RLC Trade Book

Discussion in 'RLC' started by andypaddock, Apr 5, 2011.

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. The RLC Trade Book has been designed to provide members of the Corps, and those who employ RLC soldiers, with an easily accessible guide to each stage of their chosen career.

    The full list of RLC trades have now been added and the Trade book is now live.

  2. Sgt Logistic Specialist: No Relevant Content, No Accreditation Details.

    Seems about right :hmm:
  3. Again on ArmyNet which no one in my Sqn uses. And if you do, you just forget the login/password and have to go through the pain of getting it back again!
  4. Finally logged in.....so we dont need to do the SNCO Pet Op course anymore?
    There is no requirement for a BFCV Instructor at SNCO level......Inspectorates dont inspect BFCV's anymore and havnt done for ages!
    And DGSA for every SNCO??!!! We all have a responsibility for DG consigning in a Fuel Sqn, so id like to see all of them pass it!
    And again no accreditation anywhere. But that doesnt matter as we all end up going to Afghan, Africa or some ex Soviet country after our time in the Army, to show them how to pump fuel for 3 times the wages im on now!
  5. MT Accts course for a VS JNCO?

    And VS went years ago, now VSS, nice to see DRLC keeping up to speed...
  6. LCpl Ammo Tech

    •Defence EOD Operator. - Wrong
    •Defence EOD Operator No 2.
    •Defence Advanced EOD Operator. - Wrong

    Sgt / WO2 / WO1 AT - No Relevant Content, No Accreditation Details.

    Looks like another top website/page for info on the AT trade. May I humbly suggest to the author of said webpage thingy that getting it right before publishing/uploading it would be a good plan.
  7. Mr Paddock, i would seriously look at Stinkers advice and pull it!
    A top tip would be to look at any EPR's that have sat recently in TDT and read the outcomes, which would probably make the content of your website a lot more relevant!
  8. It's not my web site.

    I have created the content based on info given to me by RLCTDT, they have had access to the completed version for a few weeks now.

    More than happy to have the correct info on the site but I would have to go on the word of what I consider an official source.
  9. My mistake on dropping the Support from the list, thought the wording may be a bit long. Just changed it.
  10. Cheers mate, not that I'm happy. Still a VS!!! :)
  11. http://www.arrse.co.uk/rlc/135634-joining-ammunition-technician.html

    The info in the linked thread for AT is better than the info from the official sources. As a matter of fact the info on Arrse is better for nearly every RLC trade. Looking at the official RLC info available on the net, its dross. Honestly, a 10yr old could do better, are we currently employing this age group?

    If the Corps has a recruiting problem then I for one am not suprised, the internet is todays prime source for info and what is currently provided is a long way from precise.

    I appreciate its easy to find fault but in this case its not difficult. The RLC is 20k? strong, is this the best that the RLC can do, I hope not.

    Please don't see this as a personal dig it's certainly not meant as such.
  12. I was asked to provide a solution which would map the career progression of the trades it's not intended as a recruiting tool.

    I share some of your concern/angst over the quality of the info but it's a step in the right direction. I should accept some of the blame for it being incomplete I did push for this not to be in development for a couple of months waiting on material that may never arrive.

    I would hope that we could all see it's potential and perhaps feedback to the POC any errors or additions that we may like to see.
    • Like Like x 1
  13. I do question its inclusion on ArmyNet, as i said in my Sqn no one uses it. What i can see on there, it doesnt seem to be "secret" so why dont you put in on Arrse? After all the AT thread highlighted is a good example.
  14. I understand the premise is that most young soldiers use smart-phones and could therefore access trade and promotion information at any time. Also, few soldiers below NCO have routine access to DII and may not know about the details in the RLC Training Instructions. Soldiers in your Sqn have RLC offrs and SNCOs to lead and advise them. Half of the Corps is employed at E2 and have non-RLC line managers. If the Trade Book catchies on they may all benefit from it. Other cap-badges have a successful Trade Book type thing on ArmyNet, we are just catching up.

    I am not a fan of ArmyNet, ARRSE is far funnier and generally more informative, but if the posters above feed their constructive criticism back to TDT, then the Trade Book may just work as intended.
    • Like Like x 1
  15. Im not against the Trade Book, but if its going to be done lets do it properly otherwise its dead in the water from the start.