Corps by requirements

Truimphant

Swinger
Hey guys,

Sorry if someone has done one of these recently. I tried using the search function and nothing came up with the goods.

I'm looking for a list of corps accompanied by whether or not they require a degree and also what the general fitness requirements are (1.5 mile time, 2min press-ups, 2min sit-ups).

I know this isn't an exact science and I already have good ideas as to which corps/regiments I'll try for but it would be a great reference tool for myself and others.

Thanks.
 

cpunk

LE
Moderator
Off the top of my head, the only Corps which which specifies a particular degree subject is REME which requires an engineering degree of some kind for DE officers, IIRC. The physical standard for entry is the same across the board for all RMAS entrants.

Obviously PQOs must have the education relevant to their specialisation.
 
It might be worth mentioning that to promote to (or higher than - can't remember which) you will need a degree, and to (from?) Lt Col you'll need a masters. The military will assist, but it'll be either distance learning or an in-service degree.
 

Truimphant

Swinger
So my initial interviewer was saying to me that the RMP, Int Corps and AGC generally expect degrees. I've also seen a few figures bounced around here for target 1.5 mile times for teeth arms where as I'd imagine that a time of 10:30 mins for the run compared to 9:00 has less impact on your suitability for the Int Corps than say your university record.

Again I know there is no exact science. Would I be better off going to specific forums here and asking them directly about expectations?
 

Sarastro

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
I'm looking for a list of corps accompanied by whether or not they require a degree and also what the general fitness requirements are (1.5 mile time, 2min press-ups, 2min sit-ups).

You're asking for something that doesn't exist, because there is no reason for it to exist. There are no specified hidden requirements for any Regiment or Corps. There are rough guides of what is expected to be competitive for a place in certain Regts or Corps, but those apply to your second term at RMAS, not AOSB. So:

1. Your cutoff 1.5 mile time to get into RMAS is 10:30, whether you want to go Para Regt or ETS. Ditto pressups & situps, at 25/44/50/60 or whatever they are for your race, gender, age, religion or resident galaxy.

2. Your target run time for 1.5 miles is: as fast as possible. This applies for all Regt / Corps.

3. A rough guide to being competitive for infantry regts is sub-9:30. But, as above, this applies to when you are at RMAS. A better guide to being competitive for infantry regts is: as fast as possible sub-9:30.

4. As previously mentioned, a degree is preferable but not required for the Corps mentioned above. A statistically significant minority without degrees got into all those Corps from my intake. I'm also pretty sure that the Engineers prefer a degree, the REME certainly do, and I think the ETS prefer some kind of teaching qualification. I am skeptical that the AGC realistically expect a degree, as they tend to take the dregs who are left from clearing in any case, but I'm sure they say they do.

Two other points. First, nobody cares or knows how you do at AOSB apart from you and AOSB. RMAS are not given information about performance on AOSB to prevent it from shaping judgement before you arrive.

Second, it's a sad fact that initial interviewers at AFCO's tend to be an excellent source of chronically outdated and plain wrong information. For example, mine told me to forget applying to where I was eventually accepted into. If you want to know what a Regiment or Corps expects, go on a familiarisation visit or write a letter, and ask them directly.

PS Ref asking on specific forums here: if mine is anything to go by, you are vastly more likely to get cast-iron, 110% true, science-based fact from SNCO's who left in 1988 than current, reliable information from those involved in the present officer selection process.
 
Last edited:

cpunk

LE
Moderator
Two other points. First, nobody cares or knows how you do at AOSB apart from you and AOSB. RMAS are not given information about performance on AOSB to prevent it from shaping judgement before you arrive.

Actually, RMAS do get a detailed report on each candidate from AOSB, highlighting any potential areas of risk which they need to keep an eye open for. This is particularly necessary since the demise of RowCo as faults can no longer be beaten out of candidates before they start the commissioning course.

Second, it's a sad fact that initial interviewers at AFCO's tend to be an excellent source of chronically outdated and plain wrong information. For example, mine told me to forget applying to where I was eventually accepted into. If you want to know what a Regiment or Corps expects, go on a familiarisation visit or write a letter, and ask them directly.

PS Ref asking on specific forums here: if mine is anything to go by, you are vastly more likely to get cast-iron, 110% true, science-based fact from SNCO's who left in 1988 than current, reliable information from those involved in the present officer selection process.

I've heard an awful lot real bollocks from recruiters about how regiments and corps select officers. The bottom line is that, above every other factor, a good performance at RMAS is what counts and will lead to them considering you.
 

Sarastro

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Actually, RMAS do get a detailed report on each candidate from AOSB, highlighting any potential areas of risk which they need to keep an eye open for.

Curious. Do you know if this has changed recently, or has it always been that way? We were definitely told as part of the RCB brief that only a pass / fail was handed over to RMAS (in the same way that RMAS performance files don't get handed over to subsequent units / P2 courses).

I suppose they could have been lying, but I don't see why they would bother, when they could just not mention it at all.
 
I am skeptical that the AGC realistically expect a degree, as they tend to take the dregs who are left from clearing in any case, but I'm sure they say they do.


I resent that comment. I can recognise which side of the paper the map is on 7/10 times, and possess my own pencil (unsharpened for safety, of course).

AGC (less ALS & ETS) don't currently expect a degree, but it'll make things easier for all capbadges in years to come. And the majority of regiments take pepole from clearing - Engineers, Loggies, Artillery. Even the infantry.
 

sup rec

LE
Book Reviewer
I've heard an awful lot real bollocks from recruiters about how regiments and corps select officers. The bottom line is that, above every other factor, a good performance at RMAS is what counts and will lead to them considering you.

Under Capita/RPP, whatever you want to call it Careers Advisers, there are no longer any recruiters job, aren't really briefed on the officer side. Apparently that is all down to the Senior Careers Advisers. Unless someone was in a recruiter role before RPP they probably haven't been taught anything. So yes, they probably are talking bollocks as you put it (there will be some out there that know what the score is but not that many I wouldn't have thought).
 

cpunk

LE
Moderator
I don't know if it has changed recently or not but it's certainly what happens. Possibly it's the result of the demise of RowCo? In any event, AOSB do generate a detailed report on each candidate which flags up any areas of risk which have been identified, e.g. intellectual, practical, physical or personality.
 

cpunk

LE
Moderator
Under Capita/RPP, whatever you want to call it Careers Advisers, there are no longer any recruiters job, aren't really briefed on the officer side. Apparently that is all down to the Senior Careers Advisers. Unless someone was in a recruiter role before RPP they probably haven't been taught anything. So yes, they probably are talking bollocks as you put it (there will be some out there that know what the score is but not that many I wouldn't have thought).

A typical example is that SCAs do persist in telling candidates that they won't get into the Guards/HCav/RAC unless they have 'private money', family connections, have been to Eton etc etc etc.
 

sup rec

LE
Book Reviewer
A typical example is that SCAs do persist in telling candidates that they won't get into the Guards/HCav/RAC unless they have 'private money', family connections, have been to Eton etc etc etc.

I agree with you I was just putting the point across that the 'rank and file' don't really do this anymore it is all down to the SCA's.
 

Latest Threads

Top