Regimental ties

Discussion in 'ACF' started by papegojan, Jun 26, 2007.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Saw this on the TRF/DZ flash thread and it peaked my curiosity. I would say that providing these items are not worn in daily life, but used for the mess, for example, where we can wear regimental mess kit, then it should be OK, as you can't exactly walt it up among your peers, who know you. Does anyone know if there is a rule governing this. As for the CEO rifting the SI, if we can wear the cap badge, why not the tie? Then again we are all ACF instr4uctors, and have enough ties/blazer badges of our own.
    What does everyone else think?
  2. Interesting point - I saw that, too. Plenty of our instructors wear the ties and blazer badges of our sponsoring Regiments, and it shows pride in the Regiment, and that we belong to the wider Regimental Family, so to speak.

    I suppose it goes with the stable belt/Mess Dress argument as stated. But we also have a County tie and an ACF tie (which was the subject of another thread) and should that be worn instead?
  3. If we are allowed to wear cap badges, Mess Kit with ACF on them, then we should also be allowed to wear ties, I have seen a few wearing ties , even if they haven't served in TA/Regs in Frimley, nobody said anything, I did wear an ARRSE tie, some people wondered what regiment it was, lol , I also have an ACF tie as well as other regimental ties, its cheaper than a Mess Kit IMO and can be worn as an alternative, if prefered a Highlander dinner suit can look just as good and generic enough especially if you wear a Black Watch or Royal Stewert tartan

    as it is, it is not worth my money to buy a mess kit until I become an officer as I would have to buy different one for each rank, the consesus is that the first mess kit you get as an Officer is the one you usually stick with.
  4. I wasn't going to bother with Mess Kit, but could I get away with the RLC bow tie with my dinner jacket? How literally meant is the term 'black tie'?
  5. I normally wear my Dinner Suit or Lounge Suit.

    Sometimes I wear my old Scaley tie and sometimes my Tesco tie.

    Never bothered with parent unit ties. Does it matter? After all we're uniformed youth workers not squaddies anymore...
  6. woopert

    woopert LE Moderator

    Items like a Regimental Tie/Blazer are within the gift of the Col of the Regt in question. The CEO was wrong to rift the SI.

    If in doubt a quick letter to the Col introducing yourself and passing on your regards and expressing a desire to promote his Regt by wearing the tie would always be well received. The Col is unlikely to say no, would probably also invite you to join the respective mess for as long as you are affiliated, and you would certainly make the right impression.

    As for wearing the tie, if someone asks you you reply "I am the OC/SI of X Det ACF which is affiliated to the Regt" then that isn't walting at all.
  7. No regimental tie what a load of bollocks,what planet is this CEO on ?
    MY detachment are badged PARA so the non ex airborne instructors wear a sector/acf tie as the reg one carries PARA wings(BBC) on it so that is understandable
    In the same instance the same instructors when wearing t shirts with the regimental wings on it(not to be mistaken for the BBC)they always ensure it has x det acf also on the t shirt not to be walty.......

    but to take away regt ties and blazer badges well that is just eroding the regimental affliations within the acf.....

    On the subject of CEO/ SI beasting what tie was the SI wearing ?
    if it was a para or commando tie then that would be another matter........
  8. Royal Artillary. Can I say with which regiment/corps the CEO had previously served, or might that narrow it down too much? Not for the sake of his PERSEC, but for the sake of mine :)
  9. Like my namesake I am a pompous 'wannabe', and have never served as a grown-up. Chances are I'd wet my pants on an operational tour – all serving officers and soldiers are as Richard Sharpe to my Sir Henry Simmerson. So perhaps my opinions are fuelled by reverse-walting, whereby I try too hard to be seen as I am, and to not be mistaken for a real soldier.

    I have a bit of a problem with the regimental ties and blazer badges, but gracefully acknowledge Woopert's measured and sensible response. However, I have a real problem with stable belts and Mess Dress. To be honest, I think the wearing of Mess Dress by ACF instructors (commissioned and non-commissioned) is a huge affront to all proper, grown-up Regular and TA Officers, WOs and SNCOs. I don't know why I should think this, having never been a Regular or Territorial Army Officer, WO or SNCO, but it seems to me that this uniform is somehow the most prestigious and hard earned and ACF adults are just not worthy or deserving enough.

    The same goes for stable belts to my mind; they're earned by real soldiers in trade training and not to be taken lightly, let alone be worn by children. We've got an ACF stable belt, so let's wear that, regardless of our cap badge – plenty of TA Yeomanry wear their own colours. But then I'm of the firm opinion (the subject of other threads here) that the ACF should have it's own cap badge and not have sub-unit or County affiliation.

    If an AI has been there and done that then fine, wear mess dress, stable belt, qualification badges, medals and everything earned and deserved. Stand out from the walting dross and chaff that inhabits ACF messes and make those instructors ashamed that dared not put themselves in harms way for their country.

    I'm not interested in arguments about Mess Dress being another uniform, and if we can wear CS95 and No2 dress then what's the difference. Nor am I bothered that I might upset someone who was desperate to serve but has a physical impairment which prevented it; sorry, but tough, get over it (or harbour a painful, deep-rooted psychosis like mine.)

    Please don't think that I am some liberal out to somehow divorce the ACF form the Army. Far from it, I would like to see better weapons and more flexible rules allowing cadets to practice fire and movement (the make-safe rule is cobblers.) I just want us to be seen for who we are and what we are, for then the walts will have nowhere to hide and we can be rid of them.

    Right. Rant over, I'll go now, and probably won't come back. Even if I was still welcome.
  10. Sir Henry,
    a very daring rant I must say and I admire your non walting approach,

    I have to all intensive purposes been there, done that ,
    I have completed op tours some boring ,some cheeky and sandy and spent 14 years in the queen's uniform leaving the green machine in sept 2006 and fully going over to the ACF.

    I have never had an issue with the ACF and its regimental affiliations but agree it does to an extent breed waltism and maybe a generic cap badge /stable belt would eradicate that.
    Who knows maybe it will happen some day
    but on the other hand I always liked seeing young cadets wearing my unit capbadge doing well and there is that fostered family attitude which we would lose if the affiliations were to go.

    The ACF on rank slides and brassards are there to differentiate between the cadets and soldiers so that should be enough.

    ACF titles on mess kit and no 2 dress etc should be enough........

    maybe a generic mess kit for acf punters may be the answer with ex mob being allowed to wear the old kit if earned,I don't know....

    But the regimental affiliations for cadets is an honour and should be treated as such...........
    If there are individuals who misuse and abuse it then maybe it should be more down to their peers to out them ...........
  11. I admire the view, Sir Henry.

    I think the regimental alliances are the right thing. It encourages the regimental spirit in the cadets.

    I have no desire to be seen as anything more than a good ACF instructor and to that end have worn the Para Cap Badge in a blue beret when posted to that detachment. You can't walt about being para with a blue beret in a TA centre full of airborne.

    On the regimental tie front, if you want to wear one in the mess fair enough. Wear it to work or out and about, then you are wrong. Wear the ACF or Frimley Park course ones whenever and wherever you want, that's what you are in.

    I remember when we got out first Gren Gds detachment at the back end of the 80's, they could wear everything but the regimental tie. It was suggested that the tie would open doors at jobs interviews etc.. They never had a problem with as the Gds gave them loads of help.
  12. bravo freddie old boy
  13. woopert

    woopert LE Moderator

    What needs to be remembered is that mess dress is not in fact a form of uniform, merely a prescribed form of dress for (regimental) social occasions. Hence for some regiments such as the RGJ of old, and some guards and cavalry regiments they don't even put badges of rank on them.

    The issues that SHS raises are more relevant to the wearing of medals and qualifications, which can be displayed on uniform, regulated dress, or civilian attire.

    It's my view that the issues around wanting to be seen as seperate are more the ACF's than the army's. Those who have been the worst offenders for it in my experience have been either those that have never served, or those who have been commissioned having only ever previously done a couple of years as a pte or a lance-jack a number of years previously. They tend to have a wholly unbalanced view of what it is to be an officer and as they tend to be viewed with some suspicion by regular and TA counterparts make a whole song and dance about being "diferent" so as to provide themselves with some psychological defence to protect their egos. They are the self-same people who will argue that their 3 pips are the same as a regular's 3 pips when they want to throw their toys of their prams under the cover of authority, mainly because they haven't worked out that the army like every walk of life involves building relationships and calling in favours and not on rank.

    It is a sweeping generalisation, but one I've seen often enough.

    I've said before that the best way to get on as an ACF officer/SI is to understand the culture and fit in with it. A newly posted officer would write to his new CO, and if you adopt the same aproach by writing to the Col of the Regt you are afiliated to you would be surprised how well it is received. You will be positively welcomed into the fold, encouraged to wear the uniform and display the stable belt, cap badge, service dress and mess kit, because often the ACF is the closest the unit comes to being seen in the local community. You aren't judged positively or negatively for wearing regimental tems, but for your overall bearing and attitude, and sometimes the ACF does itself no favours in being quite high handed and aloof for all of the wrong reasons.
  14. couldn't agree more mate I have written to Regimental Colonel PARA and he has been more than accomodating even gave the detachment a battle honour for it's title

    A very positive approach to their cadets

    Guys don't shun your affiliated regiments embrace their ethos
  15. You walty chopper! : You've never worked at TESCO's! :twisted: :rofl: