ACF Officers

cpunk

LE
Moderator
#3
Mark,

Good for you. I don't think 90% of the users of Arrse would strongly disagree with what you have written. Most of us recognise what a good job the ACF does: it can and does genuinely turn lives around. Where the ACF suffers is when AIs and ACF officers lose sight of what they are supposed to be doing and embark on a personal power trip. I recognise that that is a tiny minority, but there are enough of them to raise military Arrser's hackles.

In any case, welcome to Arrse.
 
#4
An interesting point of view.

I'd be interested to hear why you think "there is not much difference between the officers attitude and ability", ability in particular.

Welcome.
 
#5
So, you say you were a reg, a stab and now ACF.

What rank were you in the regs and stabs, as your line about you put in far more time than your TA counterpart shows you know absolutly fek all about senior management (SNCO and Off) requirments in the TA.

I have a high regard for all ACF instructors.

But there are some who walt it up more than they should, and others with chips almost as large as yours.

So you command TA and Reg troops, when, on your 2 week camp? And the command would really be a hard one. 'CCT, can you run a 3 Start Ex?'
'Yes!'

Dont try and large it up, as there are people on here who are alot higher and mightyer than you as a one pipped wonder and they dont. It is 'conduct unbecoming' - if you know what I mean.

You command a det with over 75 cadets and AI's in. Well I saw fekking well done!

Bet you havent been there that long though, not if you are a one pipped wonder, and I would also think that your senior NCO at the unit would have a thing or two to say about you 'commanding' anyone.

A lesson, when a new subbie (thats you that is) leaves the factory (that would be Sandhurt, somewhere you Havent been as an ACF Officer, no matter how much you try to large it up) arrives at a unit they are advised by their boss to 'look, listen, and most of all learn from the SNCO' before they open thier mouth.

May I suggest you do the same.

Apart from that, welcome to Arrse and do try to add more in your next post, rather than just blowing smoke up your own Arrse.
 
#6
MarkM said:
Thats one thing that is forgotten, we not only command cadets we also command adults, Cadet, TA, and regular army.
Not this callsign. I respect your previouse experience and the fact that you have chosen to take the time to pass on your experience to the youngsters, but the day an ACF Officer tips up at Div in any form of Command position is the day I look to the French for guidance.
 
#7
MarkM said:
Not meaning to bang on but we as ACF officers are moulding the soldiers of tommorow.
Well done you and I'm genuinely grateful - just please tell me that you aren't passing on your spelling skills?





..... sorry I just couldn't resist!
 
#8
Rant 'on':

Firstly I have seen both sides of the fence. I have been commissioned in both regulars and ACF. As cadets we always used to pride ourselves that we aspired to regular service, whereas the TA didn't......

MarkM said:
I've been in the regular army and the TA and now serve in the ACF.
...........Well done, I genuinely applaud what you do in your spare time.

MarkM said:
I was reading a thread on the site where ACF officers were getting some stick some support form other members.
.............mmm, I sense a defensive spirit.

MarkM said:
Just thought I would put a few facts on the site:

1. We have to attend the westbury selection procedure
2. We serve a 2 year probation as 2Lt
3. We have to pass Cadet AI course within the 2 years to move up to Lt (and?)
4. We are issued regular army officer number (..this does not an officer make)
5. We are eligiable for home service call up (LIKE THE WRVS THEN?)
6. I would say that as Cadet officers we put in more time than out TA conterparts, I personaly did 60+ days last year.
7. We parade twice a week (not once as our TA bods do)
8. Our commisions are announced in the London Gazzette (see 4)
9. We are bound by military law
10. We have Army MOD 90's issued(see 4)
............As a natural cynic, I am beginning to be won round to the 'one Army' concept, but get one thing straight - do not try and equate your selfless community work, to those 2Lts that are leading their patrols out in Helmland province (and I imagine there are a few TA there).

MarkM said:
Just because My rank slide says ACF that doesnt mean is is any less of a commision than if it just stated my corps.
............Perhaps not, but the fact that you can't spell commission suggests to me that you shouldn't have one.

MarkM said:
I appreiciate that the ACF is a youth organisation and that in the end we are not trained to the level of a Sandhurts graduate, but In my experience of serving in all of the levels (Cadet, TA, Regular) there is not much difference between the officers attitude and ability.
............Mmmmm, I am now looking for the hidden camera. In my experience (also served with all three), I have yet to find an ACF officer (without regular commissioned experience) that could comfortably pass as a full-timer with no-one suspecting a thing; the gap is just too big - I have, however met a few TA that could blend in unnoticed. I am also guessing that you have not held the same rank in both organisations, so can you really comment objectively?

MarkM said:
But, the main point I suppose is not what you are attached to, its how you conduct yourself, In my interview at westbury I asked the Colonel taking it how ACF officers were seen by the rest of the Army, he just said that once the people saw how you did your job, then they would treat you accordingly.
........Sage words. If you do a good job as an ACF officer, you will be treated as a good ACF officer.

MarkM said:
Not meaning to bang on but we as ACF officers are moulding the soldiers of tommorow.
............I whole-heartedly agree. But that does not make YOU the soldier of today............


Look - the ACF is a great organisation, doing great stuff, with great people. Please don't feel the need to justify it, nor to equate it to other organisations on the grounds that you carry a piece of plastic that says 'Army' on it.

..Rant 'off' :D
 
#9
I find the level of hatred displayed against the ACF here most disturbing.

As the many regulars who feel driven to post on these threads remind those in the ACF, it is a youth organisation.

That is correct, so it makes me wonder why they then go to such lengths to criticise it and its members?

Big timing it against the ACF is very waltish indeed.

I don't know if it is indicative of low self esteem but if I was still serving I would want to compare myself against other regulars units, not bore everyone lording it over the hard working ACF adults.
 
#11
This Regular Army v ACF disdain is a little over done. The Army is a snobocracy and ACF are a very long way down the pecking order. No one with an ACF commision is currently going to be invited to take command of real soldiers in real operations. Their officers need a sense of humour to accept flak.

But...

If you look at where the officers and NCOs came fromfor the Great War the ACF/ CCF Boy Scouts Boys Brigade proved to be of real value. People had commissions and stripes by virtue of belonging to one of these youth organisations. Cadets of various sorts produced by far the largest number of leaders. The 1914-18 war was the largest ever expansion of the British Army, and its greatest trial. If Kitcheners army was a bunch of civies trained by people walting it up then they didn't do a bad job. If there was ever a general war they would do the same again.

.......and.

The ACF isn't just another youth organisation. They are one of the more visible parts of the army at a time when links between the Army and the civilian world are diminishing. Cadet's parents are tax payers and voters. ACF Officers and staff are what pewople think the army is like.

How do you think ACF officers should carry out that particular burden?
 
#12
Pteranadon said:
This Regular Army v ACF disdain is a little over done. The Army is a snobocracy and ACF are a very long way down the pecking order. No one with an ACF commision is currently going to be invited to take command of real soldiers in real operations. Their officers need a sense of humour to accept flak.

But...

If you look at where the officers and NCOs came fromfor the Great War the ACF/ CCF Boy Scouts Boys Brigade proved to be of real value. People had commissions and stripes by virtue of belonging to one of these youth organisations. Cadets of various sorts produced by far the largest number of leaders. The 1914-18 war was the largest ever expansion of the British Army, and its greatest trial. If Kitcheners army was a bunch of civies trained by people walting it up then they didn't do a bad job. If there was ever a general war they would do the same again.

.......and.

The ACF isn't just another youth organisation. They are one of the more visible parts of the army at a time when links between the Army and the civilian world are diminishing. Cadet's parents are tax payers and voters. ACF Officers and staff are what pewople think the army is like.

How do you think ACF officers should carry out that particular burden?[/quote]

answer- With a sense of realism! I agree that the ACF have a good role in todays society but your being nieve if you try and compare ranks within the British Army to that of a aggresive scout club.
History sometimes repeats itself, but I very much doubt that ACF officers would be called up to Iraq/Afghan.
One more point, Who says links between the Army and civvs's are diminshing? I'd say there has not been stonger support for the forces in many years.
 
#13
Moon_Monkey_Spunk said:
answer- With a sense of realism! I agree that the ACF have a good role in todays society but your being nieve if you try and compare ranks within the British Army to that of a aggresive scout club. History sometimes repeats itself, but I very much doubt that ACF officers would be called up to Iraq/Afghan.
True.

But the ACF isn't just an "An aggressive scout club". They wear military uniform - your uniform. They train young people in military skills, supply recruits for the Army and are a visible presence across the country.

Their officers and NCOs are one of the diminishing pools of military training If there was ever another general war and we wanted to build up our ground forces, we would have to look seriously at the ACF for people with military skills. Do you think that Britian will only ever provide an Imperial police force? Have we had the war to end all wars?


One more point, Who says links between the Army and civvs's are diminshing? I'd say there has not been stonger support for the forces in many years.
Whatever the opinion polls say, fewer and fewer people have direct or indirect contact with the Army.

- There are very much fewer people in civilian life who have military service. The veterans from the world wars are dying off and the national servicemen are collecting pensions.

- Many fewer people have relatives in the Armed forces. The regular and Territorial army is a LOT smaller than they were 20 years ago.

- The war on terror is very divisive. A lot of people repeate the mantra that they have a lot of respect for the soldiers doing a difficult job etc. But a lot also have the atttude that if you join the army you accept the risks. I really don't think there is quite the same sentimentality attached to our boys that the Americans have.

- A lot of business people think that public sector pensions and perks should be squeezed ruthlessly. When they think of Publisc sector pensions they don't automatically think of the army. Watch further pressure for sevice pension "refoirm".

- If there is such a high level of support for our armed forces, how come we have to fill the ranks with the foregin legion?
 
#15
MarkM said:
Its good to see that along with the scorn poured down onto the ACF there is some support.

To me this whole issue is about respect,
............................................................... but just because my rank slide says ACF dont think I dont know what I'm doing.

Just my point of view.
Hmm your choice of the word "respect" in this context implies that you are being a little naive and perhaps unused to the culture of the Officers Mess.

OK, regular and TA officers should be aware of (respect) the significance of the ACF, have a high regard for (respect) the voluntary commitment made by ACF officers to make it happen and (respect their feelings) - be aware of the discouragement that ACF Officers might feel when people pickon them. :)

But the word "Respect" has other associations:.

- You earn respect, you can't demand it.

- Its tied up with the sense of awe that soldiers feel for people seriously braver, harder and moreskilled - and expected by those who have risked their lives from those they might regard as remfs :)

Its not just the ACF. Anyone demanding "respect" from officers that consider themselves more frontline will get a bit of a hard time. Sure they appreciate the importance of stacked blankets or correct pay -but its not quite the same as fighting off the enemy in hand to hand combat. :) Britian has a long comic tradition and one of the favourite targets is someone very limited authority standing on his dignity and demanding respect - like Captain Mainwaring.

Having a sense of propoirtion means accepting the ante room banter -and avoiding arguments you can't win. ;)
 
#16
Pteranadon said:
Having a sense of propoirtion means accepting the ante room banter -and avoiding arguments you can't win. ;)
I've been in the TA for a week and I've learnt this!

FF.
 
#17
BlotBangRub said:
I find the level of hatred displayed against the ACF here most disturbing....................

...............Big timing it against the ACF is very waltish indeed.
I really hope that this wasn't aimed at me.... :D It did come in after my post....

I have served with all three (Reg/TA/ACF - not in that order) and genuinely think that all of them do a sterling job and fulfil a unique requirement. I met friends whilst serving with all three that continue to be friends and get my full admiration and respect. I am amazed that many TA and ACF give up time to do something that many Army bods try their best to get away from in their spare time.

My message was simple - be happy with your lot. If you are an instructor in the ACF you have many skills that regular soldiers don't have; if you are in the TA, you are increasingly placing yourself alongside your regular counterparts in many aspects. But if you are an ACF instructor, why try and equate yourself to the equivalent in the Army - there is simply no need - Both primary school teachers and university professors are critical to educational development. Indeed, without primary school teachers, there wouldn't be much need for university professors; but you don't get many primary school teachers feeling the need to justify their equality based on the fact that they both stand up and impart education and belong to the same union.

Please do not start a thread that so clearly draws a line in the sand/throws down a gauntlet, and then treat educated responses as 'scorn' or 'disdain'. Just because I think the ACF and Army are different, doesn't make me a bad person. That said, the stronger you argue that they are, expect a stronger counter argument!!

Chill out!!! :D
 
#18
BlotBangRub wrote:
I find the level of hatred displayed against the ACF here most disturbing....................

...............Big timing it against the ACF is very waltish indeed.

I really hope that this wasn't aimed at me.... It did come in after my post....

I have served with all three (Reg/TA/ACF - not in that order) and genuinely think that all of them do a sterling job and fulfil a unique requirement. I met friends whilst serving with all three that continue to be friends and get my full admiration and respect. I am amazed that many TA and ACF give up time to do something that many Army bods try their best to get away from in their spare time.

My message was simple - be happy with your lot. If you are an instructor in the ACF you have many skills that regular soldiers don't have; if you are in the TA, you are increasingly placing yourself alongside your regular counterparts in many aspects. But if you are an ACF instructor, why try and equate yourself to the equivalent in the Army - there is simply no need - Both primary school teachers and university professors are critical to educational development. Indeed, without primary school teachers, there wouldn't be much need for university professors; but you don't get many primary school teachers feeling the need to justify their equality based on the fact that they both stand up and impart education and belong to the same union.

Please do not start a thread that so clearly draws a line in the sand/throws down a gauntlet, and then treat educated responses as 'scorn' or 'disdain'. Just because I think the ACF and Army are different, doesn't make me a bad person. That said, the stronger you argue that they are, expect a stronger counter argument!!

Chill out!!!
It was a general observation regarding the numeorus ACF baiting threads that appear on the forum.

I still think to go to great lengths to criticise the ACF as not real soldiers/ NCO's/ Officers and to mention Op tours for example in the response is waltishness of the highest order.

It's certainly not me that needs to get a life and chill on this issue.
 
#19
BlotBangRub said:
BlotBangRub wrote:
I find the level of hatred displayed against the ACF here most disturbing....................

...............Big timing it against the ACF is very waltish indeed.

I really hope that this wasn't aimed at me.... It did come in after my post....

I have served with all three (Reg/TA/ACF - not in that order) and genuinely think that all of them do a sterling job and fulfil a unique requirement. I met friends whilst serving with all three that continue to be friends and get my full admiration and respect. I am amazed that many TA and ACF give up time to do something that many Army bods try their best to get away from in their spare time.

My message was simple - be happy with your lot. If you are an instructor in the ACF you have many skills that regular soldiers don't have; if you are in the TA, you are increasingly placing yourself alongside your regular counterparts in many aspects. But if you are an ACF instructor, why try and equate yourself to the equivalent in the Army - there is simply no need - Both primary school teachers and university professors are critical to educational development. Indeed, without primary school teachers, there wouldn't be much need for university professors; but you don't get many primary school teachers feeling the need to justify their equality based on the fact that they both stand up and impart education and belong to the same union.

Please do not start a thread that so clearly draws a line in the sand/throws down a gauntlet, and then treat educated responses as 'scorn' or 'disdain'. Just because I think the ACF and Army are different, doesn't make me a bad person. That said, the stronger you argue that they are, expect a stronger counter argument!!

Chill out!!!
It was a general observation regarding the numeorus ACF baiting threads that appear on the forum.

I still think to go to great lengths to criticise the ACF as not real soldiers/ NCO's/ Officers and to mention Op tours for example in the response is waltishness of the highest order.

It's certainly not me that needs to get a life and chill on this issue.
I've never been called a Walt before - cool! :D But I wasn't criticising the ACF, so I don't think it was me.... :cry:

To say that the ACF is different from the regular army because they don't deploy is not criticism - it is a fact.

The original theme of this post was to bait members of the regular army. I fell for it - d'oh. :oops: To claim that it is the other way round makes you a silly plonker - that is both criticism and fact. :D



Talking of the original post - why was it deleted?
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
King-walt The Intelligence Cell 197
h301593 Army Pay, Claims & JPA 36
BuggerAll ACF 2

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top