RAF size and balance
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
I think you should compare LAC+SAC with Private and Lance Corporal.
When Miss PN1 was in the Aux Regt as an SAC she was in charge of a section which would have fallen to a Lance Cpl in the Army.
True the RAF Regt now has Lance Cpls an well which does muddy the water slightly.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: raf
Posts: 610
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A guy I once worked with had to do a dissertation for a course or qualification. He compared the structure of the RAF to the structure of Tesco. Interestingly the Tesco chain of command only had 4 levels, unlike the RAF.
I once remembered there was a documentary that compared the RAF to the USMC and found the same thing, how the RAF is massively top heavy in comparison and the USMC can achieve the same if not more with less high ranking officers.
I once remembered there was a documentary that compared the RAF to the USMC and found the same thing, how the RAF is massively top heavy in comparison and the USMC can achieve the same if not more with less high ranking officers.
Last edited by gr4techie; 1st Sep 2013 at 19:14.
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Penzance, Cornwall UK
Age: 84
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to return to the subject of educational accomplishments, at one time I had a driver who could boast a BA and a BSC. He had no intention of taking a commission. The CO tried his level best but the reply was always the same "I'm here for 3 years as a much needed hair shirt, sir".
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,285
Received 3,135 Likes
on
1,311 Posts
I think you should compare LAC+SAC with Private and Lance Corporal.
I once remembered there was a documentary that compared the RAF to the USMC and found the same thing, how the RAF is massively top heavy in comparison and the USMC can achieve the same if not more with less high ranking officers.
Start drug testing your Ranking Officers....
I am not sure comparing the USMC and the RAF would be a very good pair of services to compare....very much Apples and Oranges I should think.
Now if you used the USAF and the RAF.....you would be on to something but I doubt you would find much difference as the USAF are really Top Heavy and have more than a few Rank officers.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: uk
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am not sure comparing the USMC and the RAF would be a very good pair of services to compare....very much Apples and Oranges I should think.
And your point is?
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: UK
Age: 56
Posts: 201
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jimlad, I take your point and if I've misinterpreted your original post, sincere apologies. Although, I do think it is fair to question the top heavy nature of the rank structure.
You mentioned competency and I dont see how that has been criticised here. Having been in the private sector for a few years now I can say that in comparison, in terms of managerial and leadership skills, even the weakest of Officer/SNCO in the RAF is doing a damn good job. More so these days as there can be little room for slack.
You mentioned competency and I dont see how that has been criticised here. Having been in the private sector for a few years now I can say that in comparison, in terms of managerial and leadership skills, even the weakest of Officer/SNCO in the RAF is doing a damn good job. More so these days as there can be little room for slack.
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
A guy I once worked with had to do a dissertation for a course or qualification. He compared the structure of the RAF to the structure of Tesco. Interestingly the Tesco chain of command only had 4 levels, unlike the RAF.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: 23, Railway Cuttings, East Cheam
Age: 68
Posts: 3,115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having been in the private sector for a few years now I can say that in comparison, in terms of managerial and leadership skills, even the weakest of Officer/SNCO in the RAF is doing a damn good job. More so these days as there can be little room for slack.
On the whole British private sector management is appalling (don't even get me started on public sector...). I have no idea whatsoever how we manage to compete on the world stage.
The only answer was to go off and work for myself. I've been quite relaxed since and no longer want to shake people warmly by the throat.
Gentleman Aviator
Something I posted a little while ago on another thread fits in well here to inform the "number of rank levels" debate:
Facts:
1. I joined an RAF of about 150 000 personnel - with a 4-Star CAS. I now serve with a 35 000-ish RAF - with a 4-Star CAS.
2. 35 000 in uniform about equates to the Met Police - who have 11 ranks in total from Constable to Comissioner (and that's 2 more than most forces).
3. From AC to ACM, the RAF has about 19 or 20 ranks.
Discuss.
1. I joined an RAF of about 150 000 personnel - with a 4-Star CAS. I now serve with a 35 000-ish RAF - with a 4-Star CAS.
2. 35 000 in uniform about equates to the Met Police - who have 11 ranks in total from Constable to Comissioner (and that's 2 more than most forces).
3. From AC to ACM, the RAF has about 19 or 20 ranks.
Discuss.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Does Tesco have 2000 people working in one place?
Does Tesco have to have shelf-stackers and checkout assistants in the same grades as Carrefour (I know
)?
Does Tesco have to have shelf-stackers and checkout assistants in the same grades as Carrefour (I know
)?
I know a TESCO manager .............. one tier down from the General manager of a 7/24 branch. He manages the entire night work, which is essential if the shop is to function properly during the day.
I understand him to say that there are three grades below him, including two under-managers, about 100 workers a night. He says "I am paid to manage 100%. The ones below are 75/25 manage/ labour. One down foreman is 25/75, and the bottom 100 shelf stacking".
This means that there are at least five grades in the shop, overseen one imagines by a district manager, perhaps an area manager above that, before we get to the corridors of power.
Not quite so lean and mean as claimed?
I understand him to say that there are three grades below him, including two under-managers, about 100 workers a night. He says "I am paid to manage 100%. The ones below are 75/25 manage/ labour. One down foreman is 25/75, and the bottom 100 shelf stacking".
This means that there are at least five grades in the shop, overseen one imagines by a district manager, perhaps an area manager above that, before we get to the corridors of power.
Not quite so lean and mean as claimed?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Avionker
Nicely ignoring the fact that the army has 17.7% of it's OR's at OR-3, Lance Corporal. Combine OR-3 and OR-4, then tell me what the difference is.
Perhaps you are talking chalk and cheese.
I think you should compare LAC+SAC with Private and Lance Corporal.
When Miss PN1 was in the Aux Regt as an SAC she was in charge of a section which would have fallen to a Lance Cpl in the Army.
True the RAF Regt now has Lance Cpls an well which does muddy the water slightly.
Originally Posted by Avionker
Nicely ignoring the fact that the army has 17.7% of it's OR's at OR-3, Lance Corporal. Combine OR-3 and OR-4, then tell me what the difference is.
Perhaps you are talking chalk and cheese.
I think you should compare LAC+SAC with Private and Lance Corporal.
When Miss PN1 was in the Aux Regt as an SAC she was in charge of a section which would have fallen to a Lance Cpl in the Army.
True the RAF Regt now has Lance Cpls an well which does muddy the water slightly.
My point was that to compare the RAF to the army is in effect comparing chalk and cheese. The army has Lance Corporals, as does the RAF Regiment now, which allows them to promote people so that they have the authority to lead sections. The RAF in general does not have that rank so in order for a person to be endowed with the authority to lead, or supervise, promotion to Cpl is the only option.
I suspect that if the RAF adopted the rank of Lance Corporal generally then the RAF and army would eventually end up would a more comparable percentage of personnel at OR-4 rank.
Last edited by Avionker; 2nd Sep 2013 at 15:57.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The Whyte House
Age: 95
Posts: 1,966
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not quite so lean and mean as claimed?
*including MRAF, that is.
I am not sure comparing the USMC and the RAF would be a very good pair of services to compare....very much Apples and Oranges I should think.
Last edited by Willard Whyte; 2nd Sep 2013 at 16:39.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Avoniker, true, however the rank of SAC is said to be able to work unsupervised and that of Cpl as the first step in management.
Does the army have similar definitions?
Does the army have similar definitions?