Veh Spec Thread

#1
Thought I'd join the other masses at creating useless threads.

No point having a VS thread as the trade doesn't exist anymore.

Thankyou DRLC for screwing my career.....
 
#2
Strima,

I understand yr sentiments that your chosen career path has been diverted however promotion within the VS trade was a tad slow due to the pyramid.

Whereas you may not want to be a stacker, DRLC may in fact have boosted yr career promotion wise.

Shame to lose the trade, knew a few VS's in Canada that could give the recce mechs a run for their money getting a Chally2 started at -32 on a Montreal Dock!
 
#3
With 4 years left and a lot of posts being cut I'm one of the few that will not benefit from being on the Supplier role.

The young 'uns however, are a totally different story.
 
#4
Sad Day

Had many happy times with the VS trade in Antwerp, Cyprus and BAOR. Bit idle in barracks but great once you got them in the field. Every time you needed a ship loading or vehicles fixed or out of a ditch -it was always worth calling in the VSs.

How can a Tnk Tptr be a valued trade and VS surplus to requirement?
 
#5
I was lead to believe that VS is not disappearing but becoming a part of the Supplier trade, ie you will be known as Sup (VS) and still be posted to the jobs you always were previously. Or am I wrong ?

By the way, fixing vehicles is a VM job and recovering them out of a ditch is for Recovery Mechanics ... just to put the record straight.
 
#6
As above althou few trades merged to "supplier" thought general all the old-salt would stay within their main specialitys - as Ashchurch would still have supplier-vs's so wouldnt "supplier" prefer already trained (vs) to continue ??
 
#7
DesktopCommando said:
As above althou few trades merged to "supplier" thought general all the old-salt would stay within their main specialitys - as Ashchurch would still have supplier-vs's so wouldnt "supplier" prefer already trained (vs) to continue ??
You'd think that and the majority are staying for now. Wait until the next set of promotion boards and watch the migration.

The capability gap will appear and take a couple of years to be filled as training isn't an instant thing.
 
#8
The Corps is trawling as we speak for young Suppliers to go on the relevent courses in order to start to grow this new Spec Qual. The courses will all be revised and the content of the training is yet to be wholly decided. The key for those that are transfering is to ensure that they get trained as quickly as possible for their new trades and are then proactive in the completion of the Record of Achievement.

The affect of the supplier trade is already being felt since one SSgt VS was promoted this year on the main supplier boards in addition to the one that promoted purely as a VS.
 
#9
Is it me (probably) but is there a conspiracy here to rid the RLC of all the former RAOC trades and CEG's?

MTI's - Lifing out
Sup Spec and Sup Con - Merged
VS -reduced to Spec Qual
AT-possibly getting stolen by the RE

Mind you, they have managed to keep the stuff that seems atractive to them like 'Conductor'. An appointment that was reserved for those members of the RAOC deemed worthy enough - now half hinched by the RLC and awarded to 'other' trades and bearing no resemblance to the original concept.

Sometimes I am definatley not like Murphy's !
 
#10
qman said:
Is it me (probably) but is there a conspiracy here to rid the RLC of all the former RAOC trades and CEG's?

MTI's - Lifing out
Sup Spec and Sup Con - Merged
VS -reduced to Spec Qual
AT-possibly getting stolen by the RE

Mind you, they have managed to keep the stuff that seems atractive to them like 'Conductor'. An appointment that was reserved for those members of the RAOC deemed worthy enough - now half hinched by the RLC and awarded to 'other' trades and bearing no resemblance to the original concept.

Sometimes I am definatley not like Murphy's !
You do have a point there.

Aren't photographers going as well?

And System Analyst Supplier Spec Qual.
 
#11
qman said:
Is it me (probably) but is there a conspiracy here to rid the RLC of all the former RAOC trades and CEG's?

MTI's - Lifing out
Sup Spec and Sup Con - Merged
VS -reduced to Spec Qual
AT-possibly getting stolen by the RE

Mind you, they have managed to keep the stuff that seems atractive to them like 'Conductor'. An appointment that was reserved for those members of the RAOC deemed worthy enough - now half hinched by the RLC and awarded to 'other' trades and bearing no resemblance to the original concept.

Sometimes I am definatley not like Murphy's !
After what you said to day in that meeting it seems you want everything on bloody wheels...you should join Moon Spunker, always knew you were a secret troggy!!!
Still havnt heard what Drivers specialise in, Moon, me old spunker! :wink:
 
#12
Also how come Theatre troops (Log Bdes) providing centric functions within Regt's are labelled Supply where the central function was Ordnance and Transport where the central function is er.....Transport. Is the concept of Ordnance too alien to comprehend?
 
#13
you were a secret troggy!!!
I've said it before I'll say it again "Drivers rock my world". The ability of drivers to turn their hands to anything thrown at them is to be commended. No whining about danger pay from them. Just head down and on with the job in hand.
 
#14
qman said:
you were a secret troggy!!!
I've said it before I'll say it again "Drivers rock my world". The ability of drivers to turn their hands to anything thrown at them is to be commended. No whining about danger pay from them. Just head down and on with the job in hand.
Can you expand on that qman and give us some examples that drivers turn their hands to that's so commendable? Cheers.
 
#15
I dunno pal why don't you ask the driver (who doesn't get EOD pay (and doesn't bleat like a beatch)) on your team?
 
#17
True - the trogs are pulling the raoc trades to feck, Supplier trade - sounds like the RAF.

I'm not saying it's a bad idea - I'm saying it's an idiotic idea!!!!

One was a glorified clerk and then you had a specialised storeman - jack of all trades springs to mind and also....you get what you pay for, ruining the concept.

Strima is right as well - for people with less than 5 years to do....end of career!!!

This is rubbish and utterly bias.
 
#18
There doesn't appear to be any upside to the 'rationalisation'. Have to take into account that the writing has been on the wall for the VS trade for a very long time, still very sad though. Bizarrly I can understand the rationalisation behind the asset grabbing from the RE in respect of EOD (and before dinger and the gang start with their protestations I said I understand not agree) IMHO I think this will allow the CoC to introduce Supplier (Ammo). I honestly believe the writing is on the wall for a lot of the trades (Corps wide) Watch the spaces for Supplier (Fuel). The day is fast coming for the relaunch of the Soldier 2000 concept.
 
#20
I remember a grey haired Nick Hancock look-alike banging on about how great a supplier trade would be, similar to RAF Supplier. When he was told how long the RAF basic supplier course was, he said we didn't to do all that!!

Combat Logistician wasn't a bad concept, but no-one wanted to see it through because it would mean more training up front to cover variety of roles. More training - how rediculous is that.

Now we get it by the back door without the training and at the expense of specialist trades and capabilities
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Capt Jobsearch Jobs Offered 0
A RLC 3
muscat_diver REME 3

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top