Why NCO's Are The Backbone Of The Military!
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: St Annes
Age: 69
Posts: 638
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually...
I'm far from convinced, and I'm an ex NCO. (Thanks to downbanding exercises that decided a WO from PSF was qualified to comment on aircrew duties - I'd have been a WO otherwise <g>)
Some officers are idiots, some NCOs are idiots. Generally speaking the first decade tends to winnow the idiots out, so by the age of 30 or so you have good NCOs and good officers. What's left tends to be quite useable.
Unfortunately, some idiots remain past that point due to the vagaries of the service, and some idiot NCOs even get promoted to become idiot officers, but that's life, whilst other idiot NCOs become older idiot NCOs, and some idiot officers become idiot senior officers - this is really the only difference, an idiot NCO tends to stay at the same rank whilst the up or out aspect of officership means some bloody stupid Flt Lts become Sqn Ldrs.
Let's face it, everyone knows who is reliable and a good troop, and who are the bookends. Compared to civvy life (I assure you) the RAF remains a lean, mean, fighting machine... until then a good officer is worth his weight in gold, as is a good NCO, and I very much doubt that the percentages show one subset is more prevalent than the other.
FWIW, if I think really hard about who the most sensible chap I ever met was, then he was an NCO - but I think the officers had the advantage if you graphed 'commonsense v time since recruitment'.
I'm far from convinced, and I'm an ex NCO. (Thanks to downbanding exercises that decided a WO from PSF was qualified to comment on aircrew duties - I'd have been a WO otherwise <g>)
Some officers are idiots, some NCOs are idiots. Generally speaking the first decade tends to winnow the idiots out, so by the age of 30 or so you have good NCOs and good officers. What's left tends to be quite useable.
Unfortunately, some idiots remain past that point due to the vagaries of the service, and some idiot NCOs even get promoted to become idiot officers, but that's life, whilst other idiot NCOs become older idiot NCOs, and some idiot officers become idiot senior officers - this is really the only difference, an idiot NCO tends to stay at the same rank whilst the up or out aspect of officership means some bloody stupid Flt Lts become Sqn Ldrs.
Let's face it, everyone knows who is reliable and a good troop, and who are the bookends. Compared to civvy life (I assure you) the RAF remains a lean, mean, fighting machine... until then a good officer is worth his weight in gold, as is a good NCO, and I very much doubt that the percentages show one subset is more prevalent than the other.
FWIW, if I think really hard about who the most sensible chap I ever met was, then he was an NCO - but I think the officers had the advantage if you graphed 'commonsense v time since recruitment'.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ditto Secret1
DaveJB hits the nail on the head.
MT WO aged 50 BZN circa 1996 or so who thought he was untouchable -
The number of NCOs and Offrs that are walking around with CGCs, MCs etc -
It takes all sorts.
G
DaveJB hits the nail on the head.
MT WO aged 50 BZN circa 1996 or so who thought he was untouchable -
The number of NCOs and Offrs that are walking around with CGCs, MCs etc -
It takes all sorts.
G
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Or to put it another way, if NCOs are the Backbone of the military, then why do they NOT accrue the same pension rights?
Answers on the proverbial postcard folks......
Answers on the proverbial postcard folks......
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: North Yorkshire
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by glad rag
Or to put it another way, if NCOs are the Backbone of the military, then why do they NOT accrue the same pension rights?
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Sydney
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The truth of the matter is that it is not NCOs or officers that are the most important. From my own time in the RNZAF it was the baggies, the only ones still sober or around after lunch to carry on working.
The NCOs got tanked at the Corporals or Sergeants messes, the officers have done the same or gone off golfing. I lost count where NCOs would come back from the mess loaded and then start ripping parts off planes and not being able to remember what they had done the next day, where the process would repeat itself from 3pm onwards till the off at 5pm.
The NCOs got tanked at the Corporals or Sergeants messes, the officers have done the same or gone off golfing. I lost count where NCOs would come back from the mess loaded and then start ripping parts off planes and not being able to remember what they had done the next day, where the process would repeat itself from 3pm onwards till the off at 5pm.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: bristol
Age: 56
Posts: 1,051
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have been looking at this thread for a while, and coming from a green background, I can't help but think this question will have differing answers for each service.
But, having met many good and bad officers and NCO's can I offer an alternative suggestion (possibly biased by my background):
Personnel who are natural leaders, good decision makers, and know their own and their comrades capabilities are the backbone of the military.
I have encountered many NCO's and officers who I considered as lazy, inept and suffering from a complete lack of military ability (all in the same person), but have also met NCO's and officers who I would follow over the edge of a cliff (based on the fact it must be the correct/only/best thing to do at that time, in their wise judgement).
But, having met many good and bad officers and NCO's can I offer an alternative suggestion (possibly biased by my background):
Personnel who are natural leaders, good decision makers, and know their own and their comrades capabilities are the backbone of the military.
I have encountered many NCO's and officers who I considered as lazy, inept and suffering from a complete lack of military ability (all in the same person), but have also met NCO's and officers who I would follow over the edge of a cliff (based on the fact it must be the correct/only/best thing to do at that time, in their wise judgement).
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
The truth of the matter is that it is not NCOs or officers that are the most important. From my own time in the RNZAF it was the baggies, the only ones still sober or around after lunch to carry on working.
The NCOs got tanked at the Corporals or Sergeants messes, the officers have done the same or gone off golfing. I lost count where NCOs would come back from the mess loaded and then start ripping parts off planes and not being able to remember what they had done the next day, where the process would repeat itself from 3pm onwards till the off at 5pm.
The NCOs got tanked at the Corporals or Sergeants messes, the officers have done the same or gone off golfing. I lost count where NCOs would come back from the mess loaded and then start ripping parts off planes and not being able to remember what they had done the next day, where the process would repeat itself from 3pm onwards till the off at 5pm.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: St Annes
Age: 69
Posts: 638
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seemed to me that around 1990 or so the bar lunch went out of fashion...at least the club sandwich, chips, and three pints turned into club, chips, diet coke...
Around that time I went back through the OCU as a knackered old man, pitied by the young studes who would sit on my knee hoping for a Werther's original whilst trying to ignore the embrocation fumes - I was a very old man, well into my thirties, at the time. (An even older wet man kept me company on the course, it took us a while to realise that at 'Grab a Granny' nights we were, in fact, the targets rather than the hunters...)
PT* was something you avoided, post 1990 it became something you had to beat people with a big stick to stop them doing. Sgts agonised about terms of service, take the crown and give up reserved rights, or be a well paid ocatgenarian sgt? Lots of attitudes changed back then - and lunchtime sessions went the way of the Dodo, except for a few who, it turned out, were themselves Dodos....
(*Most mornings, as I head off to work, I now have to negotiate my way past the RAF Kinloss Tour De France racing team, who seem to have cornered the 'taking up most of the road with a bloody treader at 20 mph' market, whilst doing a natty line in sharkskin patterned hi vis Lycra cycling attire.... now in my day a pair of bike clips was considered 'overly professional', so feel free to stop it and take the bus or drive....is EVERYONE a budding PTI these days?)
Around that time I went back through the OCU as a knackered old man, pitied by the young studes who would sit on my knee hoping for a Werther's original whilst trying to ignore the embrocation fumes - I was a very old man, well into my thirties, at the time. (An even older wet man kept me company on the course, it took us a while to realise that at 'Grab a Granny' nights we were, in fact, the targets rather than the hunters...)
PT* was something you avoided, post 1990 it became something you had to beat people with a big stick to stop them doing. Sgts agonised about terms of service, take the crown and give up reserved rights, or be a well paid ocatgenarian sgt? Lots of attitudes changed back then - and lunchtime sessions went the way of the Dodo, except for a few who, it turned out, were themselves Dodos....
(*Most mornings, as I head off to work, I now have to negotiate my way past the RAF Kinloss Tour De France racing team, who seem to have cornered the 'taking up most of the road with a bloody treader at 20 mph' market, whilst doing a natty line in sharkskin patterned hi vis Lycra cycling attire.... now in my day a pair of bike clips was considered 'overly professional', so feel free to stop it and take the bus or drive....is EVERYONE a budding PTI these days?)
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
davejb, a masterly diversion but spot for all that.
New to the game a couple of decades earlier it seemed that everything ended in ex, including endex.
Trackex, torpex and loadex were soon mastered but there were other super secret ones that it took a while to master. These were exercises designed and wholly managed by the SNCOs and duly programmed on the flypro as such. Those I have in mind were Crownex and Stablex.
Unfortunately tacevals and that scourge of the Air Force in the 80s - barbed wire - eventually killed them off.
New to the game a couple of decades earlier it seemed that everything ended in ex, including endex.
Trackex, torpex and loadex were soon mastered but there were other super secret ones that it took a while to master. These were exercises designed and wholly managed by the SNCOs and duly programmed on the flypro as such. Those I have in mind were Crownex and Stablex.
Unfortunately tacevals and that scourge of the Air Force in the 80s - barbed wire - eventually killed them off.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: St Annes
Age: 69
Posts: 638
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crownex I'd go for - although my favourite was that place on the beach, can't remember the name, it closed years ago....
One other difference between NCOs and O's - when you hit a "b*ggeration factor" in some planned event, then if an O had planned it you were probably looking at something that was a genuine mistake, or it was so lacking in Machiavellian (sp?) intent that a 6 year old could avoid it, whereas one planned by an NCO would be designed to rip the heart from a saint. I much preferred to be *'d about by officers, there was less malevolence most of the time....they also reacted differently when you chose not to play.
(Taceval rock officer to young Sgt Aircrew in HAS - 'and in the desert what oil will you use to lubricate your Browning Sgt?' 'Whatever oil I've been given sir'. I suppose I could have gone with 'none', but I thought a bloody stupid question deserved an equally bloody stupid answer - after all, midwinter Kinloss did not offer many opportunities for desert warfare, so something a bit more relevant might have been appropriate.)
One other difference between NCOs and O's - when you hit a "b*ggeration factor" in some planned event, then if an O had planned it you were probably looking at something that was a genuine mistake, or it was so lacking in Machiavellian (sp?) intent that a 6 year old could avoid it, whereas one planned by an NCO would be designed to rip the heart from a saint. I much preferred to be *'d about by officers, there was less malevolence most of the time....they also reacted differently when you chose not to play.
(Taceval rock officer to young Sgt Aircrew in HAS - 'and in the desert what oil will you use to lubricate your Browning Sgt?' 'Whatever oil I've been given sir'. I suppose I could have gone with 'none', but I thought a bloody stupid question deserved an equally bloody stupid answer - after all, midwinter Kinloss did not offer many opportunities for desert warfare, so something a bit more relevant might have been appropriate.)
Or to put it another way, if NCOs are the Backbone of the military, then why do they NOT accrue the same pension rights?
Maybe because they dont want their service before the age of 21 to be disregarded in calculating their pensionable service, as is the case with officers!
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: @exRAF_Al
Posts: 3,297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, I accept that (I assume you meant 34?).
75 was quite prescriptive and dogmatic in assuming that people stayed in for the full hitch and did favour those who stayed the course. It was the MoD's way of accepting work patterns of the time, and incentivising more expensively trained Officers to stay in longer. 05 addresses that to some extent, and although only 8% or so transferred across from 75, far more WOULD have benefited from doing so.
Instead, the usual refrain was 'Huh, they're only doing it to save money, and at my expense' when that wasn't always the case. One size doesn't fit all and 05 benefits far more, those who stay the whole course. It also helps families more, it recognises that divorce is more common and it doesn't disadvantage those as much, who do elect to leave early.
Per Ardua,
Al
75 was quite prescriptive and dogmatic in assuming that people stayed in for the full hitch and did favour those who stayed the course. It was the MoD's way of accepting work patterns of the time, and incentivising more expensively trained Officers to stay in longer. 05 addresses that to some extent, and although only 8% or so transferred across from 75, far more WOULD have benefited from doing so.
Instead, the usual refrain was 'Huh, they're only doing it to save money, and at my expense' when that wasn't always the case. One size doesn't fit all and 05 benefits far more, those who stay the whole course. It also helps families more, it recognises that divorce is more common and it doesn't disadvantage those as much, who do elect to leave early.
Per Ardua,
Al
