WINGS AND CS95 - Please help!
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: An airfield cunningly close the Thames
Age: 46
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A lot of these arguments are null and void if you think about it. Look at the paras, who proudly display their jump wings on their cabbage kit, both at home and away, and they are rightly proud of their achievements to earn the badge. The RMs wear a whacking great dagger and slogan depicting their speciality. How can aircrew be criticised for wearing their wings on their kit, when they certainly have earned the right to wear them.
All the AAC pilots I have seen wear their wings on CS95 so it seems you will only get criticised if you are aircrew AND RAF. But at least we all have our Royal Air Force badge, Union Jack and DZ patch so no one will mistake us for Paras or Marines
[QUOTE]But at least we all have our Royal Air Force badge, Union Jack and DZ patch so no one will mistake us for Paras or Marines [QUOTE]
Trust me that will never happen.................with or without your badges!!
Trust me that will never happen.................with or without your badges!!
Red On, Green On
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Between the woods and the water
Age: 24
Posts: 6,487
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
All the AAC pilots I have seen wear their wings on CS95 so it seems you will only get criticised...
...Look at the paras, who proudly display their jump wings on their cabbage kit, both at home and away, and they are rightly proud of their achievements to earn the badge. The RMs wear a whacking great dagger and slogan depicting their speciality.
...Look at the paras, who proudly display their jump wings on their cabbage kit, both at home and away, and they are rightly proud of their achievements to earn the badge. The RMs wear a whacking great dagger and slogan depicting their speciality.
FWIW badges do not stop bullets
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Several miles SSW of Watford Gap
Posts: 596
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With few exceptions the infantry and the AAC do not operate far behind enemy lines - thus their uniform is not really an issue if captured. Aircrew are of course frequently operating in some depth beyond the front line, and those acting in support of SF either in SH, AT or moving mud should think about the guys they might be giving away, as well as their own skins, before going adorned with too many badges.
FWIW badges do not stop bullets
FWIW badges do not stop bullets
Those aircrew you mention would not be wearing CS95 (No 3 Service Dress) - they would be wearing flying kit (No 14 Dress (Flying Clothing)).
Join Date: May 2001
Location: uk
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AA
That's all very well, but these days 'enemy lines' are a little bit blurred. Classic definitions of FLOT etc don't really do justice to how we find the ground truth in Iraq and Afghanistan.
There is an argument put forward that you should put as many badges on as possible so that you are 'humanized' to the individuals who may be trying to/have captured you. Can't say I'm overly excited either way, or by the prospect of being caught by the Taliban, AQ or even the local village Mullah!
You're not going to compromise anyone by either wearing a badge or not wearing a badge. If you're caught everything to do with any Op is considered compromised. And if someone's holding a gun to my head, that consideration would be well placed!
So ultimately, wear your SD hat, wings on your CS95, jump wings on your shoulder or poncy Harrier flap boots. You'll look a pratt, but it won't make a jot of difference to how you're treated by the enemy.
But, if you want to be ridiculed by all your mates (and break dress regs) put your wings on your desert combats!
That's all very well, but these days 'enemy lines' are a little bit blurred. Classic definitions of FLOT etc don't really do justice to how we find the ground truth in Iraq and Afghanistan.
There is an argument put forward that you should put as many badges on as possible so that you are 'humanized' to the individuals who may be trying to/have captured you. Can't say I'm overly excited either way, or by the prospect of being caught by the Taliban, AQ or even the local village Mullah!
You're not going to compromise anyone by either wearing a badge or not wearing a badge. If you're caught everything to do with any Op is considered compromised. And if someone's holding a gun to my head, that consideration would be well placed!
So ultimately, wear your SD hat, wings on your CS95, jump wings on your shoulder or poncy Harrier flap boots. You'll look a pratt, but it won't make a jot of difference to how you're treated by the enemy.
But, if you want to be ridiculed by all your mates (and break dress regs) put your wings on your desert combats!
Last edited by rudekid; 14th Jan 2007 at 18:45. Reason: 'You' being the generic, not the specific!
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: The Smoke
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Red On, Green On
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Between the woods and the water
Age: 24
Posts: 6,487
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
That's all very well, but these days 'enemy lines' are a little bit blurred. Classic definitions of FLOT etc don't really do justice to how we find the ground truth in Iraq and Afghanistan.
If you've got wings/Boy Scouts' hoof-picking qualification, so what, both are knack-all use in a fire-fight, in my humble and all-too-real experience.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: uk
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So in these conditions it's very simple - wear CS95/grow-bag, negative badges of any description - not even rank. You should know and be known by your team, and no-one else needs to know.
If you've got wings/Boy Scouts' hoof-picking qualification, so what, both are knack-all use in a fire-fight, in my humble and all-too-real experience.
If you've got wings/Boy Scouts' hoof-picking qualification, so what, both are knack-all use in a fire-fight, in my humble and all-too-real experience.
Surely, by definition, having wings automatically makes me knack all use in a firefight.
That and the pop-gun I'm carrying...Luckily I'm dead-eye Dick following my ten rounds this year.
Those aircrew you mention would not be wearing CS95 (No 3 Service Dress) - they would be wearing flying kit (No 14 Dress (Flying Clothing)).
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: my own, private hell
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
About 3 years ago, Comd JHC (an RAF 2*) decided not to spend his (shrinking) budget on desert flying suits but that the boys would stag on in temperates. The decision has not been reversed by his successor, despite being asked.
Hmmm....
Introduction
The main legislation governing Personal Protective Equipment at work is the Personal Protective Equipment at Work Regulations (PPE) 1992. The Management of Heath and Safety at Work Regulations (MHSW) 1999 also control this area. This article explains what sorts of equipment employers should provide as well as the precautions employees need to take in order to stay safe.
The MSHW regulations require employers to identify and assess the risks to health and safety in the workplace. All risks must then minimised as far as possible. Where an activity requires some risk, the risk could be minimised in a number of ways – one of which is to wear the appropriate personal protective equipment.
Regulation requirements
The requirements are simply that where there is a risk to an employee’s health and or safety, which cannot be controlled in other ways, protective equipment must be supplied (by the employer) and used by the employee carrying out the activity at hand.
The Regulations also require that:
- the equipment is properly assessed before use to ensure suitability
- it is maintained and stored properly
- it is provided with instructions for safe use
- it is used correctly by employees
What is PPE?
Personal protective Equipment (PPE) is “all equipment (including clothing affording protection against the weather) which is intended to be worn or held by a person at work and which protects him against one or more risks to his health or safety”. This could include helmets, gloves, eye protection, safety harnesses, high-visibility clothing and more.
Hearing protection and respiratory protective equipment are not covered by these regulations. The former is covered by the Noise at Work Regulations. Of course these items must still be compatible with PPE.
Cycle helmets and crash helmets worn by employees on the road are not covered by these regulations. Motor cycle helmets are legally required under road traffic legislation.
Can I charge for using PPE?
No consideration is required by the employee for the use of protective equipment. However, if a term in the employment contract states that the employee must return the equipment, and he does not do so, the employer would then be entitled to deduct a suitable amount from the wages owing to the employee.
Assessment of PPE
The hazard in the work place must first be assessed. Once the exact risks are known, suitable PPE can be selected. Make sure that the equipment does not adversely affect the overall risks of the activity. Make sure that the equipment can be appropriately adjusted to ensure a good fit for the individual who is to wear the equipment. If more than one item of PPE is worn, are they compatible with each other?
Eyes – hazards include chemical or metal splash, dust, gas and vapour and radiation. PPE could include goggles, visors, safety spectacles and face masks.
Head – hazards include impact from falling or flying objects, risk of head bumping, hair entanglements. PPE could include a range of helmets and bump caps.
Breathing – hazards include dust, vapour, gas, oxygen deficient atmospheres. PPE could include air-fed helmets, breathing apparatus, partial or full face masks.
Protection of the body – hazards include extreme temperatures, adverse weather, chemical or metal splash, and contaminated dust. PPE could include disposable or conventional overalls, bodysuits, chain mail, high-visibility clothing.
Hand and arms – hazards incude abrasion, cuts and punctures, electric shock, skin infection. PPE could include gloves, wrist cuffs or armlets.
Face and legs – hazards include wet / damp, falling objects, slipping, abrasion. PPE could include safety boots and shoes, leggings.
I would have thought that your employer had an obligation to provide you with PPE which affords you the relavant protection from 'extremes of temperature' under the Health and Safety at Work regulations - and if the current budget can't run to that, then either the budget needs to be increased or the task re-assessed.
Introduction
The main legislation governing Personal Protective Equipment at work is the Personal Protective Equipment at Work Regulations (PPE) 1992. The Management of Heath and Safety at Work Regulations (MHSW) 1999 also control this area. This article explains what sorts of equipment employers should provide as well as the precautions employees need to take in order to stay safe.
The MSHW regulations require employers to identify and assess the risks to health and safety in the workplace. All risks must then minimised as far as possible. Where an activity requires some risk, the risk could be minimised in a number of ways – one of which is to wear the appropriate personal protective equipment.
Regulation requirements
The requirements are simply that where there is a risk to an employee’s health and or safety, which cannot be controlled in other ways, protective equipment must be supplied (by the employer) and used by the employee carrying out the activity at hand.
The Regulations also require that:
- the equipment is properly assessed before use to ensure suitability
- it is maintained and stored properly
- it is provided with instructions for safe use
- it is used correctly by employees
What is PPE?
Personal protective Equipment (PPE) is “all equipment (including clothing affording protection against the weather) which is intended to be worn or held by a person at work and which protects him against one or more risks to his health or safety”. This could include helmets, gloves, eye protection, safety harnesses, high-visibility clothing and more.
Hearing protection and respiratory protective equipment are not covered by these regulations. The former is covered by the Noise at Work Regulations. Of course these items must still be compatible with PPE.
Cycle helmets and crash helmets worn by employees on the road are not covered by these regulations. Motor cycle helmets are legally required under road traffic legislation.
Can I charge for using PPE?
No consideration is required by the employee for the use of protective equipment. However, if a term in the employment contract states that the employee must return the equipment, and he does not do so, the employer would then be entitled to deduct a suitable amount from the wages owing to the employee.
Assessment of PPE
The hazard in the work place must first be assessed. Once the exact risks are known, suitable PPE can be selected. Make sure that the equipment does not adversely affect the overall risks of the activity. Make sure that the equipment can be appropriately adjusted to ensure a good fit for the individual who is to wear the equipment. If more than one item of PPE is worn, are they compatible with each other?
Eyes – hazards include chemical or metal splash, dust, gas and vapour and radiation. PPE could include goggles, visors, safety spectacles and face masks.
Head – hazards include impact from falling or flying objects, risk of head bumping, hair entanglements. PPE could include a range of helmets and bump caps.
Breathing – hazards include dust, vapour, gas, oxygen deficient atmospheres. PPE could include air-fed helmets, breathing apparatus, partial or full face masks.
Protection of the body – hazards include extreme temperatures, adverse weather, chemical or metal splash, and contaminated dust. PPE could include disposable or conventional overalls, bodysuits, chain mail, high-visibility clothing.
Hand and arms – hazards incude abrasion, cuts and punctures, electric shock, skin infection. PPE could include gloves, wrist cuffs or armlets.
Face and legs – hazards include wet / damp, falling objects, slipping, abrasion. PPE could include safety boots and shoes, leggings.
I would have thought that your employer had an obligation to provide you with PPE which affords you the relavant protection from 'extremes of temperature' under the Health and Safety at Work regulations - and if the current budget can't run to that, then either the budget needs to be increased or the task re-assessed.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Waleshire
Age: 60
Posts: 209
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you for that cut-and-pastathon Beags, very civil.
Now if you could just explain to me how any of that makes it alright to wear an SD hat and a brevet with desert combats please....
There's a good chap.
Now if you could just explain to me how any of that makes it alright to wear an SD hat and a brevet with desert combats please....
There's a good chap.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: firmly on dry land
Age: 81
Posts: 1,541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tad harsh there QFIHawkman, I think BEagle's post referred to the message immediately above his.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Waleshire
Age: 60
Posts: 209
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fair point, I was just seeing if I could tempt Beags with a little bait. I wondered whether he could possibly come out with a comment as crass as his earlier one about berets!
"They're soo working class dear boy!"
"They're soo working class dear boy!"
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: firmly on dry land
Age: 81
Posts: 1,541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts