sqn Dining In last year.

So even though officially we are not a recruiting mechanism for the RAF, clearly we are.

As to the comments about VR(T) wearing the blue uniform, surely we should wear the same uniform as our cadets? Or do you want that uniform to be changed too? Maybe we should wear dark Navy, the SCC should wear DPM, and the ACF light blue? That way there should be no confusion when on RAF Stations.

ABINITIO

13th Apr 2006, 21:08

I've had the privilage of 'serving' (I should hope the pedantic of you participating in this discussion won't read anything into the use of that word) under what was overall a fantastic set of VR(ATC) Officers, AWO/SGTS, CI, and Civilian Commitee members; being an Air Cadet between the ages 16 & 18.

All of these people, INCLUDING those "w*nks" reffered to in earlier posts played parts, big and small, in providing me with opportunities that would most certainly have been unavailable to me had I not been involved with the ACO. Though the status and degree of authority given to some of these so called "substandard" VR(T) Officers is a source of resentment for some members of the parent service; I believe it to be barely worthy of discussion.

Let those service members with issues deal with them in their own way; be it through not saluting a VR(T) Officer, or through mocking they're ability/intelligence etc. But at the end of the day... it's all about the kids...

For every "w*nk" in contact with the kids who perhaps isn't a fantastic role model, there's also someone having a positive effect on their lives.
And for every regular serviceman carrying resentment and disrespect for those in the ATC VR(T), there is someone with respect for what they do (as a whole), and are happy to help enhance the experiences of the kids.

"W*nks" are present in all walks of life including the VR(T) I expect... being 20 I don't feel as if I can say that with absolute certainty!;) But as with most organisations, within the ACO remains a net positive effect, and as long as there is a net positive effect, criticism directed at ATC VR(T) Officers (that isn't on an individual basis) is unwarranted, and when you look at what really matters - the kids - a disgruntled regular's opinion is of little significance.

The ACO played an immeasurable part in making my dreams come true, and I'm sure I'm not alone. And as it stands, I won't hear a bad word said about it.:ok:

biggles111

19th Apr 2006, 21:55

Chaps

Having read this thread from the begining I think we should draw a line under it, Yes I realise that every organisation has its posers, and timewasters, I know I met them all in 20+ years as a regular Officer, and as a VR(T) Officer. Both regulars and non regulars have their share, but we seem to be missing the point, where else can a youngster of 13 -18 get free Flying, Gliding, Adventure Training, Shooting, Microlighting, Hang Gliding, & Parachuting. Where can they go on visits to RAF Stations, both in the UK and Abroad? Have opportunities to learn new skills for next to nothing?

90% of this is only be available because of volunteers. Not many people these days want to give up 2 nights a week and most weekends to baby sit someone elses kids, and run the risk of being sued if jonny gets an eyelash stuck up his nose!

You regulars who decry the VR(T) may be steely eyed fighter aces (or not) Who have diced with death over the skies of some foreign city, but you try spending 6 hours a week at some inner city ATC Squadron, dealing with a constant barrage of Parents who are complaining because little Jimmy didn't get to go flying this time, or trying to raise the funds to send a cadet to camp because his parents can't afford the £35.00, or dealing with Social Services because one of your cadets' has trouble at home, or wading through the 60 odd sheets of paper required to send cadets on an adventure training exercise! Sometime I wish for the safety of a cockpit at 450 knots and 50 feet surround by AAA!

The old saying applies here don't knock it until you've tried it! It can be really rewarding, despite the oxygen thieves. However we all have our uses even the useless ones. So come on stop knocking people for trying until you see it from the other side!

DK338

9th May 2006, 05:19

Apologies for raking this one up but I have a few thoughts to add.

After 20+ years in the RAF I fell in to my local ATC Sqn and very quickly found myself back in uniform but this time holding a VR(T) commission. Seemed like a good idea at the time!

Wind forward a few months and I get to the OIC at ATF and guess what, a room full of knobbers who are more intent in waltzing around in a uniform and larging it up in the mess. Mr Snaiths did a roaring trade. Suffice to say that my weeks experience at Cranwell was for me quite sickening and has left a very bad taste in my mouth and me wondering whether I wish to continue to be involved with a group of uber walts. Right now the thought of being in the VR(T) literally makes my skin crawl with shame, I feel that in some way I have brought shame on the uniform and the proud heritage of the real VR.

To my mind the VR(T) has no place in the Reserve Air Forces, it is nothing more than a youth organisation, a very good one, but a youth organisation nonetheless.

At first I didn't share RayDarrs views but I have to admit my outlook has changed and I now find myself firmly in his camp. I believe that all adult members of the ACO should be enrolled in the ATC/CCF as uniformed civilians, as are the adult SNCOs of the ATC thus creating a firm line between the war fighting element of the RAF and the youth organisation parented by the RAF.

The wearing of the uniform of the Queens armed services is a privelige and is earned, I do not believe that members of the VR(T) have earned that right, unless of course they are ex regulars.

Maple 01

9th May 2006, 06:00

Having left the mob less than a year ago I too moved across to helping as a CI. I share DK's concern about some of the VR(T) officers and the more waltish elements within the adult staff in general, however, it's not a new problem. I can see the validity in the point DK raises, IMO Officers and NCOs should have at least served (even Army or, at a pinch, RN;) ) but I imagine with the way the Armed Forces have contracted down the years that would be impossible.

Having slagged off the VR(T) I must say my squadron's boss is an example of all that's good about it, keen, bright and enthusiastic (mind you he is an ex Fairy.) He thinks it's mildly amusing that he's been commissioned and uses his rank as a tool to get the job done and boost his people, rather than an aid to social climbing - much like many of the better bosses I had in the RAF

mgdaviso

9th May 2006, 08:03

in any organisation (RAF included) you're going to get nobbers and walts at all ranks, DK338, it's unfortunate that you had a whole course of them. But as maple states; there are a lot of good people out there doing a job for nothing in return except the satisfaction of a job well done.

I'll state my case again

a) a volunteer is worth 10 pressed men
and
b) this situation of nobbers and walts will only be sorted by addressing the recruitment and training of VR(T) personnel by the top brass - but that's not going to happen is it?

Sensible Bod

9th May 2006, 12:05

Mr. Darr, Mr. Darr. I don't think I have had the pleasure of meeting you but pardon me for being impertinent.

The ATC is about the kids, most join because they want to get involved with the exitement of aviation and dare I say the military aspects. They don't want to become scouts.
Therefore the uniform of Her Majesty's Air Force is essential to provide some affiliation. Yes, the badging has to be clear because when I was a CWO, back in the seventies most our cadet SNCO'S had more facial hair than some of the new squaddies.
The VR-T officers in my Sdn. No 362(Ashleigh School Sqn.) were all ex national service commissioned, so therefore all knew the ropes.
The RAF as far as i know are not exempt from employing t*ssers as officers, what is happening at cranwell? By the way, 3 of my mates are ex Tornado drivers and the tales of poor discipline on their part explain why they are flying for the air touring company, Bransons Kites, and Sleazy Jet.
By the way I was a member from 1971 to 1980 as a cadet through to CWO and then CI.
I feel that an officer structure is neccesary for, dare I say a pseudo miltary organisation, yes yes I know it's supposed to be a youth organisation. The phrase in mind "we look up to them and they look down on us" springs to mind but I never felt that was the case. However whatever the situation was in the 70's I feel something has changed, perhaps the pretty distractions for the lads???.
Anyway my thoughts, don't get rid of the officers, kick them up the arse properley before they get a posting to a Sdn. remind them regulary of what the ATC stands for.
I'm now 47 wondering how I can best pay back some of the time the ATC and the RAF gave me, or am I too old.

If any Sdn. needs help I live in Cheshire about a mile from M6 J19.

NightFlit

9th May 2006, 20:20

I think its pertinent to say that it was a relatively natural progression that ex-servicemen fell into the Cadet Forces, but naturally times have changed and there is a perceived greater responsibility and liability with working with Children that deter many from getting involved after they leave.

To my mind the VR(T) has no place in the Reserve Air Forces, it is nothing more than a youth organisation, a very good one, but a youth organisation nonetheless.

Without being picky there are problems with this statement. Yes ultimately RAF VR(T) Officers hold responsibility for looking after Cadets in both CCF and ATC Units. However, there are equally RAFVR(T) Officers with the responsibility of running Squadrons of Military Aircraft (from Flying Supervisory roles to Engineering Maintenance) and complying with RAF and Joint Services regulations. It would be imposible to imagine the RAF or MOD alowing civilians to hold such responsibility.

Inevitably some individuals decide to “wear” their commission rather than taking status of the role to which they are commissioned into. The latter being the more appropriate stance, but that is human nature … and its not just isolated to RAF VR(T) Officers!

I feel that an officer structure is neccesary for, dare I say a pseudo miltary organisation

:ok:Quite right, with the ACO (along with the other Cadet Forces) mimicking the Armed Forces, such a structure is necessary. For a start they are seen more in public that the Armed Forces. It also teaches the “youth” about their national defence, which in turn gives them respect for the men and women serving and respect for the head of state.

Maple 01

9th May 2006, 20:36

Just to make one thing perfectly clear

The RAF as far as i know are not exempt from employing t*ssers as officers, what is happening at Cranwell?

In these days of equal rights I demand that the 'nobber' potential of many Swinderby and Halton (Scumbag College, Aylesbury) graduates be recognised alongside that of their Sleaford Tec commissioned brethren ;)

(Former student of the Polytechnic of West Lincolnshire - campus now known as Witham St Hughs - WTF?)

DK338

10th May 2006, 01:37

However, there are equally RAFVR(T) Officers with the responsibility of running Squadrons of Military Aircraft (from Flying Supervisory roles to Engineering Maintenance) and complying with RAF and Joint Services regulations. It would be imposible to imagine the RAF or MOD alowing civilians to hold such responsibility

No VR(T) officers running Sqns of military aircraft fella and don't include VGSs because they don't count. However, those VR(T) types on full time engagements are civil servants on J class commissions so yes they are civilians.

Quote:
I feel that an officer structure is neccesary for, dare I say a pseudo miltary organisation

Quite right, with the ACO (along with the other Cadet Forces) mimicking the Armed Forces, such a structure is necessary. For a start they are seen more in public that the Armed Forces. It also teaches the “youth” about their national defence, which in turn gives them respect for the men and women serving and respect for the head of state.

Cobblers, no way no how do you need a commission to do this.

From my exposure to the ATC over the last 10 years or so, the good guys are very much in the minority, but there are a great number of people who are quite literally in love with the wearing of the uniform and the status that adult service in the ATC affords, in particular the VR(T) commission. I've met far too may of them, shysters one and all.

In the current military climate with people on OOA operating in real danger I personally find reprehensible that there are characters out there enjoying all the benefits of the RAF but not being liable for miltary service. Not on I'm afraid!

Maple 01

10th May 2006, 06:15

In the current military climate with people on OOA operating in real danger I personally find reprehensible that there are characters out there enjoying all the benefits of the RAF but not being liable for military service. Not on I'm afraid!

Sorry, that's OTT, many of us ex-mob ATCers did plenty of OOA stuff thank-you very much*, of the others many could never join the Armed Forces because of poor health, family commitments or because it used to be plain difficult to get in. So they do the next best thing, they give their time to work with a bunch of kids who in many cases have few good male role models**. The kids might go on to join, they might not, but the experience will make them better citizens. It costs the RAF about £24m a year, for this they get a pool of 'Airminded Youth' and a lot of goodwill- bit of a bargain IMO, and all you have to complain about is that the commissioned VR(T) aren’t 'real officers!' Don't you think most of them know that?

*And in my case would have joined 7006VR on demob if they hadn’t got hung up on med cats
**Not ingnoring the girlies, just the male role model thing is kind of importaint at the moment

mgdaviso

10th May 2006, 08:25

In the current military climate with people on OOA operating in real danger I personally find reprehensible that there are characters out there enjoying all the benefits of the RAF but not being liable for miltary service. Not on I'm afraid!

err... what benefits?

I get free initial issue of uniform - I have to pay for any new uniform I need.
If I get to go to annual camp - I get to use the mess and get cheap beer for a week.
I get paid at the appropriate rate for up to 28 days a year for taking time off from my paid employment to run weekend activities and week-long camps for the kids...

big deal.... I'm not in it for the money, not in it for the uniform, the cheap beer is probably the only draw for me :p

and yes, actually VR(T) are liable for call up in extreme circumstances (not that it's likely to happen mind!)

PhoenixDaCat

10th May 2006, 11:49

Sensible Bod, 2056 (Knutsford) will be your closest sqn, and I think they are short of staff at the moment.

More info here http://www.ecsmwing.co.uk/welcome/squadrons.aspx and also in a private message I just sent.

Cat5 in the Hat

10th May 2006, 11:59

No VR(T) officers running Sqns of military aircraft fella and don't include VGSs because they don't count. However, those VR(T) types on full time engagements are civil servants on J class commissions so yes they are civilians.

What you call a J class commision is a commision in the RAFR(CC) - Civilian Component. A Civvie in Uniform if you will. They are certainly not VR(T). AEF staff pilots are VR(T).

And why don't VGS' count?

(Edited for grammar)

plans123

10th May 2006, 12:23

Changing tack here slightly, just followed the link that PheonixDaCat just provided (mainly because I'm a bit bored) and noticed that a few of the ATC Squadrons had their own squadron crests!!!!!!

Sorry, but did I miss something? are Spacey Squadrons now being awarded them as well???

A bit of a dig on Google led me to bloody loads of them, most of the plagiarising RAF Squadron crests, squadrons that have a proud history.

Surely in the current RAF 'Logo' copyright world we now inhabit, this can't be allowed.

airborne_artist

10th May 2006, 13:09

And the award for Grumpy old git of the week goes to plans123.

Which bit of the crest below do you have a problem with?

http://www.hrmconsultancy.net/images/966crestsmall.jpg

plans123

10th May 2006, 13:21

This one look familar?

12 Sqn (http://www.2425atc.org.uk/)

or this one bottom left?

56 sqn (http://www.rafmarham.co.uk/gallery/crests4.htm)

:eek:

As for the grumpy old git award - Thank you very much! :ok:

batfink2

10th May 2006, 13:38

Surely in the current RAF 'Logo' copyright world we now inhabit, this can't be allowed.
Technically they shouldn't be - however the College of Arms & Inspector of RAF Badges is, at present, turning a blind eye. Currently there are only 4 ATC Squadrons who have crests which have been formally adopted by the College of Arms.

And why should they not have crests?

Ops and Mops

10th May 2006, 13:39

and yes, actually VR(T) are liable for call up in extreme circumstances (not that it's likely to happen mind!)

Actually, no they are not. The war appointable part of the RAFVR was amalgamated into the RAuxAF in 1997.

The role of the RAFVR(T) is within the cadet Forces only and as such cannot, under current regulations or Goverment legislation, be mobilised. The most that would happen is that in a National Emergency Sqn Cdrs would be required to parade at their Parent Unit to surrender their unit service weapons and ammunition. RAFVR(T) Officers may, however, be selected for conscription (not necessarily commissioning) due to their prior limited military training. They would be, however, subject to the same medical standard etc as every one else.

There has been some debate and rumour over the years about the RAFVR(T) providing weapons and other basic training in the event of conscription. However this is not actually supported, and would require a war appointment to be created (authorised by government and the Sovereign) to allow the RAFVR(T) to be mobilised into full time service.

The RAFVR(UAS) used to have a Civil Defence role (note not a war role) until the demise of the UKWMO.

batfink2

10th May 2006, 13:41

The most that would happen is that in a National Emergency Sqn Cdrs would be required to parade at their Parent Unit to surrender their unit service weapons and ammunition.
That always makes me laugh! The thought of us handing over our No 8's must have Al-Quaeda quaking in their sandles!

Ops and Mops

10th May 2006, 13:42

Exactly.......:E

Strictly Jungly

10th May 2006, 17:21

I would like to thank the ATC (2394 E Cleveland Sqn) as it gave me a unique opportunity to see RAF life.........................and that is why I subsequently joined the best....................the FAA. So please don't knock the ATC, it serves its purpose.
Regards
SJ:eek:

tmmorris

10th May 2006, 19:55

I dunno batfink, we do have a couple of dozen vaguely serviceable L98A1s. They would knock a hole in a few enemy grunts until they jammed, as per usual.

Tim

DK338

10th May 2006, 20:23

Maple, please don't think my comments re OOA are aimed at people like you, or me for that matter. My point, although poorly articulated, is that the uniform of the RAF is that of a fighting service and as such the right to wear it is earned and I do not believe that members of the ACO with no prvious military service have earned that right. However, I do concede your point that many go into adult service with the ATC after thwarted attempts to join the regulars or because of personal circumstances. If VR(T) training was a little more robust and some of the bloaters that inhabit our ranks were counselled about pie eating and setting a good example and appropriate image, I would have a more sympathetic outlook.

I suppose after all this rhetoric is what I am trying to say is improve the training and make holders of the VR(T) commission more credible and thus worthy of wearing the uniform.

AEF staff pilots are VR(T).

Ah yes so they are, but also they are to a man ex regulars! Also it is my understanding that no VR(T) AEF pilot actually commands the AEF, that job these days falls to an RAFR Sqn Ldr, also ex regular because as you probably well know, only service qualified pilots are allowed to captain AEF Aircraft.

And why don't VGS' count?

Because you cannot possibly imagine that a glider is a military aeroplane.

wg13_dummy

10th May 2006, 21:29

Because you cannot possibly imagine that a glider is a military aeroplane.
*cough*
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e9/Airspeed_Horsas_-_Arnhem_1944_1.jpg
http://www.assaultgliderproject.co.uk/Resources/Thorp/lapb.jpg
http://www.regiments.org/img/badges/uk-crest/robinson/specfor/glider.gif

NightFlit

10th May 2006, 22:01

Quote:
And why don't VGS' count?
Because you cannot possibly imagine that a glider is a military aeroplane.

Clearly someones disgruntled! I'm sorry to say, if you look on the Strength of the RAF, the VGSs are listed as an Elementry Flying Training Unit ... ooh look, just below UASs. I don't suppose the military registration, and the fact that they are owned by the Armed Forces is a big enougth give away that they are military?

You may find that the VR (T) specific cannot be called up, but without looking too deep in the tablets of stone I'm sure you'll find that these delightful holders can have their commissioning status changed so they can be called up (excluding conscription of course). That goes for "Civilian" Instructors who act as an military aircraft commanders.

DK338

10th May 2006, 22:25

WG13... Yeah yeah! Massive difference between a Horsa/Hamilcar/Hadrian and a G103/G109.

Clearly someones disgruntled! I'm sorry to say, if you look on the Strength of the RAF, the VGSs are listed as an Elementry Flying Training Unit ... ooh look, just below UASs. I don't suppose the military registration, and the fact that they are owned by the Armed Forces is a big enougth give away that they are military?

Ah so does this mean that gliders owned by the RAFGSA/RNGA/AGA are 'military' aircraft too? No clearly not as the organisations referred to are clubs within the military and therfore the aircraft are procured privately however they are still military by association. The VGS aircraft are scourced publically so the RAF has to justify the expense somehow.

You may find that the VR (T) specific cannot be called up, but without looking too deep in the tablets of stone I'm sure you'll find that these delightful holders can have their commissioning status changed so they can be called up (excluding conscription of course). That goes for "Civilian" Instructors who act as an military aircraft commanders.

Are you referring to VGS personnel here or VR(T) in general? Either way I cannot image for a second an individual holding a VR(T) commission having his commission transferred to the active reserve for temporary mobilisation unless he/she has a specific skill that the RAF could utilise in a commissioned capacity. Nothing about being disgruntled, more about fed up to the back teeth with poseurs and social climbers!

VigilantPilot

10th May 2006, 22:30

Have to agree that we are stretching the imagination a little far to think that there would ever be a call to change VR(T) commissions and call them up.

Ops and Mops

10th May 2006, 22:35

Also it is my understanding that no VR(T) AEF pilot actually commands the AEF, that job these days falls to an RAFR Sqn Ldr, also ex regular because as you probably well know, only service qualified pilots are allowed to captain AEF Aircraft.

With the exception of OC 12AEF who has never been a regular, nor a Qualified Service Pilot as defined in the books.

He is the only person qualified to wear the unique VR Flying badge which he earned on being converted from Civilian QFI to RAFVR QFI (note not RAFVR(T) but now RAFR) via CFS. He is the product of a scheme introduced by Support Command years ago to recruit Civilian Flying Instructors to bolster the AEFs. OC 12 AEF was the only successful student from this course to earn his VR wings, and the scheme was subsequently scrapped.

Agreed though that he is the exception rather than the rule!

I'm sure you'll find that these delightful holders can have their commissioning status changed so they can be called up

I'm sure you'll find that they can't. It would have to go to the Sovreign first to change their role, Terms of Appointment, the role of the RAFVR(T) as established and then select those fit to carry out a War Role. As has been said, some are thinking far too far outside the box here.

Maple 01

10th May 2006, 22:35

My point, although poorly articulated, is that the uniform of the RAF is that of a fighting service and as such the right to wear it is earned and I do not believe that members of the ACO with no previous military service have earned that right
I see where you're coming from DK, I hadn't given it too much thought until a while back when a Rock, of all people, said that we 'quins should take more pride in our blue berets because we'd earned the right to wear them - not quite in the RM/Para stylee but even so, not just any man/woman in off the street could pass basic/Cranwell* - he caught me giving my boots a quick pre GDT brush-up with mine :O

Perhaps if ATC Adult NCOs and VR(T) Officers that haden't served wore a disk behind the capbadge? It might help identify some of the walts and wannabies, but as they say, some of the biggest choppers in the ATC are ex-mob

Swinderby c1983 - think 'Bad Lads Army' but with more swearing and random acts of violence

NightFlit

10th May 2006, 22:49

Ah so does this mean that gliders owned by the RAFGSA/RNGA/AGA are 'military' aircraft too?

lol, No I believe they come under some form of Trust. At least their gliders are registered under the CAA or BGA, so no.

Are you referring to VGS personnel here or VR(T) in general? Either way I cannot image for a second an individual holding a VR(T) commission having his commission transferred to the active reserve for temporary mobilisation unless he/she has a specific skill that the RAF could utilise in a commissioned capacity.

Na, I'm being general since the VR(T) commission (speaking loosly) is much the same for all areas of it. Obviously (using the full abilities of common sence) we would need some form of all out war before steps to be taken. But I understand it is possible.

DK338

10th May 2006, 22:51

but as they say, some of the biggest choppers in the ATC are ex-mob

Not experienced much of that, however have experienced the 'Oh your RAF service doesn't count for much' attitude from plenty of VR(T) choppers.:mad:

Like the idea of a clear differentiation between ex regulars and the rest, mind you rememberance parade is usually a laugh when Fg Off Smegead VR(T) rolls up with a chest full of scrap metal and the rest can only muster a cadet forces thingymajig, the RAFA boys and girls attitude changes immediately:=

Ops and Mops

10th May 2006, 22:54

Obviously (using the full abilities of common sence) we would need some form of all out war before steps to be taken. But I understand it is possible.

:suspect: :hmm:

spillage

11th May 2006, 08:15

I shared a room at Cranwell with a guy who was ex-VR (T) and I was hit with snippets like 'things are a lot different once your in' and 'I already have my comission' he even asked for increased seniority based on time with the ATC - I was in the scouts, does that count?

Don't get me wrong the VR (T) and ATC do a great job, but there should be some demarkation.;)

mgdaviso

11th May 2006, 08:36

Not experienced much of that, however have experienced the 'Oh your RAF service doesn't count for much' attitude from plenty of VR(T) choppers.:mad:
Completely barmy - an Ex-regular might not know much about working with/training teenage cadets, but their life experience, RAF experience, and one would hope leadership, teamworking ability, etc would be a goldmine to any ATC unit. Any RAF VR(T) or ATC SNCO who doesn't realise that is a kn0b

Like the idea of a clear differentiation between ex regulars and the rest, mind you rememberance parade is usually a laugh when Fg Off Smegead VR(T) rolls up with a chest full of scrap metal and the rest can only muster a cadet forces thingymajig, the RAFA boys and girls attitude changes immediately:=
and your point there is?

Postman Plod

11th May 2006, 17:22

Umm there is demarkation - the little ATC / VRT tags clearly differentiate between regulars and ATC / VRT?

frigthestoat

11th May 2006, 22:34

Volunteers commissioned in the RAFVR(T) do a great job guys. I've met many of them and they put in hours of work for the good of the Corps. Yes there are smegeads as well, in particular associated with one well discussed VGS in Hampshire, but hey, this group is an exception who should not be used to judge the rest of us-just a few who give us a bad name.

diginagain

12th May 2006, 05:04

Whilst not wishing to drag this thread on any further than the Regulars would want, I have to agree with mgdaviso's point. Despite being ex-AAC, my local ATC Squadron welcomed me with open arms. Each member of the adult staff have shown me nothing but courtesy, and seem to genuinely appreciate the input and insight on Service life, ethos and values that I bring. The cadets equally, if not more so.

As a cadet in the mid-1970s, the vast majority of the adult staff had served at some stage - my first OC was a former Spitfire driver from the BoB - and we looked up to these people for inspiration. Since so few of the population of the UK are exposed to Service life these days, it is no wonder that the ACO at Squadron level has to accept those with a 'civilian-only' background. Those with whom it has been my pleasure to work would want the ATC to retain its links with the RAF, lest it become just another youth club.

Now, could we get on with providing potential recruits to the Services with some useful skills, and drop the sniping? :ok:

Edited for spelling, as my caffeine autoject misfired.

Postman Plod

12th May 2006, 07:06

Hmm you know, rather than moan about the staff of the ATC becoming less and less ex mil, and therefore "not deserving of the uniform", how about all you ex-mil guys out there who cant stand the VRT / ATC join up and try to move it forward, and put some service life back into the ATC! God knows as an organisation we need the staff, and those of us who are NOT ex mil appreciate the input from those who have been through the system! (well most of us do anyway!)

incubus

12th May 2006, 15:38

Just be prepared to acknowledge that the cadet forces are not the armed services and there are some very real differences which need to be considered.

The wealth of knowledge, expertise (some of which may actually count for naught, but that is another matter) and stories can only enhance the organization but there is still a steep learning curve, especially for those servicemen and women who are a bit longer in the tooth.

The Air Cadets really are at the fluffier side of "service life" and the working practices are far more in the style of modern management than, say, the forces of 10 years ago. I'm not saying that it is for the best, just that it is.

dazjs

18th May 2006, 19:33

I think that I could say, that, if I were a (Non-Commisioned)serving member of the regular RAF and had been in the Force for nearly 15 years, served the Queen and counrty on many occasions, put my life on the line many times, been apart from my loved ones and witnessed the evillness of armed conflict then I would be uncomfortable being put in situations where a RAFVR(FT) Officer who has no military experience has command over me. I would feel that i had earned the right to wear that uniform and beret with pride. I understand that these VR Officers have a responsibility and a position of authority but it should be only for the cadets. I do not think that Civilians who do a week or so on officer training and have no military experience should be placed in command of regular service men. From what I know the VR do not have to do annual fitness tests, annual defense training, orderly duties and go to the gulf. Regular's DO. In some cases i think that the VR Officer in command would have no concept of the different stresses that the Regulars would be under.
I agree with the statment by RayDarr (http://www.pprune.org/forums/member.php?u=128437) vbmenu_register("postmenu_2380382", true); that some VR's feel threatened by Regular's and as a result would create the need to prove ones rank therefore creating bad feeling.
VR(T) should not in my opinion have the same status as "Full Blown" RAF officers and uniform or an emblem should be worn to show this.

VigilantPilot

18th May 2006, 20:07

Isn't that what the shiny metal VRT pins through the rank slides are there for though? Not being funny, but you can usually spot a VR(T) Officer from a long way off by the beer gut. Seriously though, I have worked with quite a few VR(T) and I have complete respect for most of them as youth organisation leaders.

Big Bear

18th May 2006, 20:09

mgdaviso

18th May 2006, 20:20

Dazjs - do you know anything about the VR(T)???? I suspect very little.
You do get the odd knob who will try to lord it over a regular airman or junior officer - but they are few and far between.
We don't get involved in operational taskings so it's highly unlikely that a VR(T) Officer would have "command" over someone in the regulars.
The exception to this is where the safety, security and welfare of the cadets in our charge are concerned. occasionally I have had to reign-in an over-zealous "ACLO team" helper because they were
a) treating cadets like regular soldiers.
or
b) driving around dangerously in a land rover on a "night exercise" with the chance of people being run over.
any other time and I'd make a pleasant request for cooperation.
We have gold VR(T) badges on our shoulders to denote our branch - is this not enough?

dazjs

18th May 2006, 20:25

[quote=DK338]No VR(T) officers running Sqns of military aircraft fella and don't include VGSs because they don't count. However, those VR(T) types on full time engagements are civil servants on J class commissions so yes they are civilians.

The Gliders based at Syerston are maintained by civillians who are commanded by a full time RAF JEngO.

have to correct you there. they are maintained by regular servicemen and women, commanded with a full time JengO with a RAFVR Squadron Leader over him.

dazjs

18th May 2006, 20:30

mgdaviso

18th May 2006, 20:42

I have a freind in the RAF and he has been all over the world. He is now at RAF Syerston where all the aircrew are Reservists (Paid, voulenteers?) and from what he says they DO have command over RAF Full time personell. They do not wear little badges and are clvil servants paid by the hour but wear RAF flying suits. Hows that work ???????

That's because they are RAFR probably, not RAF VR(T).

completely different animal mate.

dazjs

18th May 2006, 20:53

That's because they are RAFR probably, not RAF VR(T).

completely different animal mate.

Thanks for that, not how twas explained to me. What sort of contract are they on then as they dont have to do half the stuff as my mate, they just have a normal 8 - 5 job. Do they go to IRAQ with the other reservists. seems an odd setup????

mgdaviso

18th May 2006, 21:14

RAF - Regular people being paid to do their job. Fight wars (or LEAN)

RAFAux or RAAuxF - The RAF's TA

RAFVR(T) - Run the Air Cadet Organisation

RAFR - Usually (but not always) retired or ex-RAF people, employed as (I think) J class reserve. Civil servants, limited call up liability - NOT, by any stretch of the imagination the "real" RAF. For example, generally all ATC Wing AdO's are J Class RAFR's - Ours is an ex-Wing Cdr Rock, and bloody good at his job he is too.

NightFlit

18th May 2006, 22:18

[quote=Big Bear] Quote:
Originally Posted by DK338
No VR(T) officers running Sqns of military aircraft fella and don't include VGSs because they don't count. However, those VR(T) types on full time engagements are civil servants on J class commissions so yes they are civilians.

The Gliders based at Syerston are maintained by civillians who are commanded by a full time RAF JEngO.

have to correct you there. they are maintained by regular servicemen and women, commanded with a full time JengO with a RAFVR Squadron Leader over him.

These same regulars, also maintain the other 120 or so conventional & motor gliders around the UK!

Isn't the OC CGS a regular? The Gliding Examiners of CFS certainly are.

Big Bear

19th May 2006, 07:26

[quote=Big Bear]

have to correct you there. they are maintained by regular servicemen and women, commanded with a full time JengO with a RAFVR Squadron Leader over him.

I stand corrected that there may be some servicemen there, however there is a large number of civillian staff. I know this because of the discussion I had with the previous JEngO one happy hour after he had had a particularly trying week.

Cat5 in the Hat

19th May 2006, 08:18

OC ACCGS = Regular Wg Cdr. CI ACCGS = Regular Sqn Ldr.
OC CFS Gliding = Regular Sqn Ldr.

Everyone else at ACCGS is part of RAFR(CC). Thy have had to complete ROIT, and OASC to get there.

There are a few civvy drivers, but all the engineers at Eng Flt are regulars.

Big Bear

19th May 2006, 08:46

Funnily enough it was the drivers he was complianing about

background

19th May 2006, 11:52

And How is that relevant to the ATC?

dazjs

19th May 2006, 18:48

Funnily enough it was the drivers he was complianing about

Couldn't cope, thats what happens when reservists, regulars and civvy have to work together.

I'd love to work there, sound like aright chilled place, do they jusy glide all day. do you not to be in the RAF or just the ATC to work there?????

mgdaviso

19th May 2006, 19:45

Couldn't cope, thats what happens when reservists, regulars and civvy have to work together.

I'd love to work there, sound like aright chilled place, do they jusy glide all day. do you not to be in the RAF or just the ATC to work there?????

dazjs - you obviously don't have an iota of a clue of what goes on.....

The ATC Central Gliding School parents our 29 gliding squadrons (spread around the country). This means the have to maintain the glider fleet (I have no idea how many gliders we have, but guessing at a minimum of 2/3 per squadron means probably over 100 aircraft. All of which need airworthiness certificates - annual inspections, etc etc. The instructors also need to have annual check rides, etc, etc and theres all the niff naff and triv to do, so they don't just "glide all day", but provide a professional service to the UK largest gliding school operator and best voluntary youth organisation..

NightFlit

19th May 2006, 21:41

The ATC Central Gliding School parents our 29 gliding squadrons (spread around the country).

I think that should read:

"The Air Cadets Central Gliding School parents our 27 Gliding Squadrons..."

--

I think I'm right in saying that the civilian staff is predominantly administration staff. Of course Syerston is now utilised by other units as well these days.

Ops and Mops

19th May 2006, 22:23

RAFAux or RAAuxF - The RAF's TA

Would I be right in thinking you mean the RAuxAF? (Royal Auxiliary Air Force)

Not quite the "RAF's TA......" although I know where you are coming from with that statement!

RAFR - Usually (but not always) retired or ex-RAF people, employed as (I think) J class reserve. Civil servants, limited call up liability - NOT, by any stretch of the imagination the "real" RAF

Again a little bit of confusion here.

The RAF Reserve (RAFR) is made up of many different classes which dictates the call up liability for those serving in the reserve. This ranges from the "regular Reserve" which are those who have completed their regular service engagement and are transferred to the reserve but still have a full call up liability; Sponsored Reservists (such as the Mobile Met Unit), who work for an MoD contractor (such as the Met Office) but are required to deploy on full call up liability as part of their contract; Some reservists employed by the MoD in the Military Support Function in Full Time Reserve Service on Home Commitment (ie no overseas deployment) that includes the old J class, now known as the RAFR (Civilian Component).

I think that your statement "NOT, by any stretch of the imagination the "real" RAF." for those guys and gals of the RAFR that are serving in Basra, Kabul, Kandahar, Oman, Bosnia et al is maybe a little off target.

dazjs

20th May 2006, 18:58

dazjs - you obviously don't have an iota of a clue of what goes on.....

The ATC Central Gliding School parents our 29 gliding squadrons (spread around the country). This means the have to maintain the glider fleet (I have no idea how many gliders we have, but guessing at a minimum of 2/3 per squadron means probably over 100 aircraft. All of which need airworthiness certificates - annual inspections, etc etc. The instructors also need to have annual check rides, etc, etc and theres all the niff naff and triv to do, so they don't just "glide all day", but provide a professional service to the UK largest gliding school operator and best voluntary youth organisation..

Thank you for enlightening me. :D
Its possible that I am not as familiar to the organisation as yourself. However, on a more serious note, as one is entitled to have as opinion, I do feel that in times of conflict and when our regular boys are out in the Gulf without the right clothing or hardware, that taxpayers money is misplaced on such activities. I am not Pro War in the slightest. I simply feel that those guys are going out there on a shoe string. And the RAF are still pouring bucket loads of cash into ATC. How much does one Glider cost? How many do they have? they reducing the RAF all the time and i just think the priorities are all to :mad: . end of lecture.:ooh:

tmmorris

20th May 2006, 20:00

And where do you think the RAF of 2010, 2015 or 2020 will come from?

T

DK338

20th May 2006, 20:23

I do feel that in times of conflict and when our regular boys are out in the Gulf without the right clothing or hardware, that taxpayers money is misplaced on such activities. I am not Pro War in the slightest. I simply feel that those guys are going out there on a shoe string. And the RAF are still pouring bucket loads of cash into ATC. How much does one Glider cost? How many do they have? they reducing the RAF all the time and i just think the priorities are all to . end of lecture.

Couldn't agree more! But what really grips my sh!t are people noncing around in military uniforms with no military service and I do not mean RNR/TA/RAuxAF.

Do not misunderstand me, I am fully aware of the value of any youth organisation but where youth leaders are allowed to hold the Queens Commission in a military organisation without ever having fulfilled any military service then I do have an issue. Since becoming more involved with the ATC I have become increasingly aware of people who have no desire to join the regular service but instead see the ATC as a good way in without any of the commitment expected for the wearing of the uniform. A recent example is a CWO who openly stated that he saw military life as too dangerous but still 'fancied' being an officer. A VR(T) commission was his chosen path.:mad:

My suggestion would be that VR(T) officers would become ATC officers, wear different coloured rank badges, in a similar vein to the ROC, be given different titles and wear the ATC CI style badge as a collar dog on the No1 with the same badge being used as a hat/cap badge. And no right to use the respective messes, you earn the right to use these facilities and no member of the ATC, unless of course they are ex regular SNCO/Commissioned, has earned that right!

As for the cadets, they wouldn't know any better!

And where do you think the RAF of 2010, 2015 or 2020 will come from?

Ah that old chestnut, where they always get them from - civvy street. Don't overplay your position, if you honestly believe that the ATC is the single source of personnel for the future RAF you're living in dreamland. I would argue, and this is from first hand experience, that some of the worst examples of the RAF are ex ATC. I have rather wondered about young people who display an unhealthy interest in militarism, rather more keen on the youngster who joins for the adventure than the drill and military crap myself.

Maple 01

20th May 2006, 21:26

Ah, bloody hell, I'll bite, I was sick of Eurovision anyway!

Ah that old chestnut, where they always get them from - civvy street. Don't overplay your position, if you honestly believe that the ATC is the single source of personnel for the future RAF you're living in dreamland.

So the time honoured 60% Officers and 40% Airmen are ex-ATC is tripe then? I know we had an 'outing' session in the bar on det and of seven of us, three officers, three NCOs and 1 Airman all were ex ATC/CCF.

Couldn't agree more! But what really grips my sh!t are people noncing around in military uniforms with no military service and I do not mean RNR/TA/RAuxAF

With the passing of the generations that served during the war or National Service cadets is the main exposure kids get to the Armed Forces apart from Hollywood blockbusters:ugh: :yuk: . Without the hard work of the VR(T) and ATC staff that have never worn HM’s uniform (of whatever colour) ‘in anger’ the cadet system would collapse – there aren’t enough of us old bastards to go round and many of us don’t have the time to commit to uniformed service.

I have rather wondered about young people who display an unhealthy interest in militarism, rather more keen on the youngster who joins for the adventure than the drill and military crap myself.

Whilst I was a cadet and later when serving I was never that keen of that side of life either, nor with the creeping 'greening' of the RAF, introduction of the Fitness tests and other cr@p that took me away from my primary role! Then we went all expeditionary and there was some point to it.

I see in some of our male cadets the macho pseudo military posturing that you deplore so much, and go out of my way to point out that's not how the RAF works - We need thinkers not cannon fodder, and eventually they'll grow out of it, if Halton/Cranwell are doing their jobs properly round about day 2 - sadly I'm not allowed to kick it out of them (though came close last week:uhoh: ). The girls strangely enough don’t seem to go through this phase – I may have to put bromide in the lads tea….

Shaft109

20th May 2006, 21:27

I spent 2 years at a VGS in the North West, and 6 years in the ATC. In that time I personally knew 6 people who are now regular officers, and 3 lads who are now Commercial pilots, one in NATS and 4 in the RAF ground trades- hopefully that will be 4 Commercials pilots when I get there - so on that count the system is producing lots of air minded people, and I thought that was the point of the ATC/VGS/UAS?

DK338

20th May 2006, 22:00

Ho hum here we go,

So the time honoured 60% Officers and 40% Airmen are ex-ATC is tripe then?

Actually that's not what I said, what I did say though was:

Ah that old chestnut, where they always get them from - civvy street. Don't overplay your position, if you honestly believe that the ATC is the single source of personnel for the future RAF you're living in dreamland.

Not denying the contribution that the ACO makes to RAF recruitment, bearing in mind of course that officially it is not a recruiting tool for the RAF, but these figures only serve to illustrate that 40% of officers and 60% of airmen come from outside of the ACO. Also they're stats and I have a deep mistrust of any statistical data produced by a government department.:}

With the passing of the generations that served during the war or National Service cadets is the main exposure kids get to the Armed Forces apart from Hollywood blockbusters . Without the hard work of the VR(T) and ATC staff that have never worn HM’s uniform (of whatever colour) ‘in anger’ the cadet system would collapse – there aren’t enough of us old bastards to go round and many of us don’t have the time to commit to uniformed service.

Can't disagree with you on this Maple old boy, mind you I decided to put on a uniform for the very reasons you highlight. Sad really that so few ex regulars actually do get involved, but from my experiences so far with mates who are still serving their view of the ATC is very poor. Bumped into an old boss who is now a pretty senior chap a few weeks ago in an Officers' Mess, he was initially delighted that I had decided to leap across into the dark side until I told him it was with the ACO, his reaction was less than enthusiastic although being the gent that he is he didn't actually say anything.

I spent 2 years at a VGS in the North West, and 6 years in the ATC. In that time I personally knew 6 people who are now regular officers, and 3 lads who are now Commercial pilots, one in NATS and 4 in the RAF ground trades- hopefully that will be 4 Commercials pilots when I get there - so on that count the system is producing lots of air minded people, and I thought that was the point of the ATC/VGS/UAS?

This data although superficially impressive tells me nothing other than that you were already interested in aviation and the ATC probably did little to influence you or your buddies.

mgdaviso

21st May 2006, 12:38

Would I be right in thinking you mean the RAuxAF? (Royal Auxiliary Air Force)
Not quite the "RAF's TA......" although I know where you are coming from with that statement!
Again a little bit of confusion here.
The RAF Reserve (RAFR) is made up of many different classes which dictates the call up liability for those serving in the reserve. This ranges from the "regular Reserve" which are those who have completed their regular service engagement and are transferred to the reserve but still have a full call up liability; Sponsored Reservists (such as the Mobile Met Unit), who work for an MoD contractor (such as the Met Office) but are required to deploy on full call up liability as part of their contract; Some reservists employed by the MoD in the Military Support Function in Full Time Reserve Service on Home Commitment (ie no overseas deployment) that includes the old J class, now known as the RAFR (Civilian Component).
I think that your statement "NOT, by any stretch of the imagination the "real" RAF." for those guys and gals of the RAFR that are serving in Basra, Kabul, Kandahar, Oman, Bosnia et al is maybe a little off target.
Apols - my knowledge of the RAFR was lacking - upon reading your post I now remember the guys n gals of 1359 flight who are of course - ex regulars,retained as RAFR to fly the hercs.
No disrespect intended - just a senior moment of forgetfullnes... The RAFR I was talking about were the ones I have most exposure to, in them being the J class reserve, who of course have done their time and earned their respect, but are now generally just civil servants wearing a uniform.
and yes I meant RAuxAF - it was a typo.
DK338 - Haven't you said all this about four pages back... It was cr@p then and it's still cr@p now.:yuk:

Ornithologist

21st May 2006, 19:22

Thank you for enlightening me. :D
Its possible that I am not as familiar to the organisation as yourself. However, on a more serious note, as one is entitled to have as opinion, I do feel that in times of conflict and when our regular boys are out in the Gulf without the right clothing or hardware, that taxpayers money is misplaced on such activities. I am not Pro War in the slightest. I simply feel that those guys are going out there on a shoe string. And the RAF are still pouring bucket loads of cash into ATC. How much does one Glider cost? How many do they have? they reducing the RAF all the time and i just think the priorities are all to :mad: . end of lecture.:ooh:

Just how many of those Regular Folks 'Out there' in the Gulf do you think went through the ATC/CCF? - a very large percentage!. I dont think they begrudge the ATC its existence, or its funds, & the time & effort of ATC & VR(T) Volunteers who helped send out better prepared and well rounded personnel. Let them speak for themselves.

Any organisation that does not invest in its future is bound to fall... That is why the Government ergo, the RAF, recognises that it has to invest in the countries future, not just today, with the training and investment they make in the Corps.

The current conflicts will fade away, then the next one comes along, such is the nature of conflict, but to dismantle 1000 ATC squadrons, plus VGS's, AEF's, Training Centres etc not to mention all the Property, across the country for a perceived short term financial gain would cost the Country considerably more and take a virtually impossible amount of time and effort to attempt to recreate it in times of greater need.

The AFB & The AMP downwards make these decisions, you have to abide by those decisions made within the organs of Government & by our Senior Officers who help make the policy, thats why its a Service, not a meritocracy..

Dajzs, yes you are cleary not familiar with the organisation, and yes you are entitled to an opinion, however an INFORMED opinion is best. Go and bone up a bit more on the Detail, Dig beneath the gloss. If you had you would have realised the true value of the ATC and why its essential to invest :ugh:

The disgraceful situation of our Boys & Girls out there not having the right equipment and protection is a different, and far more important discussion

Ops and Mops

21st May 2006, 19:44

I now remember the guys n gals of 1359 flight who are of course - ex regulars,retained as RAFR to fly the hercs.

They are actually in the RAuxAF along with the few RAuxAF F3 Jockeys that are still around! (All collectively known as Reservist Aircrew) ;)

The RAFR aircrew you may come across away from ACCGS are the Aviaton Officer (AvO) Grades in the RAFR(CC) generally employed in the Flying Training systems as QFI's. More "Civil Servants in Blue suits", but most with quite experienced and/or distinguished regular service backgrounds.

SirToppamHat

21st May 2006, 19:46

The disgraceful situation of our Boys & Girls out there not having the right equipment and protection is a different, and far more important discussion

... and absolutely nothing to do with the tiny amount of money (in relative terms) that the Air Training Corps costs the taxpayer.

STH

Ornithologist

21st May 2006, 19:51

Sorry, but did I miss something? are Spacey Squadrons now being awarded them as well??? :=

Its been going on for at least 30 years to my knowledge & experience, probably far far longer... another case of UNfamiliarity breeding contempt.

Again, anyone reading the history of the ADCC/ATC would understand the true nature of the Corps role and its relationship with the Armed Forces and we would not even be discussing this.

Guys, please, go and study the Corps in more detail before coming up with such uninformed trivia . :ugh:

In 1938, a year before our time of greatest need, A visionary AOC recognised the need for the ADCC, the ATC as is later became. Lets not try to decry or dismantle it, only to bemoan its demise in a time of greater need that will inevtiably come one day even if that day is far away.

Many older Cadets 'served' in WWII at their local stations in menial but useful tasks helping to ground handle aircraft etc, releasing service personnel for better things, until their own call ups and in many cases deaths. Bet ya didn't know that ! :*

Ornithologist

21st May 2006, 19:53

... and absolutely nothing to do with the tiny amount of money (in relative terms) that the Air Training Corps costs the taxpayer.

STH :ok: My point exactly STH :ok:

Maple 01

21st May 2006, 20:02

Which is about £24 million - next to bu@@er all for a means of fostering good citizenship and air-mindedness in the youth of the UK, who, despite what you might read in the papers, aren’t generally a bunch of chavs or wasters.

(And it is a good recruitment tool too, not that of course it is ;) )

Many older Cadets 'served' in WWII some with the ATA!

dazjs

21st May 2006, 20:50

And where do you think the RAF of 2010, 2015 or 2020 will come from?

T

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=225687

Dave5705

21st May 2006, 20:57

As a Cadet in the ATC I thought I should post something on this thread.
I have been a member of the ATC for 5 years and am nearing the end of my cadet career. I have done so many great things with the ACO in my time, and I highly reccomend the organisation to any teenager. I have benefited from my time in the ACO and have learnt so much. I feel, the ACO has made me a better person and will help me in whatever career I persue in later life.
The Corps is by no means perfect and has a few problems, like any other organisation does. Yes some members of staff are w*nkers and should not hold a comission, but this is a small minority of the adult staff that make up this organisation.
Instead of hanging around, being chavs and a general problem to society, the ACO teaches teenager many thing. respect, discipline, leadership skills and team work, to name a few. Teenagers have the chance to fire rifles, fly aircraft and meet people from all over the country. People that they wouldn't usually have any contact with.
For young people interested in joing the RAF, or any other branch of the armed forces, the ACO help them tremendously. The Corps does help in recruitment for the RAF, I think it gives you an advantage when/if you go for OASC.
To all the people who don't like the ATC and think that it should be done away with I ask: Were you members of the ATC?

These are all my opinions and if anyone disagess then fine. However please don't slate me too much about this.
Thanks for reading
Dave

dazjs

21st May 2006, 21:24

I have a mate who is in the RAF but works for the ACO. We had a chin wag over a beer this weekend. He goes away quite a lot and gets cheesed off back at his own base when he has people lording over him that have no military experience at all. I do wonder, what pecentage of Air Cadets go on to join the RAF. I wouldn't join the RAF. I wanted to a few years ago, good job I didn't with the lataest round of redundancies. As for the Voulenteer Gliding schools, why dont these people join private gliding clubs? ITS TO EXPENSIVE!!!! sttaight from the horses mouth

Maple 01

21st May 2006, 21:52

I wouldn't join the RAF. I wanted to a few years ago, good job I didn't

Er, I think you've just killed off your credibility there! You're certainly entitled to your opinion but don't feel you can speak with any degree of authority on what the boys and girls in the sandpit think, nor try and hold some moral high-ground on priorities. You've never served by your own admission, you say you're not familiar with the VGS, were you ever even a cadet?

Its possible that I am not as familiar to the organisation as yourself.
How many do they have? they reducing the RAF all the time and i just think the priorities are all to . end of lecture.

And I think the moon is made of cream cheese - speaking as a non-expert outsider with little or no practical moon exploration experience guess how relevant my thoughts are to the topic of the rock strata of the moon? I wouldn’t presume to lecture NASA on the subject.

NightFlit

21st May 2006, 23:13

As for the Voulenteer Gliding schools, why dont these people join private gliding clubs? ITS TO EXPENSIVE!!!! sttaight from the horses mouth

Actually private gliding clubs, particularly the GSA, is quite cheep, and a lot are members of private clubs. I think your looking at the wrong end of your horse! The simple answer is that the VGSs are not flying/gliding clubs and don't operate as such. I am speaking with regard to recent years, as a lot has changed. Effectively they are elementry training units. A private club it's more like your local golf club, a completely different atmosphere with completely different aims!

Washington_Irving

22nd May 2006, 06:18

Which is about £24 million - next to bu@@er all for a means of fostering good citizenship and air-mindedness in the youth of the UK, who, despite what you might read in the papers, aren’t generally a bunch of chavs or wasters.
(And it is a good recruitment tool too, not that of course it is ;) )
some with the ATA!

I believe that works out at about £800 per cadet, per year. Hardly breaking the bank now, is it?

fade to grey

22nd May 2006, 08:56

Hi,
I still personally feel that the ATC is a great recruiting tool for the service and for aviation in general -I spent seven years in it becoming a CWO ultimately.
I think it has a slight image problem with alot of the teenagers today -but that is a society wide problem.
yes, as a vouluntary organisation it does attract alot of 'wannabes' (you know the type,poncing around in flying suits pretending to be 'maverick' and the traffic warden turned uniformed god type),
However from my peer group we produced:
3 airline pilots
2 RAF pilots
3 RAF officers
numerous airmen

Not a bad result, I can still recall vivdly my first solo in 1988 at Benson in the venture (thank you flt lt hazelwood !)
and if it wasn't for that i wouldn't be sitting in a 757 today !

Lou Scannon

22nd May 2006, 13:18

Without the ATC, and in particular a Squadron in the Midlands, I would never have made it to be a pilot in the RAF, an airline captain flying large and well paid aircraft and now, a prosperous retiree being able to do pretty much whatever I want.

I owe them big time!:ok:

tmmorris

22nd May 2006, 13:37

My suggestion would be that VR(T) officers would become ATC officers,

Only problem with that is I'm not a member of the ATC...

T

DK338

22nd May 2006, 16:39

Only problem with that is I'm not a member of the ATC...

Ah yes, but by disbanding the VR(T) and enrolling you in the ATC, which was my point.....................

Sook

22nd May 2006, 17:21

Ah yes, but by disbanding the VR(T) and enrolling you in the ATC, which was my point.....................

I think what he means is that he's part of the CCF (RAF) branch, which is not part of the ATC, but is part of the ACO (Air Cadet Organisation). Confusing I know! It was so much easier in the old days.

Sook

22nd May 2006, 17:22

First of all let me say how interesting this thread is.

Let me explain my background so you know where I’m coming from. I joined the ATC aged 14 and 8 years later left as a CWO. I am currently a CI, and I am applying for a commission in the VR(T). After I finished university I considered joining the RAF, but I wasn’t really interested in becoming an EngO as they didn’t seem to do what I wanted to be doing, which was work with the aircraft. I got an offer from a civvy company doing design, so I took that. I considered joining the RAuxAF, but around my neck of the woods they are Regiment units, and playing in the mud has never really been my thing! So I decided to stick it out in the ATC, and am currently deputy Adj on my squadron as well as doing various other jobs.

Now I may not have any real knowledge of how the RAF works, but I feel that after 10 years involvement in the ATC I do have a good knowledge of how the Corps works. I feel that this stands me in good stead if I actually get commissioned. I understand that it’s easier to achieve a commission in the ATC than the RAF, but if I was offered an IOT course similar to those RAuxAF officers go through I would jump at the chance. If I’m going to be an officer I don’t want to do it half-arsed! I am very proud of the RAF and the association the ATC has with it. It’s what marks us apart from every youth organisation in the country.

At the end of the day, I do like being in uniform but I’m not really fussed if my commission is real or just an ATC one so long as it allows me to get the job done to the best of my ability.

I’m sorry that some Regular and Aux personnel have had bad experiences (as I have) with VR(T) officers who have ideas above their station, but generally they’re not a bad bunch.

Finally, and please don’t take this as in anyway sarcastic, could someone who has served in both the RAF (or RAuxAF) and the VR(T) give me some examples of how their service knowledge helped them in their ATC capacity? I am genuinely interested, as having little knowledge of the day to day running of the RAF, I can’t comment on how similar/dissimilar it is to the ATC.

Thanks

Dave

onlyme

22nd May 2006, 22:16

Well said Lou Scannon!

I too benefited from my time as a Cadet and now having had a career flying both fast jets and commercial, am trying to give back a little to the Corps. I am proud to wear the VRT pins and proud to serve with a broad range of committed and talented uniformed and civilian staff. They all bring enormous experience from their family lives and civilian occupations and give of their time and talents generously. They provide a service and experience to our young people that simply isn't available elsewhere.

Tamper with the military links at your peril. The entire structure, tradition and ethos of the Corps depend totally on the close relationship with the RAF. Commissioning of our VRT Officers and their acceptance as "fellow officers" is an essential ingredient of that close bond. When I am surrounded by teachers, senior managers, businessmen, senior police officers, skilled workers, committed parents, university lecturers, airline pilots, engineers, medical professionals etc etc, it doesn't seem to matter that they haven't served in the RAF, they collectively bring more skills than I can to a military youth organisation. I fear that any dilution would weaken the relationship and lessen the air minded military ethos that we value so much.

Are there any bad eggs? You bet, but they are few and far between and are rarely commissioned.

Jester282

22nd May 2006, 22:47

My cards on the table. I am a VRT officer, am a scaly brat as I come from an RAF family background (three generations) and have been in the ATC since the age if 13 as a cadet, CI, AWO and Officer.

Despite having met some prats and walts in my time, some of whom were actually exRAF airmen / NCOs who fancied "lording it" and "poncing around" as a VRT officer, I am proud of my service - yes it is service, not military / combat service obviously, but service - of thousands and thousands of hours over many years - to the best youth organisation in this country.

No I am NOT a wannabe and no I don't "ponce around" on RAF stations looking for salutes off airmen. Yes I do know some individuals who do / have done that and we - as in those (the vast majority of VRT officers) who know what we are in and why we are in it and don't suffer from delusions of grandeur - laugh at these walts and are embarrassed by them.

To all of you out there who are criticsing VRT officers, as you have such strong opinions why dont you offer your services to the ATC - obviously as a CI or Adult SNCO as you wouldnt take the commissioned route - and put half as much effort into advancing the ATC. You may find out that your strongly held opinions are actually totally unfair and reflect a small minority of idiots and walts that should never have made it into uniform of any kind (except perhaps traffic wardens), and that the majority of RAFVR(T) officers (and the AWO / SNCOs and Civiian Instructors) work their nuts off to generate great training opportunities for young pepole.

Now I know I am going to get a load of flak off some very opiniated people but I don't give a monkey's stuff. Enjoy attacking me for speaking my mind.

Jester282

23rd May 2006, 10:41

I too benefited from my time as a Cadet and now having had a career flying both fast jets and commercial, am trying to give back a little to the Corps. I am proud to wear the VRT pins and proud to serve with a broad range of committed and talented uniformed and civilian staff. They all bring enormous experience from their family lives and civilian occupations and give of their time and talents generously. They provide a service and experience to our young people that simply isn't available elsewhere.

Tamper with the military links at your peril. The entire structure, tradition and ethos of the Corps depend totally on the close relationship with the RAF. Commissioning of our VRT Officers and their acceptance as "fellow officers" is an essential ingredient of that close bond. When I am surrounded by teachers, senior managers, businessmen, senior police officers, skilled workers, committed parents, university lecturers, airline pilots, engineers, medical professionals etc etc, it doesn't seem to matter that they haven't served in the RAF, they collectively bring more skills than I can to a military youth organisation. I fear that any dilution would weaken the relationship and lessen the air minded military ethos that we value so much.

Are there any bad eggs? You bet, but they are few and far between and are rarely commissioned.

Thank you for such an eloquent and well-reasoned answer.

I was going to say that, regrettably, my 'rant' late last night was fuelled by being knackered from having spent another weekend working long hours training ACO adult staff (which is true). However, having read it again this morning, with the option of using the edit or delete buttons, I opt to leave it as stands.

TheEvilDiesel

23rd May 2006, 10:55

Thank you for such an eloquent and well-reasoned answer.

I was going to say that, regrettably, my 'rant' late last night was fuelled by being knackered from having spent another weekend working long hours training ACO adult staff (which is true). However, having read it again this morning, with the option of using the edit or delete buttons, I opt to leave it as stands.

Jester, as always a well put response.

Having spent 2 days trawling through this whole thread, I felt it was time to "bust my cherry" and post something.

As a "veteran" of 20 annual camps and 21 years as a member of staff in the ACO (18 as an Officer), I have come across several VR(T) Officers and AWOs who should not have been appointed.

However with the advent of more control in the form of H&S, Risk Assessments and the additional admin that goes with running any cadet activity there is more training offered, this training is never going to match that offered on IOT, it isn't meant to, it is there to enable the VR(T) Officer (and ASNCO) to carry out their duties on Squadron and on military establishments. This training and better selection processes are weeding out the "coat hangars". Things are changing, but it all takes time.

I would add that in my experience, Regular and RAuxAF personnel on stations are friendly and willing to help where they can, and to them I would say a huge thank you as this support is vital to the continued success of the ACO.

BengOBoB

23rd May 2006, 12:13

I think that......:ok:

We need to hit the ground running, keep our eye on the ball, and make sure that we are all singing off the same song sheet. At the end of the day, it is not a level playing field and the goal posts may move; if they do, someone else may have to pick it up and run with it. We therefore must have a golf bag of options hot-to-trot from the word 'go'. It is your train set but we cannot afford to leave it on the back burner; we've got a lot of irons in the fire right now.
We need to unstick a few potential poo traps but it all depends on the flash to bang time and fudge factor allowed. Things may end up slipping to the left, if they do, we need to run a tight ship. I don't want to reinvent the wheel but we must get right into the weeds on this one. If push comes to shove, we may have to up stumps and then we'll be in a whole new ball game.
I suggest we test the water with a few warmers in the bank. If we can produce the goods then we are cooking with gas. If not, then we are in a world of hurt. I don't want to die in a ditch over it but we could easily end up in a flat spin if people start getting twitchy. To that end, I want to get round the bazaars and make sure the movers and the shakers are on-side from day one. If you hit me with your shopping list I can take it to the head honchos and start the ball rolling.
There is light at the end of the tunnel and I think we have backed a winner here. If it gets blown out of the water, however, I will be throwing a track. So get your feet into my in-tray and give me chapter and verse as to how you see things panning out. As long as our ducks are in a row I think the ball will stay in play and we can come up smelling of roses.
Before you bomb burst and throw smoke, it is imperative we nail our colours very firmly to the mast and look at the big picture. We've got to march to the beat of the drum. We are on a sticky wicket, so we'll need to play with a straight bat and watch out for fast balls.
I've been on permanent send for long enough and I've had my ten pence worth. I don't want to rock the boat or teach anyone to suck eggs. We must keep this firmly in our sight picture or it will fall between the cracks. If the cap fits, wear it, but it may seem like pushing fog up a hill with a sharp stick.
Hope this clarifies the situation for you!!

Rigchick

23rd May 2006, 14:36

I've been hanging around this site for ages, but haven't posted until now. It's taken a while to read this thread but some of the comments have really got me mad:mad:

I'm a serving JNCO in the RAF having done 18 years.I'm an ex-cadet and I also help out at my local ATC Sqn. Whilst I agree that there are some complete w*nkers in the ACO the majority of these people provide a valuable service to the youth of today. How many of you have spent time griping about the teenagers hanging around the streets causing trouble or glued to the TV/computer screen? The next time you see your local Sqn parading on Remembrance Day or Battle of Britain or any of the other numerous events throughout the year, remember that they want to be there, rain or shine.

The adults who give their time are to be praised and applauded. Without these unselfish people there would not be an ACO and so a lot more bored teenagers out there possibly causing trouble.:D

So what that some of them wear the uniform to make themselves feel good/important. Let them think what they want within their own little world;)

Not all of us in the RAF look down on these people. A lot of us realise the important role that they play in fostering the spirit of the ACO and in raising the next generation to be the kind of people we would trust to go into conflict alongside:D

Come on everyone, give them a break:sad:

Jester282

23rd May 2006, 16:35

Thank you Rigchick, that is indicative of some of the fantastic support the ACO gets off large sections of the regular RAF.

Rigchick

25th May 2006, 17:16

You're welcome Jester282. It just really gets my back up when people either speak from ignorance or just enjoy having a go at those who work bl**dy hard at helping the kids.:ugh:

Whilst I am fully aware personally at the short-comings of some of those who wear the uniform for the ACO, I have to say I know a fair few officers in the RAF who also do it because it makes themselves feel important. Unfortunately it is always the minority that give the majority a bad name.:hmm:

ItalianStallion

25th May 2006, 19:09

Im a Regular forces pilot at the AEF near my parents and there is a VGS on the station. Considering these guys are VR(T) or civilians, they are often very rude and arrogant. It seems that if you put a VR(T) in a flight suit its like opening Pandora's Box. Even some of the visiting ATC staff are incredible, you'd think they were the Station Commander at times! However, despite not being a cadet and having flown air cadets with the AEF for a number of years I think it is a shame that a handfull of individuals have ruined my perception of what on paper is a terrific organisation.

dinoorin

25th May 2006, 19:35

Im a Regular forces pilot at the AEF near my parents and there is a VGS on the station. Considering these guys are VR(T) or civilians, they are often very rude and arrogant. It seems that if you put a VR(T) in a flight suit its like opening Pandora's Box. .
Interesting -I am nowadays VR(T). Operate on an airfield with an AEF which has the usual holding guys attached to it. As far as I am aware we get on well with them, certainly whenever I have worked with them we all have mutual respect for the job we have to do - i.e. flying / instructing air cadets.
I find a very dissapointing that some regulars have nothing but negativity toward their cousin officers. Some of the rap I can understand, being ex reg I do get people trying to demonstrate their seniority as regards time served-all be it cadet only time. I simply let this slide and get on with my own task.
I can only hope that some of this negativity will be dispelled when you get the chance to work with the guys that are in it for all the right reasons.
I now await the incoming.

Maple 01

25th May 2006, 21:19

Now to put this thread to use! I'd like to score 10 sets of 58 paten webbing for my cadets I know the stores system is sitting on tons of the stuff. In years gone it was possible to get it from the system on indefinite loan via Horsham (I think), how does one achieve such miracles these days - Helpful Stacker, where are you?

Ash679

31st May 2006, 12:55

Afternoon all!

Just stumbled across this forum whilst desperately trying to avoid actually having to finish my PGCE coursework - was actually trying to google-search the name(s) and contact phone numbers of the Station Tailors at Cranditz (if anyone has them!!) for a mate of mine who is going on his VR(T) Officers Initial Course at the weekend.

I've spent the last hour or so reading through this tread with amazement...

As a serving VR(T) officer I have worked with, and continue to work with, the regular RAF on many many occasions, and my experience is that - as many people have made the point - that there are good and bad apples in both organisations. I have also had first hand experience of actually having to use my commission "in anger" as it were, reporting a regular Airman for inappropriate behaviour with a young female cadet; the outcome of which was that he was disciplined and posted from the station in question (where he regularly came into contact with cadets). I personally took absolutely no pleasure in this, and it was very unfortunate, but also very necessary.

I have been commissioned for almost 7 years, and take very deep pride in wearing the uniform of the Royal Air Force, and holding the Queens Commission. I do my utmost to do my job, run my ATC Sqn, and carry out all associated duties with the dignity and skill that befits such a privilage. I obviously do not have 24 (28 now, I think) weeks IOT behind me, but I try to leave every regular member of the RAF that I work - or have worked with - with a positive impression of the ATC and VR(T), and try do my bit to counter some of the negative experiences they may have when coming into contact with our less professional brethern... of which there are - admittedly - unfortunately some.

I have always found that the approach of asking politiely when dealing with the regular RAF, works wonders, and very rarely results in people saying "no" unless they genuinely cannot help you. I would personally never dream of trying to "throw my weight around" on a station, because not only is it the wrong attitude, but it does not generate results. I only ask that - because I am the privilaged (that is, that I feel it is my privilage) holder of the Queens Commission - that I am treated accordingly in the same manner as a brother regular officer. The only time I would ever challenge a regular service-person junior in rank, would be if they showed disrespect for the fact that I am commissioned (because whether they like it or not, someone senior to them has made that decision!). This is a duty imbued to me by my commissioning scroll... but even then, it would take the form of a polite word - which would hopefully do the trick. Having said this, perhaps because of my approach, I have never actually had to do that.

I would hope that the majority of my fellow VR(T) officers feel, and act similarly, and would suggest that respect breeds respect. I personally have nothing but respect for my parent service, and it saddens me when - occassionally - that respect is not reciprocated.

I do what I do because the ATC made me the man I am today (sob, sniff!), and if I can help give other cadets and staff the opportunities that I enjoyed, then I will have repaid my debt to the Corps. I hope that I was selected for commissioning because my personal qualities were recognised as befitting a holder of the Queens Commission, and I cherish the privilage I have been granted. Having said this, I recognise that it is to some extent a tool which enables me to do my job, and I also recognise my limitations... and try not to "exceed my brief" as it were when in the company of my regular cousins!

Just felt the need to squeeze my two-penneth in.

Cheers!