- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 430
Out of curiousity if given the opportunity would you go back to the old RCAF/RAF rank structure we have before the Big U?
Question for the Air Force types
- Thread starter Ex-Dragoon
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 9,274
- Points
- 1,260
Although I'm not in the Air Force, I like it - it represents the fact that the Air Force is an independant arm of a modern fighting force responsible for the projection of Air Power and.
For anyone who isn't aware of the British system of rankings:
http://www.rafcom.co.uk/information/rank.cfm
For anyone who isn't aware of the British system of rankings:
http://www.rafcom.co.uk/information/rank.cfm
A
aesop081
Guest
As a newly minted air force type, i would like to see a more distinctive rank structure for the air force. Although for me right now it would not change much (if we were to use the brit model) but for later on......I eventualy want to CFR to navigator so it would be nice to be "flight Lt" or "pilot officer" or whatever. Maybe even different rank insignias ??
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
Ex, you've already heard my opinion on it, but I'll share with the rest of y'all.
I'm all for it, I think being a Flight Lt would be awesome. Though given our existing structure, we'd have Wing Comds as Sqn CO's and Group Capts as Wing CO's. Kind of confusing if you ask me, ie Wing Commander Bloggins is the 423 Sqn Commander. There's no reason we couldn't change the system a little bit.
I definitely think we should get the old RCAF rank on our uniforms though, it just looks cool.
I'm all for it, I think being a Flight Lt would be awesome. Though given our existing structure, we'd have Wing Comds as Sqn CO's and Group Capts as Wing CO's. Kind of confusing if you ask me, ie Wing Commander Bloggins is the 423 Sqn Commander. There's no reason we couldn't change the system a little bit.
I definitely think we should get the old RCAF rank on our uniforms though, it just looks cool.
- Reaction score
- 9,274
- Points
- 1,260
As Inch points out, the ranks do a better job of refecting what an Air Force Officer does. Having a Major or a Lt Colonel fly around seems silly (almost as silly as Unification putting Colonels in charge of ships), AFAIK it is acceptable because the USAF kept the rank structure from the Army Air Force roots (which probably galls them so). Flight Lt, Squadron Leader, Wing Commander etc, etc make much more sense (and plus, they sound cooler).
On that matter, let me say that I support Army Officer ranks returning to the "pips and crowns". I never really liked the Navy/Air Force system of bars on the sleeve....
On that matter, let me say that I support Army Officer ranks returning to the "pips and crowns". I never really liked the Navy/Air Force system of bars on the sleeve....
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
I'm not sure I'm a big fan of the RCAF rank structure. Now, before everyone jumps on me, let me explain.
My grandfather was a Squadron Leader, but not once in his 25 year career was he in command of a squadron. At one point, he was a Pilot Officer, but he was a Navigator, not a Pilot. My other grandfather was a Flying Officer for a time, but served in the physical training branch, so he didn't fly. Both of my grandfathers were Leading Aircraftsmen at one point, but neither of them ever mechanically worked on an aircraft.
My point is, the ranks are too specifically linked to a defined role. To me, being a Major is a little less definitive than being a Squadron Leader. I'm all for honouring and continuing many of the traditions of the RCAF, but I feel that this was one change for the better.
By the way, the chart that was refered to was helpful, but it isn't the same as the ranks used in the RCAF. The biggest discrepency is with the NCO ranks. Here's what the RCAF used to look like:
Officers:
http://www.airforce.qc.ca/gallery2_e.htm
NCOs:
http://www.airforce.qc.ca/gallery1_e.htm
My grandfather was a Squadron Leader, but not once in his 25 year career was he in command of a squadron. At one point, he was a Pilot Officer, but he was a Navigator, not a Pilot. My other grandfather was a Flying Officer for a time, but served in the physical training branch, so he didn't fly. Both of my grandfathers were Leading Aircraftsmen at one point, but neither of them ever mechanically worked on an aircraft.
My point is, the ranks are too specifically linked to a defined role. To me, being a Major is a little less definitive than being a Squadron Leader. I'm all for honouring and continuing many of the traditions of the RCAF, but I feel that this was one change for the better.
By the way, the chart that was refered to was helpful, but it isn't the same as the ranks used in the RCAF. The biggest discrepency is with the NCO ranks. Here's what the RCAF used to look like:
Officers:
http://www.airforce.qc.ca/gallery2_e.htm
NCOs:
http://www.airforce.qc.ca/gallery1_e.htm
S
Sam69
Guest
I'll side with Garbageman on this one. I really find the RAF style ranks to be anachronistic and far too narrow in focus (i.e. pilot centric). We are slowly, but surely, moving to a joint structure. Trying to revive a long dead concept that emphasizes environmental differences is, IMO, a step backward not forward.
I suppose that I would not be able to see past the silliness of walking into HQ and referring to a logistics officer as "Pilot Officer." Or to the Admin O as "Squadron Leader." I have to think that they would probably find it silly too. I would also find it tiresome to explain to the public why I would be called "Wing Commander" if I was only a Squadron CO.
Just an opinion.
Sam
"Almost always tradition is nothing but a record and a machine-made imitation of the habits that our ancestors created. The average conservative is a slave to the most incidental and trivial part of his forefathers glory -- to the archaic formula which happened to express their genius or the eighteenth-century contrivance by which for a time it was served." Walter Lippmann
The assumption must be that those who can see value only in tradition, or versions of it, deny man's ability to adapt to changing circumstances." Stephen Bayley
I suppose that I would not be able to see past the silliness of walking into HQ and referring to a logistics officer as "Pilot Officer." Or to the Admin O as "Squadron Leader." I have to think that they would probably find it silly too. I would also find it tiresome to explain to the public why I would be called "Wing Commander" if I was only a Squadron CO.
Just an opinion.
Sam
"Almost always tradition is nothing but a record and a machine-made imitation of the habits that our ancestors created. The average conservative is a slave to the most incidental and trivial part of his forefathers glory -- to the archaic formula which happened to express their genius or the eighteenth-century contrivance by which for a time it was served." Walter Lippmann
The assumption must be that those who can see value only in tradition, or versions of it, deny man's ability to adapt to changing circumstances." Stephen Bayley
I'd like to see the ranks revert to what they were...but couldn't care less what they were called.
IMHO we're WAY "over-ranked", and many of the promotions/ranks have lost their zest.
Anyone remember being jacked up by a "Lance-JacK"?...that's a one-stripe private. The stripe actually meant something way back when. The working rank was Private- and there was nothing wrong with being an old Private.
Same with 2Lt- they actually did something years ago- other than attend courses.
The automatic "promotions" to Corporal and Lt (and maybe even Captain) destroyed the credibility of those ranks, necessitating ever higher rank levels commensurate with command authority. Believe it or not, Sqn Commanders actually used to command Squadrons...go figure!!
No idea why we have so many "time in" ranks- not required.
IMHO we're WAY "over-ranked", and many of the promotions/ranks have lost their zest.
Anyone remember being jacked up by a "Lance-JacK"?...that's a one-stripe private. The stripe actually meant something way back when. The working rank was Private- and there was nothing wrong with being an old Private.
Same with 2Lt- they actually did something years ago- other than attend courses.
The automatic "promotions" to Corporal and Lt (and maybe even Captain) destroyed the credibility of those ranks, necessitating ever higher rank levels commensurate with command authority. Believe it or not, Sqn Commanders actually used to command Squadrons...go figure!!
No idea why we have so many "time in" ranks- not required.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Garry said:
Agreed. 2Lt shouldn't equal "I've graduated university" and nothing more.
L
lostmuskrat
Guest
Garbageman said:
Isn't that what OCdt is for?
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Right, so if you're DEO this means that you've joined an organization and received a promotion within 14 weeks. That seems a little too quick for me.rifleman said:
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
BOTC and a Degree have been decided to be the requirements to receive a Queen's Commission. 2Lts are Commissioned, OCdts are not. That's the difference.
Garbageman, ask your civvie buddies how much leave they get. Most civvies have to work at a place for 10 years to get the leave that we start with. It's just the way it is. 2Lt is not a promotion, it's a starting point for Commissioned Officers. An officer is immediately put into a leadership position, it only makes sense that he gets the rank to do the job since troops are obligated to follow a Commissioned Officer and obey lawful orders given by the Commissioned Officer. An OCdt is nothing more than an untrained officer.
Garbageman, ask your civvie buddies how much leave they get. Most civvies have to work at a place for 10 years to get the leave that we start with. It's just the way it is. 2Lt is not a promotion, it's a starting point for Commissioned Officers. An officer is immediately put into a leadership position, it only makes sense that he gets the rank to do the job since troops are obligated to follow a Commissioned Officer and obey lawful orders given by the Commissioned Officer. An OCdt is nothing more than an untrained officer.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Inch said:
Maybe I'd be happier if DEOs didn't get commissioned until they finished their phase training. I know this would be a long time for some, but there's a great deal of credibility involved in receiving a commission, and I don't know how someone with three months in the CF can be expected to have achieved it.
Inch said:
He he, I'm a teacher in civy life. 8 weeks in the summer, 2 weeks at Christmas, and a week in March. Can't be beat! ;D
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
Garbageman said:
While I don't disagree entirely, I think you'd have an incredibly difficult time recruiting guys if they're only going to make $26,000 for the first 2 years they're in the CF when they've got twice that in debt from school and civvie jobs that'll pay at least 50% more.
Garbageman said:
Ok, you win! ;D
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 110
As for the rank structure, I agree with Garbageman...they are too "pilot oriented"
Chimo!
Don't forget the CFR and SCR Plans. A degree is not a requirement, but more of an eventual expectation. This post was more for those not "in the know", as I realize Inch is well aware of these plans.Inch said:
And still underpaid for the work you do, IMO.Garbageman said:
Chimo!
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
Heatwave said:
Right you are, I was just answering the "why do DEO's get a Commission" question.
You could also point to officers under the OCTP program, they stayed as OCdts until either they received their degree or they were MOC qualified. I had a couple guys on my Advanced flying training that got promoted from OCdt to Capt on Wings grad. Everything was retroactive since the training delays were the CF's fault and not ours. I'm not sure if other trades retro paid like that, but I know pilots are.
