ACF under one badge?-a pride in our organisation?

#1
Well chaps I am sorry but I need to talk about this..............I think the affiliations we have as independent units et al are costly, inefficient and encourage in some cases a tad of waltiness. The walty stuff is not my point, however it would solve many problems if we all wore a generic beret ,badge,stable belts, 2's, mess dress, rank slides etc we could then get on with the job in hand without bothering with some of the shit regimental traditions and other codswallop that is not relevent being applied to the cadets- our cadets in our sector are now being encouraged to refer to themselves as riflemen and this has to be endorsed by staff. well they can bollocks because they are most certainly not riflemen and this sort of thing amongst others wouldn't happen if were a single badged organisation............the navy and the air force ATC and SCC do well and engender respect so why don't we.!!? If any one from LAND is bored enough to read this can you give us any reasoning behind why not? it'll be one army soon anyway so why not? C'mon all you crusties ,diehards and regimental groupies why shouldn't it be one badge for one ACF??????
 
#2
I disagree totally. I believe that the ACF, and similar organisations, should assume the cap badges of Regiments that are either placed in to suspended animation, or are assimilated in to other 'new' regiments. The ACF units could carry on the Regimental traditions and Pride of those 'ex' Regiments, could provide a focal point for ex members of those Regiments (and also get the financial and other help from those members) and in particular, prevent the name of that Regiment becoming just a 'reference in a History book'. From many years personal experience, I have seen Cadets take on the Regimental Pride of the Regiment or Corps to which they are badged. I believe, if they were now badged to a once proud and thriving 'ex' Regiment, that that Pride and sense of being would only be enhanced. The Regimental associations may also be willing to assist - or more - with those units.




Inky
 
#3
Go to Canada, they all wear the same badge so they fight over which Language/province/town etc,

So nothing will make any difference, as for your cadets being called Riflemen, I think you will find that Land spoke to the Col in chief of the said regular unit who wanted that to be the case and so it is
 
#4
The idea about reviving old capbadges is a good one in a lot of ways, but would cost a fortune, as badges, etc. would have to be specially made for a reletively small group of bods.

An ACF cab bagde would be sufficient for all Cadets and Staff. Those who have served as Reg or Res under a capbadge should be encouraged to wear their original capbadge. (inc RAF and RN, even if in Army style uniform).

Cadets could be called, well, Cadets, rather than any Regimental title.

Regiments and Corps' could then assist ALL ACF units in their area or similar. Rather than just capbadge jobs. Perhaps the sections, or other groupings could be named after local regiments or capbadges.

ie an ACF unit in Dorset could have a "Deven and Dorset" Section, a RSigs Section and a RAC Section. With the D&D castle, R Sigs Jimmy and the RAC Fist being used as emblems.

Maintains the links to capbadges, but also gives a corperate image.
 
#5
This has been discussed many times on this forum. Ultimately the only regimental accoutrements worn on uniform should be cap badge and belt. No trfs etc. In my county rank slides are generic gold on dpm with county acf titles. Money kept to a minimum. As to No 2 dress, mess dress, look at sempers guide to newbies. They are not compulsory items. I know some people who have never worn 2s during their ACF service, and some who are never out of it. Owners of said kit are a minority in my county. In any ase, our cadets only wear CS95, so hat's wrong with dressing the same as our cadets? Mess kit? More trouble than it's worth IMHO. Keeps spending to a minimum, keeps cap badges of sponsor units, who I have found willing to support us, providing we are not trying to play ourselves up bigger than we are, and does not bring about the further expense of sorting out the amount of cap badges, stable belts and headdress that would be needed to equip rthe ntions cadets and CFAVs en masse.
 
#6
As to pobarg's comment about riflemen, you might as well say in that case they can't be l/cpl, cpl, bdr sgt/sjt etc. Regimental tradition if kept sensible is a good thing for the cadets, and the ones in my detachment seem to like it. As was mentioned also, if the affiliated regiments have expressed a wish for this to happen and LAND are OK with it, why get worked up?
 
#7
pobarg said:
s*** regimental traditions and other codswallop that is not relevent being applied to the cadets-
I hope no one from the Rifles knows who you are mate, that comment is juvenile and disrespectful in the extreme. So hundreds of years of regimental history are s*** just because you cant be arrsed with it. If you've got such a fetish for the ATC why not fcuk off and join it? If I was a Rifleman I wouldnt want someone who thought my regimental traditions were codwallop, wearing my capbadge.

I was in the ACF for 8 years and all through that time I proudly wore the Royal Anglian capbadge, stable belt and No 2 dress, I considered it an honour and a privilege and made sure the cadets were aware of this.

Walting is down to AI's and officers to self regulate, but I do agree that there should be something to make it easier to differenciate between soldiers and cadets.
 
#8
A variety of cap badges, regimental affilliations and customs is one of the ACFs strengths, not one of its weaknesses.

I think the only people complaining about regimental affilliations are those getting nothing from them, which is regrettable, but perhaps you need to try harder and forge links.

Also local army units are as a whole not partisan as to which detachment they assist, based soley on a shared cap badge. (certainly not in my sector, anyway) Local Reg and TA realise that cadets, even of the Sea and Air variety are all potential recruits.

As part of my AI training, my cadre will learn about the different regiments and corps and their respective history, customs and rank titles represented in my sector.

I do agree however that calling a cadet a rifleman or even 'Cadet rifleman' is 'über-waltenschiesse!

I don't fancy calling my lot Cadet Air Troopers, because it sounds gay too!
 
#9
Old_Gregg said:
Walting is down to AI's and officers to self regulate, but I do agree that there should be something to make it easier to differenciate between soldiers and cadets.
There is. A brassard for the cadets and Three gilt letters for the adults spelling out A,C and an F.

It doesn't require any more than that.
 
#10
[quote="Old_Gregg
Walting is down to AI's and officers to self regulate, but I do agree that there should be something to make it easier to differenciate between soldiers and cadets.[/quote]
True. Technically, that's what the brassard, and ACF titles are for. Admittedly the adult version is lower key and has watered down (When I first started adults wore brassards as well.) As far as walts go we do try our best to weed out/prevent, but these days, the CRB check does kinda weed 99% out at the first hurdle. Going back on topic, the army has many cap badges. The RN & RAF only have the one. Therefore the ATC & SCC only have one cap badge. The army cadets, following the traditions of its sponsors, adopts many badges. We do wear one badge that singles us out as ACF, and should engender pride. It's called the ACF titles, and anyone caught without them needs talking to. It's also worth remembering that the syllabus does contain a section marked "History of parent regiment."
 
#11
Who needs 'ACF' titles - a fatknacker 48 inch waist in dpm with more gucci kit than 'them', an arctic windproof, jungle boots and a loggie badged beret worn airborne stylee says ACF far better than ACF titles!
 
#12
fcking hell chaps.....like most people here, I started my regular service after being in the cadets.

i can reassure you that the modern TA and the Regular Army are little more than sinister experiments in Accelerated Aging Techniques

I for one hope that you let the thieving little scrotes enjoy their childhood in the ACF / CCF a little longer ...and stop all this pseudo SDR bullshit

ffs, the cadets corps are all about legalized waltery!!! - deliberately created so that so that kids can enjoy themselves, learn new skills and maybe join the Forces when they grow up!! :p
 
#13
moving-target-survivor said:
legalized waltery
I knew if I waited long enough, someone would come up with a decent two-word phrase to sum them up - but if they were 'real' army walts, they'd be ditching the green skin and in AT kit at every opportunity!
 
#14
Airfix said:
moving-target-survivor said:
legalized waltery
I knew if I waited long enough, someone would come up with a decent two-word phrase to sum them up - but if they were 'real' army walts, they'd be ditching the green skin and in AT kit at every opportunity!
fck yeah...i was COMMANDO-CCF!!!! *


(*Alas, my illustrious military career went down from there-on in :oops: )
 
#15
Waltery, whatever your opinion is not illegal anyway, so how can cadet service be called 'Legalized Waltery'?

Anyway, a cadet is a cadet, and not a walt at all. Some of the adults might be, but never a cadet.

Something I tell my lot when they walk around Beltring War and peace show is this:

You are more than those twunts who dress up as SS stormtroopers, because you actually are what you are, ie Cadets!
 
#16
Airfix said:
Who needs 'ACF' titles - a fatknacker 48 inch waist in dpm with more gucci kit than 'them', an arctic windproof, jungle boots and a loggie badged beret worn airborne stylee says ACF far better than ACF titles!
To me it says 'Loggie' much more than 'ACF' :thumright:
 
#17
Having been in the Marine Cadets and the Army cadets as a instucter for years badged to Cheshires, Royal Marines , Staffords , R mons RE , , WFR , and now Grenadier Guards .
my opinion is the cadets love to be badged to a parent unit it gives them a link to the history and traditions , sometimes thay have relatives or ex-cadets serving with " the Regiment " its no bad thing .
Ches-fford
 
#18
walt_of_the_walts said:
Airfix said:
Who needs 'ACF' titles - a fatknacker 48 inch waist in dpm with more gucci kit than 'them', an arctic windproof, jungle boots and a loggie badged beret worn airborne stylee says ACF far better than ACF titles!
To me it says 'Loggie' much more than 'ACF' :thumright:
Ex loggie who refuse to wear his new ACF det badge perhaps... :roll:
 
#19
There seems to be alot of defensive folk out there who seem to be very defensive and in being so are being somewhat confrontational, I meant no disrespect to any regimental tradition or honours or history-i am a keen student of military history and all that codswallop myself-but the only constant is change- picture if you will a new recruit to the rifles.......he only knows his regiment as this...........his corporal probably knows it as another thing.........his sgt as another and the RSM may well remember in the dim dark recesses of time ,another. Does that make the recruits contribution or commitment any less valid? or the history taught to him re. 4 other regts.who have come together to forge the one? Think about the new traditions that will develop in the time it takes that recruit to reach his senior ranks..................if we become singulary ACF, albeit with Land funding and guidance, can we not then have room to effect our own development and future and even......... god forbid! our own customs and traditions specific to the army cadets!!
 
#20
walt_of_the_walts said:
Old_Gregg said:
Walting is down to AI's and officers to self regulate, but I do agree that there should be something to make it easier to differenciate between soldiers and cadets.
There is. A brassard for the cadets Thanks for that, Im well aware of what there is at the moment. As you may have noticed many cadets get rid of their brassard at the first possible oppotunity after parade nights to big time it in their CS95, some conveiniently "forget" theirs or use the excuse theres no button on the 95 kit. Fed up of trying to explain why theys must display their brassard at all times I went to the lengths of keeping a spare brassard and saftey pins in the detacment kit. An ACF badge to go directly on shirts and jackets would stop this.

and Three gilt letters for the adults spelling out A,C and an F. Fine for the rest of the forces, they know what it means. The average Joe (or terrorist more importantly) hasnt got a clue. All they see is an Adult in military uniform. Whats wrong with olive rank slide with ARMY CADET FORCE actually spelt out? I wouldnt have had a problem wearing it.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
junior_RLC The Intelligence Cell 46
ging-gwar The Intelligence Cell 0
Nige The Training Wing 2

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top