"Dumbing down" RAF Officers?
BEagle insisted
The RAF 'habit' of not allowing the decanter to touch the table is something which seemed to creep in during the 1980s and is actually bolleaux!
The RAF 'habit' of not allowing the decanter to touch the table is something which seemed to creep in during the 1980s and is actually bolleaux!
ACW418 replied
Not true, I was taught about passing the port correctly and not letting the decanter touch the table in 1962!
Not true, I was taught about passing the port correctly and not letting the decanter touch the table in 1962!
and JW411 added
Ditto in 1960.
Ditto in 1960.
with brakedwell suggesting
Ditto 1956
Ditto 1956
Posts quoted for posterity and historical accuracy!
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Wimborne, Dorset
Age: 79
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know a little bit about officers and pilots. Officer training does not necessarily impart sound combat judgement. Many excellent combat pilots were or are unsuitable for senior rank. The 2 requirements are quite different. In initial selection, you need 70% foot soldiers and 30 % potential leaders. Even then, some will surprise and others disappoint, so you need free movement between the two requirements during any military flying career.
The current difficulty is a self-inflicted RAF policy problem, perhaps not helped by constant politically inspired defence reviews.
As a long-serving retired RAF pilot (1963-1988), I never could understand why every aircraft needed a commissioned officer at the controls. In the late 60's it got sillier when it was decreed that all pilots should be university graduates as well, although I believe that rule has been relaxed now.
The number of productive flying years is an important factor governing RAF pilot requirements, shortages and retention. Get 'em young is key. By the time I was 27 (when my commissioned ex-university colleagues were just joining squadrons as young embryo pilots), I was an experienced pilot with 3 flying tours and over 2000 hours on fighters.
The RAF had a good return on its investment.
The current difficulty is a self-inflicted RAF policy problem, perhaps not helped by constant politically inspired defence reviews.
As a long-serving retired RAF pilot (1963-1988), I never could understand why every aircraft needed a commissioned officer at the controls. In the late 60's it got sillier when it was decreed that all pilots should be university graduates as well, although I believe that rule has been relaxed now.
The number of productive flying years is an important factor governing RAF pilot requirements, shortages and retention. Get 'em young is key. By the time I was 27 (when my commissioned ex-university colleagues were just joining squadrons as young embryo pilots), I was an experienced pilot with 3 flying tours and over 2000 hours on fighters.
The RAF had a good return on its investment.
From Taylors purveyors of Port, according to them
'Once a Vintage Port has been decanted and the moment has come to enjoy it, tradition dictates that the decanter should be placed on the table to the right of the host or hostess. It should then be passed to the left, travelling round the table from guest to guest in a clockwise direction until it comes back to its starting point. Although the tradition is most often observed when serving Vintage Port, it is also often followed with other Port styles.
There are many arcane and colourful explanations for the custom of passing the Port to the left.
One theory is that the custom arose from the need to keep one’s sword arm free in case of trouble. It is sometimes said to have originated in the Royal Navy where the rule was ‘Port to port’, meaning that the decanter (most likely a ship’s decanter) should be passed to the left. In the Royal Navy the Loyal Toast is traditionally drunk in Port and, in contrast to the other branches of the British armed forces, the officers remain seated.
However, the reason why the custom is followed today is quite simple. If the decanter keeps moving in the same direction, every guest has the opportunity to enjoy the wine and no-one is left out. The decanter travels clockwise because most people are right handed.'
'Once a Vintage Port has been decanted and the moment has come to enjoy it, tradition dictates that the decanter should be placed on the table to the right of the host or hostess. It should then be passed to the left, travelling round the table from guest to guest in a clockwise direction until it comes back to its starting point. Although the tradition is most often observed when serving Vintage Port, it is also often followed with other Port styles.
There are many arcane and colourful explanations for the custom of passing the Port to the left.
One theory is that the custom arose from the need to keep one’s sword arm free in case of trouble. It is sometimes said to have originated in the Royal Navy where the rule was ‘Port to port’, meaning that the decanter (most likely a ship’s decanter) should be passed to the left. In the Royal Navy the Loyal Toast is traditionally drunk in Port and, in contrast to the other branches of the British armed forces, the officers remain seated.
However, the reason why the custom is followed today is quite simple. If the decanter keeps moving in the same direction, every guest has the opportunity to enjoy the wine and no-one is left out. The decanter travels clockwise because most people are right handed.'
The port decanter should always be kept moving, hence there should be no need for it to be placed on the table. This has become corrupted into meaning that it 'must' not be so placed.
If someone fails to keep the decanter moving, such that it stays in front of him/her, the traditional query from diners to his/her left is "Do you know the Bishop of Norwich?" after the memory of said cleric who had a habit of getting so pickled that he would fall asleep before the port decanter arrived, creating a delay in accommodating the requirements of other diners.
If someone fails to keep the decanter moving, such that it stays in front of him/her, the traditional query from diners to his/her left is "Do you know the Bishop of Norwich?" after the memory of said cleric who had a habit of getting so pickled that he would fall asleep before the port decanter arrived, creating a delay in accommodating the requirements of other diners.
I must say, military history is a fascinating topic. Cheers.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Boots
As it is an initial training thread I guess this is not too much of a thread drift.
We did a one week camp in the Brecons. We were issued with used Korean War vintage garments and extremely sturdy ammunition boots rather than have to wear our regular boots etc.
Do the courses now use their own issue boots? And of course have to bull them afterwards.
We did a one week camp in the Brecons. We were issued with used Korean War vintage garments and extremely sturdy ammunition boots rather than have to wear our regular boots etc.
Do the courses now use their own issue boots? And of course have to bull them afterwards.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The Whyte House
Age: 95
Posts: 1,966
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I seem to recall attending a 'boot course(?)' at Cranners between OASC at Biggin Hill in August and IOT in November 1990. Same pair of boots throughout which yes, became muddy & scuffed and subsequently required bulling.
Not quite as frustrating as having to 'blanco' white, in order to acheive absolute uniformity, an otherwise perfectly acceptable pair of self-bought, as was permitted, trainers which had the temerity to feature a couple of darker stripes. "To the right with a jump, RIGHT!" Oh happy days
Not quite as frustrating as having to 'blanco' white, in order to acheive absolute uniformity, an otherwise perfectly acceptable pair of self-bought, as was permitted, trainers which had the temerity to feature a couple of darker stripes. "To the right with a jump, RIGHT!" Oh happy days
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
WW, at school, as a 13 year old, we were lined up outside the house on the road each morning, were inspected, and then had to run up the hill and down again.
Every day I was pulled up be the house master, an ex-major in the Parachute Regiment, for mud on my black shoes. The 'mud' was a dark mud-coloured band of neoprene in the heel composition. He accepted what I told him but continued to pull me up every morning, trying to tell me something but I never twigged
put me off the Army though.
Every day I was pulled up be the house master, an ex-major in the Parachute Regiment, for mud on my black shoes. The 'mud' was a dark mud-coloured band of neoprene in the heel composition. He accepted what I told him but continued to pull me up every morning, trying to tell me something but I never twigged
put me off the Army though.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Wrathmonk (your #102),
Cannot answer for the '40s, as (in India and Burma, where I was ennobled), we didn't have dining-in nights (what with havin' a war to fight an' all) and had forgotten what Port looked like anyway.
On my return to the RAF in UK in '49, things were only slowly getting underway in the mid-'50s and although I vaguely remember dining-in and guest nights of the period, think that the old tradition of "never letting the decanter touch the table" had gone by the board: in fact the practice was to slide the decanter along the table - but always to keep it moving.
Harveys is the stuff.
Cheers, Danny42C.
...Come on Danny42C - lets get this tradition back to the 40's!!...
On my return to the RAF in UK in '49, things were only slowly getting underway in the mid-'50s and although I vaguely remember dining-in and guest nights of the period, think that the old tradition of "never letting the decanter touch the table" had gone by the board: in fact the practice was to slide the decanter along the table - but always to keep it moving.
Harveys is the stuff.
Cheers, Danny42C.
the RAF in UK in '49, things were only slowly getting underway in the mid-'50s and although I vaguely remember dining-in and guest nights of the period, think that the old tradition of "never letting the decanter touch the table" had gone by the board: in fact the practice was to slide the decanter along the table
Seem to remember Madeira was on offer as an alternative. Did this go the rounds as well? I don't ever remember sampling it. A third choice for those who didnt fancy either (or for the rare non-drinker) was water.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
TTN, ah, Madeira. I always chose that. As the two decanters perforce moved at different rates, but together. I think the Madeira came to frequent rest.
I confess that until I stayed at a finca on the island I had no idea that there bbc was such a range varying from one like a very dry sherry through to the sweetest desert one. We usually buy ours in the market and staggered back with 6 bottles. The stagger not just from the weight.
I confess that until I stayed at a finca on the island I had no idea that there bbc was such a range varying from one like a very dry sherry through to the sweetest desert one. We usually buy ours in the market and staggered back with 6 bottles. The stagger not just from the weight.
Gentleman Aviator
One always preferred Madeira when it was on offer - haven't seen it for years...... 
Chief reason was that some (many?) Messes served exceedingly bad port, but bad Madeira seemed unobtainable.
WO & Sgts Mess port in my experience (RAF) was usually better than the Officers'; but the best I tasted in a military context was in the Naval College at Greenwich - when it was the Naval College.
Chief reason was that some (many?) Messes served exceedingly bad port, but bad Madeira seemed unobtainable.
WO & Sgts Mess port in my experience (RAF) was usually better than the Officers'; but the best I tasted in a military context was in the Naval College at Greenwich - when it was the Naval College.
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Secret airbase in Cranwell
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having recently done a bit of research into degree schemes for a friend's son who wants to pursue a career in military aviation and wants to get a degree, I was surprised to find that whilst the academic syllabi at Sandhurst and Dartmouth are now 'accredited' towards a bachelors (and I believe Sandhurst are looking to allow graduates to gain credits towards a masters) the current course at Cranwell is deemed too 'short' to gain any form of accreditation - and they are looking to shorten it even further! Given our seniors are pushing the mantra of developing a force that is capable of 'thinking to win' whilst at the same time trying to recruit bright, capable individuals, this seems nonsensical to me and any reduction in content smacks of dumbing down. Having seen another family friend go through the old 'new' course a couple of years ago I certainly felt that the academic part was a vast improvement on my day when the syllabus consisted of a bunch of retired Flt Lt's talking about what it was like 'during the war'. Hence with a little bit of effort on the part of the RAF it could have provided junior RAF officers with the same career enhancing opportunities as their army and navy counterparts.
I also recall from my other half's time at Shrivenham that, more often than not, the army and navy studes were often more academically adept than their light blue counterparts (which is one of the reasons the academic syllabus was enhance in the first place iirc).
I also recall from my other half's time at Shrivenham that, more often than not, the army and navy studes were often more academically adept than their light blue counterparts (which is one of the reasons the academic syllabus was enhance in the first place iirc).
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Cheshire, California, Geneva, and Paris
Age: 67
Posts: 867
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am reminded of the recruiting poster from the 1960s which showed a young RAF Officer with Cranwell in the background with the heading "RAF Officer" and to which some wag had added underneath "making simple things difficult since 1918"
Having recently done a bit of research into degree schemes for a friend's son who wants to pursue a career in military aviation and wants to get a degree, I was surprised to find that whilst the academic syllabi at Sandhurst and Dartmouth are now 'accredited' towards a bachelors (and I believe Sandhurst are looking to allow graduates to gain credits towards a masters) the current course at Cranwell is deemed too 'short' to gain any form of accreditation
You didn't look very hard did you? Officer Training: Initial officer training course | Credit transfer | Open University
The rest of your post is drivel too.
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Secret airbase in Cranwell
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for the heads up, Stuff you, have highlighted something that the chap in 22 Gp I spoke to failed to mention. Although I must admit I'm not sure the OU was what said individual had in mind. I wonder if the shortened course will still attract the same level of credits?
As you are being so helpful, stuff you, could also perhaps explain what exactly you mean by drivel? The fact that the RAF has adopted the mantra 'thinking to win', the fact that the new course was an academic improvement over the old course or the fact that DefAc DS thought that army and navy studes were often better placed to rise to the challenge of continued academic development than their RAF counterparts?
As you are being so helpful, stuff you, could also perhaps explain what exactly you mean by drivel? The fact that the RAF has adopted the mantra 'thinking to win', the fact that the new course was an academic improvement over the old course or the fact that DefAc DS thought that army and navy studes were often better placed to rise to the challenge of continued academic development than their RAF counterparts?
Last edited by Startrek3; 4th Feb 2016 at 21:37.
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Secret airbase in Cranwell
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for the heads up, Stuff you, have highlighted something that the chap in 22 Gp I spoke to failed to mention. Although I must admit I'm not sure the OU was what said individual had in mind. I wonder if the shortened case will still attract the same level of credits?