Cranwell

[Nialligimino]

I've been watching BBC 4's 'Sandurst' and was just wondering how similar or different life and training is for those that choose to train as RAF Officers.

Logic says there must be differences, because although many of the skills and mindsets are probably very similar, if it were that easy, economising measures would surely have been taken to create a one-size-fits-all course, prior to moving on to service specific training...

Any input appreciated.

Nialligimino.

 

[MQ-9 Reaper]

its only really the leadership element that could be done jointly which in the grand scheme of the whole 6months isnt a lot really. the rest of the time your learnin specifically how the airforce wants things done..... no point merging them really.

 

[Stevienics]

I am not going to answer that, but in matter of fact you ask a very pertinent question. I am personally aware of the divergent attitudes to how commissioned duties should be executed, but I wonder if, perchance, both could be accommodated in the same academic foundation?

There are guys on here with more contemporary experience, but as a virtual outsider it has some value, at least at some formative stage. No?

 

[MQ-9 Reaper]

Like a 'pre-commission training' general officers managers course? purple beret anyone?

 

[vim_fuego]

I don't think the bayonet training, if any, is quite so vigorous....

 

[Nialligimino]

Syllabus

Syllabus

I should probably add that I realise the Army probably has no interest in (or understanding of) FASOC, the ubiquity of air power and other specialist Air Force topics.

 

[Tashy_Man]

I should probably add that I realise the Army probably has no interest in (or understanding of) FASOC, the ubiquity of air power and other specialist Air Force topics.

Which is also probably true of 95% of the real Airforce as well.

Crack on.....................DT_Xtremez_09:

 

[Nialligimino]

Which is also probably true of 95% of the real Airforce as well.

Crack on.....................DT_Xtremez_09:

Doesn't mean it won't be something you have to avoid procrastinating over.

 

[iainrm]

Historically the RAFs officer recruitment has had the main aim of finding fighter pilots as these fall by the wayside they fill all the other flying/ non flying GD roles.
One effect of this seems to be the only leadership training required is does your wing man know where to find you.
Where as the army has to prepare its officers to live in close proximity to the men while maintaining both their respect and trust, something I found to be a very rare.

 

[Spearmint]

Historically the RAFs officer recruitment has had the main aim of finding fighter pilots as these fall by the wayside they fill all the other flying/ non flying GD roles.
One effect of this seems to be the only leadership training required is does your wing man know where to find you.
Where as the army has to prepare its officers to live in close proximity to the men while maintaining both their respect and trust, something I found to be a very rare.

That might have been the case many decades ago it certainly isn't now. Your an Officer first, then trade. What this means is that all Officer Cadets follow the same syllabus in Leadership Training, Academics, Force Protection etc.

I can state with due certainty that unless your desired role is as a Rock Officer then your not taught to advance on the enemy in a contact (apart from some brief exposure but nothing concrete) so there isn't any stabbing of sandbags going on.

 

[True Blue Jack]

I should probably add that I realise the Army probably has no interest in (or understanding of) FASOC, the ubiquity of air power and other specialist Air Force topics.

I think you've answered your own question. (I don't think Tashy could be persuaded to have much interest in it either, these days).

Leadership forms the biggest part of the syllabus at all 4 training establishments and we are all taught according to the same model (John Adair, action centred leadership, mission command, etc) so it could make sense to combine that training, separating out only for the academics and Service ethos elements. The problem is that, although the theories of leadership are the same, the application is very different. There are things the other services do well that we would struggle to do and vice versa; I think combining the training would make the output for each Service worse - and there are many who would say they're bad enough already.

 

[engchimp]

Just thought I would stick my oar in having passed over to the darkside from SAC, IOT is as correctly mentioned,is based on Adair's findings. All the Crantanamo assessments base around 'Task, team and Individual' with a very generic leadership style. Kolb features highly also in 'Do, Review, Learn and Apply'. There is no real prior learning necessary (In my humble opinion) as leadership is taugt in these generic ways (follow the SMEAC checklists and Adair's principles ). On my course there were 2 ex-Sandhurst cadets who both failed the Army Initial Officer Training but breezed through IOT. Leadership is eased in after playing soldiers for a few weeks, IOT isn't too bad as long as you play ball, Just don't have 'Airman Tendencies' and do exactly whats asked of you.I guess by the looks of things Sandhurst is more challenging.

 

[duffman]

, Just don't have 'Airman Tendencies'

I've seen that before, how does cranwell define it? What would be an example of it?

 

[Ghandi's Flip-Flop]

I've seen that before, how does cranwell define it? What would be an example of it?

Displaying competance and signs of a backbone?

 

[Spearmint]

I've seen that before, how does cranwell define it? What would be an example of it?

Displaying competance and signs of a backbone?

It's down to individuals perceptions of those under review. Whilst one member of staff may not have a problem with the odd mucky joke or questionable innuendo another will. Not holding your tongue even if you know your right, dealing with things 'in house' rather than flagging it up the chain of command and even your swagger can have the moniker of 'Airman like tendencies' aimed your way. Referring to the Harrier as 'The one man, one fan, carbon fibre, death provider aka Serbian Widow Maker in your 'My Life Essay' thus earning that moniker is also what may seem slightly harsh.

The other side though would be the usual ****ing in plant pots, screwing your partner over the snooker table on Graduation night (Happened recently - no idea of what punishment received) and turning up late for a parade post Champagne Tuesday, unshaven and looking dishevelled which earned that cadet a rerun of Term 3.

 

[vim_fuego]

I've seen that before, how does cranwell define it? What would be an example of it?

Purposely playing the grey man...Taking short cuts that make perfect sense to you from an airmens point of view but not in the spirit of the game to them...Being caught with a boot full of spare clean kit...keeping the bed pack made up for almost the whole course and using a sleeping bag from same car boot each evening...not volunteering for everything...telling someone in authority that they are wrong when they are (this was my worst mistake in professional training on 3FTS and I only made it once...it was a bollocking of awesome proportions that could be heard from NAAS all the way over to College Hall...that said the bloke in question was 100% wrong!)...showing the ab initios the short cuts too early in their career...generally creating a feeling of calm over the course when the powers wanted them under stress and running around a bit.

Just a few of the ones I either made or witnessed on ITC.

 

[Stevienics]

I've seen that before, how does cranwell define it? What would be an example of it?

I recall once being quietly berated by the Flight Commannder on a "training dining-in night" (yes, you heard it right), because I refused to speak with the University Cadets that they had (on purpose, mind you) place me amongst .

...as I recall it went along the lines of "listen XXXX, I know they are talking bollux, you know they are talking bollux, just drink some wine and play the bloody game, OK"

I did. Wine changes everything.

 

[duffman]

Purposely playing the grey man...Taking short cuts that make perfect sense to you from an airmens point of view but not in the spirit of the game to them...Being caught with a boot full of spare clean kit...keeping the bed pack made up for almost the whole course and using a sleeping bag from same car boot each evening...not volunteering for everything...telling someone in authority that they are wrong when they are (this was my worst mistake in professional training on 3FTS and I only made it once...it was a bollocking of awesome proportions that could be heard from NAAS all the way over to College Hall...that said the bloke in question was 100% wrong!)...showing the ab initios the short cuts too early in their career...generally creating a feeling of calm over the course when the powers wanted them under stress and running around a bit.

Just a few of the ones I either made or witnessed on ITC.

Thanks for that Vim, I think I get it now, I now know a commission is too late for me, my airman tendancies would be far too strong!

 

[Ghandi's Flip-Flop]

telling someone in authority that they are wrong when they are

You see to me this is what is wrong with many of our Officer Cadre currently.

If you are not a big enough man to accept you are sometimes wrong you shouldn't be placed in that position in the first place.

Also if a junior officer isn't allowed to point out when someone above them is in the wrong why employ them as an officer? Surely an A/C who doesn't question anything would be more appropriate.

Its idiots in charge always saying 'yes' which has seen us into this mess

 

[Stevienics]

You see to me this is what is wrong with many of our Officer Cadre currently.

If you are not a big enough man to accept you are sometimes wrong you shouldn't be placed in that position in the first place.

Also if a junior officer isn't allowed to point out when someone above them is in the wrong why employ them as an officer? Surely an A/C who doesn't question anything would be more appropriate.

Its idiots in charge always saying 'yes' which has seen us into this mess

It is usually the context and the company in which it is said that causes the problem. It is actually a lesson which would do well to be taught and learned across and between all ranks.