RN to Army transfer...

Discussion in 'Join the Army - Regular Officer Recruiting' started by Yeoman_dai, May 2, 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. Yeah ok take your shots but i'm considering going back. I have a horrible feeling that despite joining the RN as a pilot, failing grading (boo) and now being an RN Warfare Officer who hates navigation, i've never really stopped thinking in a land centric fashion. Question is, as a fully commissioned S/Lt RN, coming up to my Lieutenancy (Army Captain) in December, would I have to leave and rejoin and slog through the entire Sandhurst pipeline AGAIN to get in? Or is there some other way of sideways entry, or at least missing out AOSB?

    Any advice out there??
  2. I imagine RMs would be more happy to have you, keeping it in the family and all that. Were you a TA officer?
  3. No Alex I have not - i'll check that link out!
  4. I have only met one officer who did this and that was 10 or so years ago (similar seniority to you). He did have to do the full commissioning course. I don't know, but have a feeling that he did keep his accrued seniority.

    I suspect that you would have to do the commissioning course one what or the other to teach you the soldiering bit, if nothing else. You might be able to dodge it if you where commando qualified and had done a job or two involving some soldiering, I know that there are some RN officers who fall into this category.

    Unfortunately there is only one way to find out and that is to ask. I would try to get to a transfer fair (if these things still exist) or speak to someone in Glasgow, where I suspect there is probably a cell (or at least a person) devoted to inter-service transfers.
  5. Fixed that for you... ;-)

    Seriously though, there is a debate on another thread over just how good (or rather, appropriate) training at RMAS really is. On the subject of transfers between services (including reserves), I think this is something the Armed Forces need to become more flexible with.
  6. seaweed

    seaweed LE Book Reviewer

    But you can't just re-badge someone and expect them to perform in a different service at the same seniority level. Mind you, a fishhead who doesn't like navigation is on a bit of a loser.
    • Like Like x 1
  7. I would presume full RMASing, unless you did the TACC and can convince your new Regiment you're good enough to skive off the full 52 weeks?!

    I hope you've spoken to your DO, your CO and have begun discreet soundings with the Regiment you wish to join.....
  8. That's why we have special-to-arm training.
  9. G-B, think this is where you and I will disagree I think. At the risk of deviating slightly, I personally believe that to be fully effective in all of the roles in which he must be employable, an army officer must complete the full length (42 week odd if memory serves) commissioning course. This is why those who do not are not realistically employable in all fields. I suspect that this is not the thread to discuss this further, but we can take it for granted that there are some very good reasons for the course bring that length.

    Special to arm training is exactly that. It takes generalist soldiers and specialises them into infantrymen, RAC vehicle crews, logisticians, etc. It is not designed to turn a sailor into a specialist soldier. To put the boot on the other foot, I doubt that I could go straight onto the RN junior logistics officers' course (if there is such a thing) and be successful, because I don't know the first thing about ships and being a sailor.
  10. In that specific example, I'm afraid you probably could!

    It rather depends on what he wants to do, and which regiment he wants to do it in. Lots of very specific questions which can only be answered by the man himself, his future Regiment, and the Manning Authorities of both the RN and Army.
  11. You are too kind sir!

    On your second point, I agree for a very few parts of the army (ETS and possibly some others).

    With the number of sailors deployed outside the wire on current operations, there must be a fairly robust training regime to give them what we refer to as "soldier first" training.
  12. Ahem. Feel free to discuss flexibility of transfers, etc etc I always enjoy a good debate.

    When I was TA i'd completed up to MOD3 (pass) and was waiting on the Sept course of TACC but got offered RN Regular Pilot instead, which I took. I WAS ex Royal Mercian & Lancastrian Yeomanry and the RAC would probably be the place i'd like to end up (if I had my way). The issues I have are that i'm on a steady job - looking at aberspr's link, I may not have to leave the RN and re-apply, which is good, but I won't keep my seniority but maybe my pay (which would be nice).

    On the other hand do I want to subject myself to another commissioning course if I already hold the Queens Commission? I'd say maybe, because its 12 months learning to be an Officer of the Watch, then another 18 months MINIMUM actually doing a job I wouldn't be all too enthused with. Or suffer Sandhurst, and finally end up in a job i'd enjoyed in the first place. Swings and Roundabouts.

    A-T-G - no, i've done none of those for the very reason that i'm still undecided, but soundings will begin as soon as I go back to 'work' (ie my next course at Collingwood) in a fortnights time. I just thought to use the wonderful resource of ARRSE to see if I could get any answers cheaply. Or any advice/thoughts along the way.

    Reference poss debate on training - as i've said, a single college/Academy with a single commissioning course would be a great step forwards on many different levels - be in branch/service transfers, and stopping the ridiculous inter service deathmatches that occur. One source of officers would hopefully breed an us and them mentality where the 'us' are the Armed Forces commissioned officers, and the 'them' are the treasury. Not as now, where there are three different colours of 'us' and 'them's.
  13. Yes, there is. Effectively have to reach the standard of a CSS Soldier (i.e. non-Infanteer) in all your MATTS before deploying.
  14. In theory I would certainly support a single initial officer training establishment. The problem is that as a soldier I would say that it should be based on the existing Sandhurst commissioning course using low level land environment tactics to teach leadership and to give all officers (regardless of service) a "soldier first" (perhaps "basic dismounted combat servicemen") background. The army logic being that this is equally applicable (vital even) for a CSS soldier, a sailor (who might conduct boarding operations) or an airman (who might be shot down or have to go outside the wire to support wider operations). The difficulty is that, I suspect that many in the other two services would disagree to this requirement in full and would see this as a bit of a waste of time. Likewise, each may consider that there are bit of the existing RN and RAF commissioning course which should be taught to all. This approach would either disappoint some or nearly double the length if the commissioning course.

    I wonder whether a workable compromise would be one term out of three (probably the first term) conducted entirely tri-service. This way the officers of all three services could share in the delights of first term PT, a bit of basic dismounted close combat, some drill (we would need to suck up the service differences) and of course a good bit of basic military leadership. It would then become an inter service pissing match to try to agree the details, in particular who the trainers were (my suggestion would be a mix of RM, Army and, ahem, RAF Regt, perhaps). Also, the location, BRNC is not big enough, Cranwell doesn't have many hills and Sandhurst doesn't have an airstrip and isn't on the coast.