Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TomInPortsmouth)
    PS Gemma, it may just be the way it comes across over t'interweb but I can assure you everything I have said on this forum is intended to be taken with the lightest heart and not for those who take it seriously. If you do take it seriously and are offended by what I say then [email protected] orf and develop a sense of humour
    Lol, it's not you I was aiming my comments at Tom - it was Qui Audet Vincit. Anyone can diss the RAF or me as much as they want as long as it's in good humour and his comments weren't (well at least they didn't sound that way). You seem like a nice, genuine bloke who speaks his mind and doesn't take life too seriously and I feel privileged share this forum with you. Sorry if it sounded like I was talking about you.



    Extra smileys to prove I'm not offended
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Sound as a pound
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Qui Audet Vincit: 99% of people on this board want to join the RAF, or so it seems?

    What's wrong with the army and the navy?

    Nothing.

    GR4pilot: Don't want navy as don't want a career out at sea all the time (though I'd trade a few months a year at sea for a seat in a JCA)

    You're not actually at sea all year And seeing as it's tri-service, you might just end up on a ship sometime anyway.


    ...for me it's cause I've got a 3 generation liniage to follow, right back to the start of military aviation.

    Yeah, I'm similar - though not with the Air Force, I had family in the Navy before and during the Great Wars, along with some Army history too, and my step-bro serving at Leuchars just now. I don't lean towards any of them being 'better' than the other, just different roles, and different careers. I enjoyed the Navy a lot myself, and that kind of tips the balance a little for me to them. But as I've said on here enough times, I'll join the Navy Seals, if they let me fly for them, for me - it's a case of I want to be at the sticks, and if the Army offers it and the Air Force doesn't then that's where my loyalties will lie. All the Forces, are great forces, with different jobs.

    LowE3D: The army is a ground force... you do your job on the ground... you are therefore trained to cope with situations you are likley to encounter...

    AAC?

    GemmaLS: Please don't come on to a forum full of RAF wannabes and **** us off!

    Why not? Friendly 'banter' is consistantly sprikled throughout these fora, by you 'RAF wannabes'. So why not have some back?

    reggie_boy: I agree, working in a tri service environment the RAF seem to enjoy their work more, and it seems to me have a better relationship throughout the ranks

    Yes and no. Theres usually trouble within the non-commissioned ranks, because of NCA: with being promoted so quickly in their career, to the equivelant rank in the RN, that when it comes to who is higher - they believe they are, opposed to the RN SR's who have served for years and have 'earned' their rank. Usually causes a bit of aggro between the ranks, until it's sorted out by someone higher than themselves - who usually leans towards the RN, as the senior service, and the more 'knowledgable' servicemen.

    TopChick: RAF or Navy, Dry land or sea, sea sickness or no sea sickness? hmm..

    Well, the Navy may very well be at sea all year round, but that doesn't mean all of the ships company are. 'Dry land'... what you gonna be serving on - if you're not at sea? Land.

    As said up above, each to their own i just feel the RAF offer better opportunities for my future and it Rocks!

    How so? What does the RAF offer its men and woman, that the Navy or the Army doesn't.. they all offer great pension schemes along with oppertunities to travel, learn etc and set you up nicely for leaving them, something common amongst them all - the key differance is why you join which force, which does not make it a better force; simply a different force.

    LoeE3D: Just makes me laugh that this guy demeans all those serving in the RAF and then says:

    "Maybe I will join the RAF one day tho, but probably it would only be the regiment for me, closest to the army"

    .... please don't if that's your attitude and perception. Obviously, I can only speak for myself but i would personally find it irritating and demoralsing to work with someone who thought of the RAF like you do.

    He didn't demean them atall, and if you believe that then just wait till you're serving, a lot of guys there don't want to be there, and you will regularly hear that 'the Navy is ****' as was said while I was in the Navy, and 'the RAF is crap', you'll get a lot of it - best get used to it or you will indeed find yourself being very irritated and/or demoralised working alongside them - you may even be the minority amongst them and that'll make you a very lonely person.

    TomInPortsmouth: I agree. If a bloke in my plt, coy or bn was not fully committed then I'd start questioning his motivation.

    Perhaps stuck doing a ROS, in a job that is nothing like what he signed up for?

    If it came to stagging on with the bloke and he started talking about how he joined "the regt" so that he could impersonate the army then I'd tell him to get stuffed, not the kind of bloke you want covering your back, even worse a bloke telling people about how hardcore "the regt" is (not a pop).

    Agreed, but it happens, and will continue to happen - people have different ideas of what is a good job, and after 15 years in the forces, might easily become 'sick' of it.

    Mark
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    :rolleyes: jeez, i'll read all that properly tomorrow when i'm not knackered!

    How's you Mark? Think we're the only ones about at the mo, although I'm being dragged out on the drink soon!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Yea I have a mixed liniage - Matriarchal's Army, Patriarchal's RAF. Just prefer the RAF.

    THE AAC is trained to deal with stuff on the ground, they do a very different job in most cases to us in blue.

    --------------

    OH and about Pilots yomping around, check the Jag 'Marines Commando' Pilot on the back of the current RAF News.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Mark. Good post
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LouE3D)
    The army is a ground force... you do your job on the ground... you are therefore trained to cope with situations you are likley to encounter. same for RAF, their personnel are trained to deal with the situations they are most likely to encounter... would be ridiculous to spend the bit of funds available sending ground support crew, pilots etc yomping round countryside for weeks on end building their combat skills up to that of the army instead of developing the skills they actually need to do the job they are employed for? All three forces are different. They have different roles so require different approaches... think about it!
    Hmm. Not quite sure about that. We certainly weren't as smooth as the inf. in our dismounted section attacks, but we practiced them pretty hard. We were prepared to be able to undertake any task we were given - and plenty of non-infantry units (a lot of arty regs. I think) did emergency infantry tours in NI during the bad old days. I understand there is plenty of ground defence training in both IOT and Halton airman course, and my understanding of the NCA post-Halton training course is that it has lot in common with the Army phase 1 training course. Sure, it's horses for courses; no pilot should be required to do for example, a Brecon course (which inf. do), although aren't they likely to need some form of fairly ardous escape and evasion type training? There's a lot to be said for spending time in the field, I certainly didn't enjoy it to begin with (esp. dismounted) but grew to love it and will always look back on exercises, mainly the ones I didn't get "killed" on, with fond memories.
    • CV Helper
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    CV Helper
    (Original post by Qui Audet Vincit)
    I've known the RAF all my life and 3 months got introduced to the army, now I see the RAF as civvies in uniform/civil servants in uniform
    Welcome to the forum. I'm sure my mates still being shot at in their GR4s over Iraq will delight in being branded "civvies in uniform." Care to quantify it a bit?
    • CV Helper
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    CV Helper
    (Original post by trickydicky)
    The recruiting process in the RAF suggests to me that they view your main job as whatever your specialization is, e.g. pilot, radiographer whatever. It's different in the army, you are a soldier first.
    This is the way we've always done it. The RAF is the most specialised of the forces. Every Naval officer is, at heart, a warfare officer; they all have to be able to form part of the officer cadre aboard and do their bit. Every Army officer is an infanteer; they all have to have the basic soldiering skills that every soldier requires.

    In the RAF, there's no "base" job like warfare of platoon commandering. Hence our officer training was always shorter than the other two services; all Navy guys need to learn how to steer boats around and all Army guys need to know how to crawl around doing soldier things. There's no generic thing that every RAF officer needs to know. The shorter officer training allows us out to our branch-specific training quicker.
    • CV Helper
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    CV Helper
    (Original post by djmarkmclachlan)
    You're not actually at sea all year And seeing as it's tri-service, you might just end up on a ship sometime anyway.
    Not quite that simple though; how long does an embarked SHAR squadron spend aboard compared to a visiting GR7 squadron? RAF Harrier mates do spend some time "on the boat" but nowhere near as much as Navy guys.

    (Original post by djmarkmclachlan)
    LowE3D: The army is a ground force... you do your job on the ground... you are therefore trained to cope with situations you are likley to encounter...

    AAC?
    The AAC keeps its officers and soldiers very close to their roots. Officers are still covered in all the usual Army career-advancing nonsense, and generally complete one tour before leaving the AAC. Their soldiers still do just as much drill as any other soldier; the Army have a mistaken belief that aviation is like tank driving. So yes, the AAC does act like part of the Army and very much a "ground force."

    (Original post by djmarkmclachlan)
    Why not? Friendly 'banter' is consistantly sprikled throughout these fora, by you 'RAF wannabes'. So why not have some back?
    Banter generally has to be backed up with a few things though. You can make remarks about the RAF being "civvies in uniform" as long as you have a few colloquial stories to follow it with, a few wry comments about nice hotels and moans about conditions, or whatever. I don't think our new Latin-named chum had his tongue in cheek when he made his post, however.

    (Original post by djmarkmclachlan)
    Yes and no. Theres usually trouble within the non-commissioned ranks, because of NCA: with being promoted so quickly in their career, to the equivelant rank in the RN, that when it comes to who is higher - they believe they are, opposed to the RN SR's who have served for years and have 'earned' their rank. Usually causes a bit of aggro between the ranks, until it's sorted out by someone higher than themselves - who usually leans towards the RN, as the senior service, and the more 'knowledgable' servicemen.
    Oh what nonsense. If people are angry about NCA starting their careers as sergeants then they're petty, childish, bitter individuals. If they wanted to kick off their careers as sergeants then they should have picked a career path which allowed it. Presumably they'd be angry with officers starting at a "higher" rank than them as well?

    There's no question of who's "higher" between ranks; whatever the RN equivalent of sergeant is, someone with that rank is the same as an RAF sergeant; be they NCA or otherwise. Time served in rank means absolutely nothing; seniority is not to be confused with rank after all. You don't necessarily become a "better" corporal just because you've been one for a few months longer. NCA have earned their rank; by ability in the air, and by getting past a harder selection process than their equivalents who have worked their way up.

    Any claims that the Navy has more "knowledgeable" servicemen is complete and utter tripe.

    (Original post by djmarkmclachlan)
    Well, the Navy may very well be at sea all year round, but that doesn't mean all of the ships company are. 'Dry land'... what you gonna be serving on - if you're not at sea? Land.
    I think her point was that the Navy have a much higher chance of spending time at sea than the other services... yes, you may not be at sea all the time, but in a considerable amount of time in the RAF, I've only been at sea for biannual sea drills!

    (Original post by djmarkmclachlan)
    He didn't demean them atall, and if you believe that then just wait till you're serving, a lot of guys there don't want to be there, and you will regularly hear that 'the Navy is ****' as was said while I was in the Navy, and 'the RAF is crap', you'll get a lot of it - best get used to it or you will indeed find yourself being very irritated and/or demoralised working alongside them - you may even be the minority amongst them and that'll make you a very lonely person.
    Remind me how many years you spent as an officer in any of the services to quantify a comment like that? Every job has people who don't enjoy it, but as most people here are keen to be RAF officers I don't think short-term experience in a non-commissioned Navy job really qualifies you to comment.

    In the flying world, you'll work with a group of exceptionally keen, very well motivated, competitive individuals who relish challenges and love their jobs. Hacked off pilots don't hang around; they pick up an option point and head off to fly for an airline. Most are happy with their lot, and those you train with will believe quite rightly that they have the best job in the world and are exceptionally lucky. Guys I train never seem to stop grinning.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by puk2184)
    :rolleyes: jeez, i'll read all that properly tomorrow when i'm not knackered!

    How's you Mark? Think we're the only ones about at the mo, although I'm being dragged out on the drink soon!
    Hey! I'n grand. Btw, sorry for spelling mistakes within. I just got that, wasn't really 'on' earlier, just left the page open, as usualy. Yay - hope u had fun, work was actually notn bad was stipped on-stage whilst dressed as a sailier and doing YMCA (We do choreographed dances and stuff, and I was dnacing..) How are you?

    (Original post by GR4pilot)
    Yea I have a mixed liniage - Matriarchal's Army, Patriarchal's RAF. Just prefer the RAF.

    THE AAC is trained to deal with stuff on the ground, they do a very different job in most cases to us in blue.

    --------------

    OH and about Pilots yomping around, check the Jag 'Marines Commando' Pilot on the back of the current RAF News.
    Ah well - you've done well so far mate, I've got my fingers crossed for you, and as you prefer the RAF then thats fair enough, just earlier seemed people were saying the RAF was better, it's simply different.

    Yes, but they are pilots - they fly. You won't be flying all the time either, and rather than being stuff behind a sedk, they're out on the ground - seems cool to me

    Argh - I just moved house and keep meaning to phone and let the RAF News and Navy News know I've moved house, I've missed the most recwnt issue, because of it. Will see if they can backdate a copy for me.

    (Original post by reggie_boy)
    Mark. Good post
    Thanks, was a bit pissed off tbh.

    (Original post by trickydicky)
    Hmm. Not quite sure about that. We certainly weren't as smooth as the inf. in our dismounted section attacks, but we practiced them pretty hard. We were prepared to be able to undertake any task we were given - and plenty of non-infantry units (a lot of arty regs. I think) did emergency infantry tours in NI during the bad old days. I understand there is plenty of ground defence training in both IOT and Halton airman course, and my understanding of the NCA post-Halton training course is that it has lot in common with the Army phase 1 training course. Sure, it's horses for courses; no pilot should be required to do for example, a Brecon course (which inf. do), although aren't they likely to need some form of fairly ardous escape and evasion type training? There's a lot to be said for spending time in the field, I certainly didn't enjoy it to begin with (esp. dismounted) but grew to love it and will always look back on exercises, mainly the ones I didn't get "killed" on, with fond memories.
    Wrell, I'm not too clued up at the min, but I know of the Navy pilots going through training between Sultan and thingy the one nearby. And they RAF pilots do go on the Brecons, as far as I was aware, just a 2 week course - not pass or fsail, just turn up alongside some SAS guys? Could be wrong, but don't think so.

    (Original post by Wzz)
    Not quite that simple though; how long does an embarked SHAR squadron spend aboard compared to a visiting GR7 squadron? RAF Harrier mates do spend some time "on the boat" but nowhere near as much as Navy guys.
    Re-read what I said, you haven't contradicted me in any way. Yes, you're on board - but ehan again, you are inthe Navy afterall.

    (Original post by Wzz)
    The AAC keeps its officers and soldiers very close to their roots. Officers are still covered in all the usual Army career-advancing nonsense, and generally complete one tour before leaving the AAC. Their soldiers still do just as much drill as any other soldier; the Army have a mistaken belief that aviation is like tank driving. So yes, the AAC does act like part of the Army and very much a "ground force."

    I know, but as such so is the RAF; both operate from land. However, the AAC is not a 'ground force': 'Air Corps' what you think that means? It means - 'Air Corps' ie AC, in the air.

    (Original post by Wzz)
    Banter generally has to be backed up with a few things though. You can make remarks about the RAF being "civvies in uniform" as long as you have a few colloquial stories to follow it with, a few wry comments about nice hotels and moans about conditions, or whatever. I don't think our new Latin-named chum had his tongue in cheek when he made his post, however.
    Agreed, there was no tongue-in-cheek. However - sometimes there is sharp edge to the 'banter' among forces personelle, as I'm sure you're aware of.

    (Original post by Wzz)
    Oh what nonsense. If people are angry about NCA starting their careers as sergeants then they're petty, childish, bitter individuals. If they wanted to kick off their careers as sergeants then they should have picked a career path which allowed it. Presumably they'd be angry with officers starting at a "higher" rank than them as well?

    There's no question of who's "higher" between ranks; whatever the RN equivalent of sergeant is, someone with that rank is the same as an RAF sergeant; be they NCA or otherwise. Time served in rank means absolutely nothing; seniority is not to be confused with rank after all. You don't necessarily become a "better" corporal just because you've been one for a few months longer. NCA have earned their rank; by ability in the air, and by getting past a harder selection process than their equivalents who have worked their way up.

    Any claims that the Navy has more "knowledgeable" servicemen is complete and utter tripe.
    Didn't day they were angry. Simply they 'fly' (perdon the pun) up a few ranks. Didn't say they weren't bitter and sad, etc, but it happens - and is not tripe as you've said, no offence intended, but as a an officer, how are you liekly to know about it? I know because of non-officers telling me, no reason to lie, nothing to gain from it. Perhaps, they liked the Navy a little more than the RAF, and thats a reason for joining the Navy - or maybe, they weren't able to become NCA, I dont know. Unlikely, Officers are commissioened - quite a different story, however, yes - some people fo resent officers, for simply having the eppaulettes and the cap.

    Well, no. It causes trouble, when on ops an RAF guy tells an RN guy to tell his guys to do something, but the RN guy feels that he is above the RAF guy and should be claling the shots. I know of it happening, so again - it's not tripe.

    Again, I didn't say that they are. Simply that is the opinion taken by some (I'm not even saying all!) Naval guys.

    (Original post by Wzz)
    I think her point was that the Navy have a much higher chance of spending time at sea than the other services... yes, you may not be at sea all the time, but in a considerable amount of time in the RAF, I've only been at sea for biannual sea drills!
    Naturally. As you'd expect - Seeing as you're a Naval Officer and all. And that wasn;t my point, I was purely pointing out, that the RN don't just operate off ships - they fly from HM Establishments too. And she mentioned that the Armywas 'Dry land'.. is that land more dry than that that the RAF operate from?

    (Original post by Wzz)
    Remind me how many years you spent as an officer in any of the services to quantify a comment like that? Every job has people who don't enjoy it, but as most people here are keen to be RAF officers I don't think short-term experience in a non-commissioned Navy job really qualifies you to comment.

    In the flying world, you'll work with a group of exceptionally keen, very well motivated, competitive individuals who relish challenges and love their jobs. Hacked off pilots don't hang around; they pick up an option point and head off to fly for an airline. Most are happy with their lot, and those you train with will believe quite rightly that they have the best job in the world and are exceptionally lucky. Guys I train never seem to stop grinning.
    I spent no years as an Officer, as you're aware. However, I spent enoguh time to meet enough people who did exactly that; ***** about their job. So my comment stands. Though not Officers - enough people did it. I wasn't just referring to Officers, btw. I feel it does, as I've said - I met enough people to comment on what I experienced. And even if I didn't serve for 10 years - I was still away from home, in the Navy, so my comment is justified.

    I'm sure you will, in the flying world. I didn't say the flying world though,I was generalising to the forces overall, in which I was correcnt, a lot of people will not be happy and will *****. I believe it's an exceptional job also, and I'm sure they guys you mentioned along with yourself are great guys, well motivated and all that too, and hope I can get in on it myself. Again I didn't say anything about the flying world, so my comment is still fine. I'm sure they are, hopefully you'll train my sometime - that'd be cool.

    Mark.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Yea, but as Wzz said, the AAC are airborne tank drivers - I had the AAC at the UAS a few weeks ago and that was their opinion too. The RAF and AAC have very, very different jobs - hence why they aren't precuring Wokkas to help lug around all the support needed for the WAH64, AT is a RAF job!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    "Wrell, I'm not too clued up at the min, but I know of the Navy pilots going through training between Sultan and thingy the one nearby. And they RAF pilots do go on the Brecons, as far as I was aware, just a 2 week course - not pass or fsail, just turn up alongside some SAS guys? Could be wrong, but don't think so."

    Good job. yeah I should have made it clear I was think about junior/senior Brecon type courses which are quite long. Sounds as if OPSEC should limit any further escape training chat here, if that's the case though.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Wzz)
    This is the way we've always done it. The RAF is the most specialised of the forces. Every Naval officer is, at heart, a warfare officer; they all have to be able to form part of the officer cadre aboard and do their bit. Every Army officer is an infanteer; they all have to have the basic soldiering skills that every soldier requires.

    In the RAF, there's no "base" job like warfare of platoon commandering. Hence our officer training was always shorter than the other two services; all Navy guys need to learn how to steer boats around and all Army guys need to know how to crawl around doing soldier things. There's no generic thing that every RAF officer needs to know. The shorter officer training allows us out to our branch-specific training quicker.
    That's most useful, thank you. Yes, I think Sandhurst is about 40 +weeks isn't it? I apologise for not bringing much original to this discussion myself but I have another question relating to "esprit d'corps". Aircrew are obviously the sharp end of the RAF, and I suppose it may be they are only folks who actually "fight" in the conventional sense, in any given combat situation. Round the JRC and even the corridors of SHQ there were always plenty of pictures of the lads in days gone by "doing the business", with all ranks represented - I guess everyone could be said to run the same risk in combat. I'm not making this point very well I think, but how does the RAF cope with the fact that only the risk is so unevenly spread, and does it damage esprit d'corps?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by trickydicky)
    Aircrew are obviously the sharp end of the RAF, and I suppose it may be they are only folks who actually "fight" in the conventional sense, in any given combat situation.
    Don't forget about the RAF Regiment.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Don't forget about the RAF Regiment.
    Yeah, someone's got to check your ID and open the barrier - or is that RAF Police?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by GR4pilot)
    Yea, but as Wzz said, the AAC are airborne tank drivers - I had the AAC at the UAS a few weeks ago and that was their opinion too. The RAF and AAC have very, very different jobs - hence why they aren't precuring Wokkas to help lug around all the support needed for the WAH64, AT is a RAF job!
    Lol, but they still fly! That's been my point from the start. That they may have different roles on the floor - but so do the RAF and the Navy. They all have different roles when not flying, but they all fly - thats what I've been saying.

    (Original post by trickydicky)
    "Wrell, I'm not too clued up at the min, but I know of the Navy pilots going through training between Sultan and thingy the one nearby. And they RAF pilots do go on the Brecons, as far as I was aware, just a 2 week course - not pass or fsail, just turn up alongside some SAS guys? Could be wrong, but don't think so."

    Good job. yeah I should have made it clear I was think about junior/senior Brecon type courses which are quite long. Sounds as if OPSEC should limit any further escape training chat here, if that's the case though.
    Sorry, was a bit drunk - the base being HMS Collingwood, obviously. Lol, good job? :confused: I'm the resident know-nothing on here. So thanks lol. Yeah, it's just survival training, and it's pretty basic - still teaches them what they need to know though. I can't really work out the point of them going underneath there - it's bloody cold! (thats where the climbing wall is, when I was in the climbing club) I only know of them being there because I was on duty, walking around the fence a couple of times, and the Commando Sergeant always told us about them - no point as we never seen them, but he always mentioned them.

    Mark
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by djmarkmclachlan)
    Lol, but they still fly! That's been my point from the start. That they may have different roles on the floor - but so do the RAF and the Navy. They all have different roles when not flying, but they all fly - thats what I've been saying.



    Sorry, was a bit drunk - the base being HMS Collingwood, obviously. Lol, good job? :confused: I'm the resident know-nothing on here. So thanks lol. Yeah, it's just survival training, and it's pretty basic - still teaches them what they need to know though. I can't really work out the point of them going underneath there - it's bloody cold! (thats where the climbing wall is, when I was in the climbing club) I only know of them being there because I was on duty, walking around the fence a couple of times, and the Commando Sergeant always told us about them - no point as we never seen them, but he always mentioned them.

    Mark

    er, "good job" = thanks, well done etc.
    • CV Helper
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    CV Helper
    (Original post by djmarkmclachlan)
    Yes, but they are pilots - they fly. You won't be flying all the time either, and rather than being stuff behind a sedk, they're out on the ground - seems cool to me
    This is the AAC you're referring to? When I say that their NCO pilots are kept in touch with basic soldiering, that doesn't mean they fly one morning then spend the afternoon acting like the SAS. It means they have to get pulled aside from flying to do drill; which is ridiculous. Their officers are similarly hamstrung by the Army's insistence that officers do an amazing amount of career development work; so they do relatively little flying.

    Someone had suggested that the Army was a "ground force." You quoted the AAC as apparently not being a ground force. The point is that the AAC may indeed fly, but when not actually airborne they are still very much members of the Army. Whoever said the Army was a "ground force" is correct. The AAC is as well. They are just as desk-bound as any other aircrew.


    (Original post by djmarkmclachlan)
    And they RAF pilots do go on the Brecons, as far as I was aware, just a 2 week course - not pass or fsail, just turn up alongside some SAS guys? Could be wrong, but don't think so.
    You are wrong. We do a fair few courses, but nothing alongside the SAS and nothing in the Brecons.

    (Original post by djmarkmclachlan)
    Re-read what I said, you haven't contradicted me in any way. Yes, you're on board - but ehan again, you are inthe Navy afterall.
    Your point was that an RAF pilot may well spend time at sea as well. My point is that 3 weeks a year is not the same as the several months a year an RN pilot can expect. You were attempting to say that a dislike of being at sea might not be a reason to pick the RAF instead of the RN, as the RAF embark too. I'm pointing out that you're wrong; my GR7 chums spend a couple of weeks a year on the boat, while SHAR and FAA RW mates spend a very very great deal longer.

    (Original post by djmarkmclachlan)
    I know, but as such so is the RAF; both operate from land. However, the AAC is not a 'ground force': 'Air Corps' what you think that means? It means - 'Air Corps' ie AC, in the air.
    The Army is very much a ground-based force while the RAF is very air-minded. All your other duties, and the rest of your Army career post an AAC flying tour are ground based. All your other duties and the rest of your RAF career post a flying tour are air based. The Army treats its helicopters like airborne tanks. They operate as you'd expect an armoured group to work. From my experience with them, the AAC is very much part of the Army and hence very much a "ground force."

    (Original post by djmarkmclachlan)
    Didn't day they were angry. Simply they 'fly' (perdon the pun) up a few ranks. Didn't say they weren't bitter and sad, etc, but it happens - and is not tripe as you've said, no offence intended, but as a an officer, how are you liekly to know about it?
    You said there's "usually trouble within the non-commissioned ranks because of NCA being promoted so early in their career." If you didn't mean people take offence to that, perhaps you could clear up what you did mean?

    I know how people perceive NCA because I work for a fairly close-knit service. I know the NCOs under me very well and they know me. We don't operate some ridiculous two-tier system whereby they salute me as I sign out a jet then run away so I don't have to look at them in dirty overalls; we all work for the same squadrons so we all get on.

    (Original post by djmarkmclachlan)
    Well, no. It causes trouble, when on ops an RAF guy tells an RN guy to tell his guys to do something, but the RN guy feels that he is above the RAF guy and should be claling the shots. I know of it happening, so again - it's not tripe.
    The RN guy should grow up and do his job; unless he wants the RAF guy to tell his men directly? I've never seen a situation on ops where people don't just get on with it. There's always an obvious command chain which puts someone in a certain post in charge of things; there's never the opportunity for a "but I'm more senior" pissing contest. Do you actually have SNECs in the Navy who don't have the maturity to just get on with it? Are you really implying that they'd start moaning about being given a job because they think their rank technically makes them more important than an other service's sergeants? If so, that's the worst advert I've seen for the Navy for some time.

    (Original post by djmarkmclachlan)
    Naturally. As you'd expect - Seeing as you're a Naval Officer and all. And that wasn;t my point, I was purely pointing out, that the RN don't just operate off ships - they fly from HM Establishments too. And she mentioned that the Armywas 'Dry land'.. is that land more dry than that that the RAF operate from?
    Her point was that the choice between RN and RAF could be made by asking yourself if you want to serve at sea. She doesn't, hence the RAF makes more sense. Your pointing out that the Navy spend some time on dry land is utterly meaningless; as you've just said yourself, you're going to spend more time at sea than any other service.

    Look at what she said; "dry land or seasickness?" was her question. You can complete an entire RAF career never going to sea while it's impossible to do that in the Navy. That was her point!

    (Original post by djmarkmclachlan)
    I spent no years as an Officer, as you're aware. However, I spent enoguh time to meet enough people who did exactly that; ***** about their job. So my comment stands. Though not Officers - enough people did it. I wasn't just referring to Officers, btw. I feel it does, as I've said - I met enough people to comment on what I experienced. And even if I didn't serve for 10 years - I was still away from home, in the Navy, so my comment is justified.
    No, your comment doesn't stand. Sitting here after about a year's service in the Navy at an impressionable age does not qualify you to warn people here that they will be in a "sad, lonely minority" if they don't hate their jobs! You have seen an exceptionally small part of one of the services from a very junior position for a short period of time, yet your post implies that's what it's like everywhere. Pick your words more carefully. Perhaps your section had poor morale; perhaps your base did. I've only ever worked in one place with an overall feeling of discontent and I've worked in lots where morale is high and people love their jobs.

    (Original post by djmarkmclachlan)
    I'm sure you will, in the flying world. I didn't say the flying world though,I was generalising to the forces overall, in which I was correcnt, a lot of people will not be happy and will *****.
    What rot; you can't generalise about all the forces after one year's service in the Navy as a 17 year old, and I don't care how many CPOs told you "it's like that!" A lot of people in any job will moan, and even those that enjoy it will obviously complain every so often when faced with long hours, poor serviceability or another det. But to come out with comments like "the Navy is ****' as was said while I was in the Navy, and 'the RAF is crap', you'll get a lot of it" and "you may even be the minority amongst them and that'll make you a very lonely person." is awful advice.

    If you want to remind everyone about the details of your service; trade, unit etc; then you can be specific and comment on the morale of the people you worked alongside. Don't generalise; I've been in the RAF for a fair old bit of time but I'm in no way equipped to make such sweeping comments; you'll need people with a lot more experience and a lot more time in than me.

    Look at the people in this forum; the majority are interested in joining the RAF officer cadre. Morale in that in general is fine; first tourists especially are a very happy bunch. Yes, people approaching option points are often getting to the stage where a military career no longer floats their boat, and they moan; but that's far from the feeling you get overall.
    • CV Helper
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    CV Helper
    (Original post by trickydicky)
    how does the RAF cope with the fact that only the risk is so unevenly spread, and does it damage esprit d'corps?
    Not in my experience. While the Army does indeed have everyone from Private to Lieutenant Colonel out their at the sharp end, you're right that the only people normally "over the line" with the RAF are aircrew. Most RAF people accept that they're doing their bit; and making sure from an engineering perspective that the GR4's ready for anything before it disappears off in the hands of a pair of officers is their part of the big picture. Plenty of people feel proud of what their squadron aircrew achieve, after all; and when you've crewed them into jets back home for years there's quite a bond when you crew them in for a combat mission. They're your aircrew after all.

    No-one I've met in the RAF has any illusions about wanting to be a soldier. The ATC guys going to Basrah etc are happy to do their bit, but you won't find them moaning about not being in the thick of it shooting people. They have their job, it's as important as any other, and I'm glad they're happy.
 
 
 
Poll
Were you ever put in isolation at school?
Useful resources

Articles:

Guide to the armed forcesGuide to the Royal Air ForceA job in the Army

Featured recruiter profiles:

Army logo

The Army is recruiting now

"With hundreds of roles available, there’s more than one way to be the best."

Quick Link:

Unanswered Armed Forces Threads

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.