applying for RAF
Nixor ut Ledo
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: In a Beaut of a State
Posts: 499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At the risk of sounding like a crusty old bugger (which I am!) I would like to emphasise that the correct use of English (presumably your native language) is important. Believe the "leave it to later it's not important" merchants at your peril.
While you might get through OASC with flying colours, when you get to IOT you might just get a crotchety flight commander such as me who sets great store on using one's own language correctly.
If the take for aircrew is as tough as it appears to be nowadays then the person who can write English properly is going to cream it over the buffoon who can't.
When I was at IOT (Main and Recourse Squadrons) there was more than one cadet that I gave a hard time to because of their crap writing abilities - and there were 2 who admittedly were having a hard/borderline time with the leadership exercises but their written communications was the deciding factor in me chopping them. Presumably they are now stacking shelves somewhere instead of playing with one of Betty's wonder machines.
While you might get through OASC with flying colours, when you get to IOT you might just get a crotchety flight commander such as me who sets great store on using one's own language correctly.
If the take for aircrew is as tough as it appears to be nowadays then the person who can write English properly is going to cream it over the buffoon who can't.
When I was at IOT (Main and Recourse Squadrons) there was more than one cadet that I gave a hard time to because of their crap writing abilities - and there were 2 who admittedly were having a hard/borderline time with the leadership exercises but their written communications was the deciding factor in me chopping them. Presumably they are now stacking shelves somewhere instead of playing with one of Betty's wonder machines.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Deepest Oxfordshire
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I second Allan907, Pontius and others.
OK, so you want to do Aeronautical Engineering, not English Literature.
It makes no odds, in my book. Barnes Wallis was a brilliant aeronautical engineer, but if he hadn't been able to communicate his ideas, no-one would have been able to cut metal and build them - and Mona would have been some Friday night fling (or a satellite airfield near Valley), and not a dam that desperately needed a copious amount of high explosive detonated at precisely the right point to cause a rupture.
BEagle is going to come on here soon and make scathing comments about txt yoof. I wouldn't blame him.
Perhaps you also think that five minutes late is not very late? Start thinking plus/minus 2 seconds if you want to fly - and then, when you're 2 seconds out, resolve to do better next time.
BASICS.
Cancel warning - amber RANT caption off.
Chocked for spilling
Gadget
OK, so you want to do Aeronautical Engineering, not English Literature.
It makes no odds, in my book. Barnes Wallis was a brilliant aeronautical engineer, but if he hadn't been able to communicate his ideas, no-one would have been able to cut metal and build them - and Mona would have been some Friday night fling (or a satellite airfield near Valley), and not a dam that desperately needed a copious amount of high explosive detonated at precisely the right point to cause a rupture.
BEagle is going to come on here soon and make scathing comments about txt yoof. I wouldn't blame him.
Perhaps you also think that five minutes late is not very late? Start thinking plus/minus 2 seconds if you want to fly - and then, when you're 2 seconds out, resolve to do better next time.
BASICS.
Cancel warning - amber RANT caption off.
Chocked for spilling
Gadget
Last edited by Captain Gadget; 31st May 2004 at 05:48.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Deepest Oxfordshire
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Storl Tern
Perhaps I'm being oversensitive, but I actually have an Oxford degree in German. So, to be particularly pedantic, it's Möhne - or if you prefer, Moehne.
Take the piß all you like.
Noch ein Bier bitte, mein Freund bezahlt.
Arschloch!
Gadget
Take the piß all you like.
Noch ein Bier bitte, mein Freund bezahlt.
Arschloch!
Gadget
Last edited by Captain Gadget; 31st May 2004 at 20:32.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: A Barren Featureless Wasteland
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
allan,
What you say is perturbing - how are these guys (with poor written comm) getting through English 'O' level (or whatever it is now)?
I can speak from 'a bottom of the barrel' perspective - it took me several attempts to get my English O level (and then I only just passed). I never experienced any problems with written comm and, like I said in my last post here, I never noticed anyone else having problems either.
What has changed? I haven't ever been a Flt Cdr at Cranners, you are/were - what is required at IOT now for written comm? When I went through (Earth still cooling etc) it was very much a 'how much do you really want to be in the RAF' course and I remember no written comm at all (I am sure there was a bit, but I have probably blotted it out of my memory).
From my perspective (mainly Front Line) written comm was never that much of an issue. For a new pilot, the priority was 'stay visual', know the weapons system and SOPs, be there and cope. I've been away from the Front Line for a long time and from the RAF for some years - is written comm now a big issue there?
All the best,
MT
What you say is perturbing - how are these guys (with poor written comm) getting through English 'O' level (or whatever it is now)?
I can speak from 'a bottom of the barrel' perspective - it took me several attempts to get my English O level (and then I only just passed). I never experienced any problems with written comm and, like I said in my last post here, I never noticed anyone else having problems either.
What has changed? I haven't ever been a Flt Cdr at Cranners, you are/were - what is required at IOT now for written comm? When I went through (Earth still cooling etc) it was very much a 'how much do you really want to be in the RAF' course and I remember no written comm at all (I am sure there was a bit, but I have probably blotted it out of my memory).
From my perspective (mainly Front Line) written comm was never that much of an issue. For a new pilot, the priority was 'stay visual', know the weapons system and SOPs, be there and cope. I've been away from the Front Line for a long time and from the RAF for some years - is written comm now a big issue there?
All the best,
MT
Last edited by MobiusTrip; 1st Jun 2004 at 19:36.
Harri
Please do not take too much notice of the advice offered here regarding English literacy. It would seem the IOT Flt Cdrs of today are really out to pick up on grammatical errors instead of building on an individual's leadership skills and officer qualities.
Nothing new there then.
Attention to detail is one thing, however, ranting on to a chap like yourself about the level of your English is absurd.
The RAF accepts chaps as officers with a grade 'C' at GCSE for a reason...It's all you need! Service writing will be taught to you at a later date.
So all in all...don't be put off by anyone telling you to brush up on your English, simply concentrate on getting through OASC.
Best of luck.
TF
Please do not take too much notice of the advice offered here regarding English literacy. It would seem the IOT Flt Cdrs of today are really out to pick up on grammatical errors instead of building on an individual's leadership skills and officer qualities.
Nothing new there then.
Attention to detail is one thing, however, ranting on to a chap like yourself about the level of your English is absurd.
The RAF accepts chaps as officers with a grade 'C' at GCSE for a reason...It's all you need! Service writing will be taught to you at a later date.
So all in all...don't be put off by anyone telling you to brush up on your English, simply concentrate on getting through OASC.
Best of luck.
TF
Nixor ut Ledo
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: In a Beaut of a State
Posts: 499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MT
You ask me how they’re getting a GCSE English at Grade C? Suspect that the fault may lie with my generation (baby boomers) who, once they had graduated from Teacher Training College, threw out the wisdom of the years and concentrated on ‘expression of thought’ etc rather than a working knowledge of the basics of our native language. Very few of us are complete experts; we all make the odd gaffe – misspellings, incorrect grammar, wrong use of words, typing faster than our thoughts etc. However, a basic expertise with your own language is one of the basics. Perhaps that is why the Armed Forces (and a lot of other organizations) insist on basic numeracy and literacy as the minimum qualifications. The RAF has set the bench mark at Grade C or above at O level standard, however, they have no control on what that actual standard is. Perhaps that is why ISS (or whatever they have nowadays) has to be a hurdle that officers ought to pass. Fortunately most officers do have the basics, but a glance at some of the postings here leads one to the conclusion that a lot do not (See Flyer1997 post on New Streaming Point).
I was a flt cdr at Cranditz from 83 to 86 so my knowledge of current teaching is zilch. However, I am sure that Service Writing still forms some of the syllabus. It is there to ensure that the layout and standardization of such things as memos, loose minutes and routine correspondence become familiar. It also has the secondary purpose of determining the basic standard of English.
One of the faults of the ‘system’ is that credence is given to the philosophy that if you are aircrew you don’t need proficiency in English. What utter b*ll*cks. How about these for entries on an F700:
“Oil tempriture gage fluctating” or “Enjin running ruff”
to quote just 2 examples from memory. Or this from a memo from the OIC Athletics:
“All personal [personnel]to note that the track trails [trials] will now be at 0900 on Saturday. Its [It’s] expected that selections will be made the week following [following] for the Group trails [trials] in September when personal [personnel] will be told of it’s [its] final selections.”
Gripping stuff, especially when it is read by an airman who probably wonders which school that particular officer went to and is probably more educated to boot. Don’t forget that an officer is primarily a leader. That’s why so much time is taken up at IOT with leadership training. A leader is looked up to and if that leader is being rubbished by his subordinates because he can’t convey his thoughts in writing just where does that place the leader? And don't forget that correct use of English is an "officer quality" - to quote TimeFlies
A few posts have postulated that it is not important, that proficiency in English is not needed, that it can be skipped over and sorted out later. Fine. Breed a ‘close enough is good enough’ mentality. But what happens when those thought processes carry over into air operations?
As I said, when I was at Cranditz I chopped 2 aspiring pilots – mainly on their borderline leadership and personal qualities – but the deciding factor was their appalling English which, despite constant correction from me and others, had little effect and they continued making the same basic mistakes. One of them actually had the nerve to give the same excuses to the Board as that put by TimeFlies. Impressed them no end!
With reducing numbers and greater competition for the remaining ejection seats the bar has been set higher. Literacy may well be a deciding factor in judging equal candidates. However, you may be the best flier in the world and get through. I fly with one of the most natural pilots in the world but he is impossible with English - and it embarrasses him! He asks me to write his correspondence!
Harri, you’ve read all the posts (I hope) including the unmitigated rubbish from TimeFlies. It’s now your call. In the words of Dirty Harry, “Are you feeling lucky, punk?”
Rant over
You ask me how they’re getting a GCSE English at Grade C? Suspect that the fault may lie with my generation (baby boomers) who, once they had graduated from Teacher Training College, threw out the wisdom of the years and concentrated on ‘expression of thought’ etc rather than a working knowledge of the basics of our native language. Very few of us are complete experts; we all make the odd gaffe – misspellings, incorrect grammar, wrong use of words, typing faster than our thoughts etc. However, a basic expertise with your own language is one of the basics. Perhaps that is why the Armed Forces (and a lot of other organizations) insist on basic numeracy and literacy as the minimum qualifications. The RAF has set the bench mark at Grade C or above at O level standard, however, they have no control on what that actual standard is. Perhaps that is why ISS (or whatever they have nowadays) has to be a hurdle that officers ought to pass. Fortunately most officers do have the basics, but a glance at some of the postings here leads one to the conclusion that a lot do not (See Flyer1997 post on New Streaming Point).
I was a flt cdr at Cranditz from 83 to 86 so my knowledge of current teaching is zilch. However, I am sure that Service Writing still forms some of the syllabus. It is there to ensure that the layout and standardization of such things as memos, loose minutes and routine correspondence become familiar. It also has the secondary purpose of determining the basic standard of English.
One of the faults of the ‘system’ is that credence is given to the philosophy that if you are aircrew you don’t need proficiency in English. What utter b*ll*cks. How about these for entries on an F700:
“Oil tempriture gage fluctating” or “Enjin running ruff”
to quote just 2 examples from memory. Or this from a memo from the OIC Athletics:
“All personal [personnel]to note that the track trails [trials] will now be at 0900 on Saturday. Its [It’s] expected that selections will be made the week following [following] for the Group trails [trials] in September when personal [personnel] will be told of it’s [its] final selections.”
Gripping stuff, especially when it is read by an airman who probably wonders which school that particular officer went to and is probably more educated to boot. Don’t forget that an officer is primarily a leader. That’s why so much time is taken up at IOT with leadership training. A leader is looked up to and if that leader is being rubbished by his subordinates because he can’t convey his thoughts in writing just where does that place the leader? And don't forget that correct use of English is an "officer quality" - to quote TimeFlies
A few posts have postulated that it is not important, that proficiency in English is not needed, that it can be skipped over and sorted out later. Fine. Breed a ‘close enough is good enough’ mentality. But what happens when those thought processes carry over into air operations?
As I said, when I was at Cranditz I chopped 2 aspiring pilots – mainly on their borderline leadership and personal qualities – but the deciding factor was their appalling English which, despite constant correction from me and others, had little effect and they continued making the same basic mistakes. One of them actually had the nerve to give the same excuses to the Board as that put by TimeFlies. Impressed them no end!
With reducing numbers and greater competition for the remaining ejection seats the bar has been set higher. Literacy may well be a deciding factor in judging equal candidates. However, you may be the best flier in the world and get through. I fly with one of the most natural pilots in the world but he is impossible with English - and it embarrasses him! He asks me to write his correspondence!
Harri, you’ve read all the posts (I hope) including the unmitigated rubbish from TimeFlies. It’s now your call. In the words of Dirty Harry, “Are you feeling lucky, punk?”
Rant over
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Scotchland
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok, ive been in the RAF for 4 years now, and there's still no sign of this Service writing course you all talk of! am i missing something ? ok, hands up! im not a pilot im an Engineer, but if i read the comments the above guy mentioned in the 700, though more accurately i assume he means the 707A entry, i would just have a chuckle! as long as i knew what he meant, presumably having been verbally informed at the debrief. i wouldnt think anything less o him/her for it. i have other more pressing issues to worry about!
as a by the by, heres a joke for you!
"How do you tell there's an RAF Pilot in the Bar?"
"Dont worry, he'll come and tell you!"
as a by the by, heres a joke for you!
"How do you tell there's an RAF Pilot in the Bar?"
"Dont worry, he'll come and tell you!"
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Lincs
Posts: 267
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Defence (Service) Writing
OK, I'll rise.....
You will have taken the basic DW module when you went through IOT, and most (but not all) branches also include additional modules as part of their professional training course - usually as part of a General Service Knowledge package.
There was a further DW element within the 3 week JOCC, but this was reduced to a point brief and a letter in about 1998.
However, the course referred to by the other contributors is of course ISS (Individual Staff Studies), which used to be a two module correspondence course but has been cut to one 4 month course (I think it's about 4 months) and a written exam, which must be hand-written rather than word-processed.
Not having reached the exalted ranks of Sqn Ldr, I can't confirm this from personal experience, but I understand that there are additional DW elements within ICSC and ASC.
SBG
P.S. Having read some of YWW's other posts, I now realise that he's an airframe tech, and clearly the above list applies to the commissioned among us. I'm not sure what is currently taught on IMLC etc.
You will have taken the basic DW module when you went through IOT, and most (but not all) branches also include additional modules as part of their professional training course - usually as part of a General Service Knowledge package.
There was a further DW element within the 3 week JOCC, but this was reduced to a point brief and a letter in about 1998.
However, the course referred to by the other contributors is of course ISS (Individual Staff Studies), which used to be a two module correspondence course but has been cut to one 4 month course (I think it's about 4 months) and a written exam, which must be hand-written rather than word-processed.
Not having reached the exalted ranks of Sqn Ldr, I can't confirm this from personal experience, but I understand that there are additional DW elements within ICSC and ASC.
SBG
P.S. Having read some of YWW's other posts, I now realise that he's an airframe tech, and clearly the above list applies to the commissioned among us. I'm not sure what is currently taught on IMLC etc.
Last edited by Spotting Bad Guys; 5th Jun 2004 at 04:19.
allan907
You have concurred with my own opinion perfectly in your last post. You mention flying with someone you describe as a natural pilot who has difficulties with his level of english.
How do you know that back in 1983-86 you didn't stop 2 very similar pilots from joining the RAF?
I would like to think the chap you fly with is an asset to the RAF even though he never going to be in the final of Countdown.
The picture I wanted to get across to Harri was that there are many more important things to deal with as a front-line pilot than worrying about the anal side of defence writing.
I agree that as an officer one needs a minimum grasp of the English language, however, it is a shame people like yourself take that minimum to their own personal extremes.
Try not to lose focus on the big picture!
Rant over also.
You have concurred with my own opinion perfectly in your last post. You mention flying with someone you describe as a natural pilot who has difficulties with his level of english.
How do you know that back in 1983-86 you didn't stop 2 very similar pilots from joining the RAF?
I would like to think the chap you fly with is an asset to the RAF even though he never going to be in the final of Countdown.
The picture I wanted to get across to Harri was that there are many more important things to deal with as a front-line pilot than worrying about the anal side of defence writing.
I agree that as an officer one needs a minimum grasp of the English language, however, it is a shame people like yourself take that minimum to their own personal extremes.
Try not to lose focus on the big picture!
Rant over also.
Nixor ut Ledo
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: In a Beaut of a State
Posts: 499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The guy that I refer to is a civilian flyer. Whilst being a natural flyer he also has the brain set that "close enough is good enough". He has problems with English despite going to Public School simply because he thought that he didn't need it and could get away with it. That follows through with his flying. He can handle an aircraft far better than I can but his attitude leads him into situations that I would not feel comfortable with. He's got away with it so far.
Were he to have come before me as a potential officer candidate when I was at Cranwell I would have had no hesitation in telling him that as a potential RAF officer the officer qualities come first and his flying abilities come second. I would have directed him to a career with Britannia, Air2000, Air Atlanta or, in our part of the world, Ansett, Skywest et al.
You have missed the point TF. You are first and foremost an RAF Officer. Basic literacy and numeracy are the bedrock. You, and others on this thread, imply that you can get by without even the basics. Ignore the bedrocks at your peril.
Were he to have come before me as a potential officer candidate when I was at Cranwell I would have had no hesitation in telling him that as a potential RAF officer the officer qualities come first and his flying abilities come second. I would have directed him to a career with Britannia, Air2000, Air Atlanta or, in our part of the world, Ansett, Skywest et al.
You have missed the point TF. You are first and foremost an RAF Officer. Basic literacy and numeracy are the bedrock. You, and others on this thread, imply that you can get by without even the basics. Ignore the bedrocks at your peril.
I believe we have differing views on what the "bedrocks" are allan.
I have also never come across anyone in my line of work who carries the attitude of "close enough is good enough". They wouldn't be there if they did.
I feel from reading through your threads you are underestimating people and labelling them based only upon how converse with the English language they are.
Standards in writing do not link directly to standards in flying, weapons operating, air traffic controlling, shelf stacking or many other things for that matter. There is a line between required knowledge/pedantic...I will leave you to decide what side you'd rather be on.
TF
I have also never come across anyone in my line of work who carries the attitude of "close enough is good enough". They wouldn't be there if they did.
I feel from reading through your threads you are underestimating people and labelling them based only upon how converse with the English language they are.
Standards in writing do not link directly to standards in flying, weapons operating, air traffic controlling, shelf stacking or many other things for that matter. There is a line between required knowledge/pedantic...I will leave you to decide what side you'd rather be on.
TF
Nixor ut Ledo
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: In a Beaut of a State
Posts: 499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TF
I accept that there are different standards of English and those standards may or may not impinge on whether you are a good pilot, blanket stacker, brain surgeon or whatever. However, we are talking about an RAF Officer. Officer first and foremost, pilot, WSO, PEdO, ATC etc secondarily.
You want to be just a pilot? Fine. Take your skills to any one of a number of different flying outfits. You want to be an RAF Officer? Great. Step up to the crease - but have all the basics that that job requires.
After all that, you may decide that reaching a basic standard of English is just too hard. Perhaps we then need to go back to square one. Train as aircrew but don't become an officer. Be NCO aircrew (although before it all got to be very macho and fashionable we did have LAC aircrew). NCO aircrew, by and large, don't get involved in secondary duties and all the other trappings of 'leadership' (Mind you, for a long time now neither have the majority of commissioned aircrew - but that's another thread - and perhaps has given rise to the feeling that English is purely a luxury).
The RAF is NOT a civilian airline. It has responsibilities as a disciplined service. It has minimum standards which you must meet as a start point. Degrade those minimum standards and you haven't got a fighting service that is running at top notch.
Oh, and by the way, while I was at Cranditz I also graduated a heck of a lot of wannabee aircrew whose English wasn't desperately good - but, they had reasonably good leadership and officer qualities. The RAF was desperate for aircrew in those days! A case of never mind the quality, feel the width! Some of these people are probably now bordering on Air Rank if not there already.
I accept that there are different standards of English and those standards may or may not impinge on whether you are a good pilot, blanket stacker, brain surgeon or whatever. However, we are talking about an RAF Officer. Officer first and foremost, pilot, WSO, PEdO, ATC etc secondarily.
You want to be just a pilot? Fine. Take your skills to any one of a number of different flying outfits. You want to be an RAF Officer? Great. Step up to the crease - but have all the basics that that job requires.
After all that, you may decide that reaching a basic standard of English is just too hard. Perhaps we then need to go back to square one. Train as aircrew but don't become an officer. Be NCO aircrew (although before it all got to be very macho and fashionable we did have LAC aircrew). NCO aircrew, by and large, don't get involved in secondary duties and all the other trappings of 'leadership' (Mind you, for a long time now neither have the majority of commissioned aircrew - but that's another thread - and perhaps has given rise to the feeling that English is purely a luxury).
The RAF is NOT a civilian airline. It has responsibilities as a disciplined service. It has minimum standards which you must meet as a start point. Degrade those minimum standards and you haven't got a fighting service that is running at top notch.
Oh, and by the way, while I was at Cranditz I also graduated a heck of a lot of wannabee aircrew whose English wasn't desperately good - but, they had reasonably good leadership and officer qualities. The RAF was desperate for aircrew in those days! A case of never mind the quality, feel the width! Some of these people are probably now bordering on Air Rank if not there already.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Lincs
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Harri,
One of the most important qualities of being a FJ pilot is the ability to find solutions to problems independently, showing resourcefulness and tenacity. There is nothing wrong with seeking advice and, as this thread demonstrates, it will invariably be freely given, but the Service respects individuals who do not need to be spoon fed. Your initial enquiries could have been addressed with Google and a little spadework, providing you with an opportunity to ask more searching questions of the PPRuNe cadre. Just a thought for the future. Good luck though.
One of the most important qualities of being a FJ pilot is the ability to find solutions to problems independently, showing resourcefulness and tenacity. There is nothing wrong with seeking advice and, as this thread demonstrates, it will invariably be freely given, but the Service respects individuals who do not need to be spoon fed. Your initial enquiries could have been addressed with Google and a little spadework, providing you with an opportunity to ask more searching questions of the PPRuNe cadre. Just a thought for the future. Good luck though.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Around and about
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I too am "anti-dumbing down" with regard to the RAF and agree with TF and allans' points. Nothing infuriates me more than misuse of your and you're, having been educated at a school where the Biology teacher would give you lines for grammatical errors as well subject specific ones. I have relatives residing in the 'Thames Basin' area and recall being horrified at the level of English employed by the staff of the local school in correspondence sent to the parents, my aforementioned dislike being in abundance.
I do have a question relating to this; I understand that regional accents are encouraged in the RAF (I am yet to meet a PTI who isn’t Scotch). With no offence intended whatsoever, how would an individual with a particularly broad accent, and all the colloquialisms which go with it, fare? I know a perfectly well educated Welshman who uses no end of “incorrect” phrases which ingress upon his writing style that apparently are commonplace in his home town.
Just a thought?
GF
I do have a question relating to this; I understand that regional accents are encouraged in the RAF (I am yet to meet a PTI who isn’t Scotch). With no offence intended whatsoever, how would an individual with a particularly broad accent, and all the colloquialisms which go with it, fare? I know a perfectly well educated Welshman who uses no end of “incorrect” phrases which ingress upon his writing style that apparently are commonplace in his home town.
Just a thought?
GF
Nixor ut Ledo
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: In a Beaut of a State
Posts: 499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If a candidate is understandable and has the underlying officer qualities (and that's a debate for later) then the candidate is likely to get through OASC. If the "rough" language causes problems at IOT then it may possibly impinge on leadership exercises. Too many "Ds" and you're on your way!
I graduated plenty of Scottish officers and consumed vast quantities of scotch in the process
As a further aside.......In my present position (Mayor of a Shire about the size of Surrey or South Yorkshire) I am in the process of shortlisting candidates for the CEO job (approx Aus$140,000 pa). Of the 30 applicants my Council has binned 10 because of simple English errors on their applications and CVs, and forgetting to submit information asked for. Close enough might be good enough for them but it HAS made a difference, in this case, in their employability.
As I said earlier Harri, "You feeling lucky?"
I graduated plenty of Scottish officers and consumed vast quantities of scotch in the process
As a further aside.......In my present position (Mayor of a Shire about the size of Surrey or South Yorkshire) I am in the process of shortlisting candidates for the CEO job (approx Aus$140,000 pa). Of the 30 applicants my Council has binned 10 because of simple English errors on their applications and CVs, and forgetting to submit information asked for. Close enough might be good enough for them but it HAS made a difference, in this case, in their employability.
As I said earlier Harri, "You feeling lucky?"
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Hendon
Posts: 260
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To take charge of men and be responsible for their work, welfare and discipline
All of the above is irrelevant. An Officer in the RAF has to be all things to all men*. Having a good command of English is only a small part of the big picture. It's no use if you don't actually communicate very well, or have the other Officer Qualities that OASC look for.
In these times, the RAF can be really, really picky.
*and women
All of the above is irrelevant. An Officer in the RAF has to be all things to all men*. Having a good command of English is only a small part of the big picture. It's no use if you don't actually communicate very well, or have the other Officer Qualities that OASC look for.
In these times, the RAF can be really, really picky.
*and women
Sponsorship
Harri
Just wondering how you got on with your search for sponsorship...any joy?
It would be interesting to see how you've got on since your last post.
Hope it's good news!
TF
Just wondering how you got on with your search for sponsorship...any joy?
It would be interesting to see how you've got on since your last post.
Hope it's good news!
TF