Slightly different then!

OK, just to clarify, how does one distinguish between s/o who goes on AT with the primary reason of instructing and s/o who is a qualified instructor and instructs on said AT? The semantics make the mind boggle!

An example is an APTC type whose primary job is to instruct - ie Parachute instructor posted to Bad Lippespringe in Germany would get LOA whereas his students wouldnt. (That's just an example mind, probably a bad one)

That's not the same as what Paywog stated above (and I queried). Students, by definition, are not instructors (instructors = facilitators, to bring us neatly back to my original point).

I'm confused.

At least I know one thing, no LOA!

B_a_RD - You are begining to confuse the issue!!

Students/ individuals taking part in AT - no LOA.
Instructors who hold the qual primary assinment anything other than AT instructor eg Sergeant Major - no LOA.
Instructors whose primary assignment is instructing AT - i.e. assigned to BAC, KYC, etc - LOA.
Admin staff on ex but not participating in AT either as student or instructor - LOA - where authorised.

PW

So by instructor at your Line 2 you are refering to, for example, DS of a ph 1 establishment? They are "instructors" but NOT AT instructors.

I'm seeking to clarify rather fuzzy language, not to confuse the issue further.

NO if they are DS at a Ph 1 establishment they have a primary assignment to instruct Ph 1 not AT if they then attend AT as instructors due to an AT qual or they attend as students they are NOT entitled to LOA as far as the current regulatuions stand.

PW

I wanted to clarify it as the language was desperately unclear (probably due to whoever wrote the JSP knowing exactly the circumstances they meant but insufficiently communicating it to the rest of the Army)

I think we've got to the bottom of it now.

Thank you.