I'm a TA officer, and in the past four years before joining my current (proper) TA unit, I served as an Officer Cadet in a UOTC and an Under Officer in the ACF. The ACF does have some value, but there are some significant problems with it, which, in my opinion, are as follows: a) While there are some really keen and enthusiastic Cadets, the majority of them are medioca at best, lacking in motivation, attention spans and the ability to basically do what they're told. b) Again, while some of the adults are very professional and excellent instructors, a large number are absolutely useless, and hold their current position not because they have any special knowledge, but because they happened to be cadets themselves and stayed on. They're stuck in their ways (most of which are outdated at best) and are not upto date with training and doctrine. c) While ACF Officers hold the Queens Commission, most of them do not deserve to be anywhere near the Queens Commission with a shitty stick. Most of the officer's I've meet in the ACF are more interested in 'acting' like Officers, and huge snobs (for example, insisting on having somewhere different to eat to the adult NCO's when on camp) than leading and managing their troops. These people aren't assessed for their Commission - even if they do attend TCB, if they fail, the county can override the boards decision and commission them anyway! d) Finally, when someone professional comes along and wants to, for example, run a proper exercise with vehicles, radios, night sights etc. using outside support (a local TA unit as enemy for example) the road blocks that get put in the way by the perminant HQ staff are unbelivable. I think the ACF is an excellent organisation and should be supported, but it's staff need to be more professional, and it's officers need to actually BE officers, not act like officers. And it's always worth remembering that the ACF provide about 25% of our future NCOs.