• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

The air cadet thread

cadettrooper

Member
Reaction score
0
Points
210
So who's done there selection board review's yet?
We (Vancouver Island) just had ours up in Nanaimo this past Saturday and wow, what dumb questions they gave us..........
 

Krisz

New Member
Reaction score
0
Points
110
I get mine this Sunday.

(Fraser Valley Region.) At... 8:30 in the morning. Not a bad hour.
 

cadettrooper

Member
Reaction score
0
Points
210
Krisz said:
I get mine this Sunday.

(Fraser Valley Region.) At... 8:30 in the morning. Not a bad hour.

that should be fun..............not.

              but good luck, because you'll need it....
 

Krisz

New Member
Reaction score
0
Points
110
That bad?

Delightful. Well, from what I've heard, it's more about your attitude during the interview then your answers to the questions themselves. So long as you remain positive, confident, (not arrogant,) and speak clearly, (may have a problem with that; I just recently got braces,) doing well should be no problem. Once again, this is only from what I've heard, though, and I imagine a lot more things are considered.
 

cadettrooper

Member
Reaction score
0
Points
210
A few quick pointers that'll help you out during your interview:

1. Always look the League member/Officer straight in the eyes, don't look off into space.

2. Always be confident of your answers, Never say "umm...", or "uhh...".

         

                                            So with those two in mind you should Ace the interview, no problem.
 

Sf2

Sr. Member
Reaction score
18
Points
180
I remember when I was accepted for Power, and I turned it down.... ;D
 

mrshappy

Guest
Reaction score
0
Points
10
Former Air Cadet here, was a Flight Sergeant with 386 Squadron Komox, now a CI with 386 Squadron and in the process of applying to the CIC.  Anybody else out there a SLC Grad from 1984?  Drat, now I've dated myself!
 

Sf2

Sr. Member
Reaction score
18
Points
180
I turned it down because I figured RMC was a better bet......
 

Good2Golf

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
8,282
Points
1,360
SF2 said:
I turned it down because I figured RMC was a better bet......

Same here...North Bay...Chilliwack?  Easy choice.

G2G
 

BobDylan

Guest
Reaction score
0
Points
60
Flight corporal, eh?  This is the first I've heard of it and to be honest I don't think we need it, though it will finally even up the army vs. air amount of ranks (7 for each) for those who have been trying to match up the different ranks.
I'm guessing the promotion trains the cadet for 2IC responsibilities?
 

Burrows

Make good life choices.
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Reaction score
29
Points
680
Now we just have to wait for them sea cadets to catch up! ;)
 

yoman

Sr. Member
Reaction score
0
Points
210
Bob Dylan said:
Flight corporal, eh?  This is the first I've heard of it and to be honest I don't think we need it, though it will finally even up the army vs. air amount of ranks (7 for each) for those who have been trying to match up the different ranks.
I'm guessing the promotion trains the cadet for 2IC responsibilities?

Section commander would be a nice position for this rank IMO.

If you look at the prerequisites for each rank they make a lot more sense for the responsibilities of somebody at that rank.
 

condor888000

Sr. Member
Reaction score
0
Points
210
Problem with making them section commanders is you cut the number of Sgt's required. If you made all FCpl's section commanders, that leaves the Flt Sgt as a Sgt and thats it. A good balance to me would see to be FSgt as Flt IC, Sgt as Flt Com and #1 Section IC, FCpl as #2 and #3 section IC, and Cpl's section 2IC's.
 

Burrows

Make good life choices.
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Reaction score
29
Points
680
FCpl compares to MCpl in the army world.  Usually MCpls are used as section 2ics.
 

condor888000

Sr. Member
Reaction score
0
Points
210
Right, but as some Sqn's use Cpl's as section commanders currently, it doesn't make sense to have them all changed to Sgts. In effect, you would have FCpl's holding positions junior to the ones that were previously held by Cpl's.

In any event it will vary from unit to unit.
 

yoman

Sr. Member
Reaction score
0
Points
210
What Kyle said makes sense too. If positions are open and no sgt's are available then you could also make them (FCpl's) section IC's.
 

CadetSgt511

Guest
Reaction score
0
Points
60
I completely agree with the new rank of Flight Corporal because there are people who have to wait for 2 years, in some cases three years just to make Sgt and by that time your close to graduating anyway.
 

BobDylan

Guest
Reaction score
0
Points
60
I completely agree with the new rank of Flight Corporal because there are people who have to wait for 2 years, in some cases three years just to make Sgt and by that time your close to graduating anyway.

Something we jokingly talk about at our squadron is how army cadets seem to get rewarded for every little thing they do.  They're like walking billboards.    What I'm hearing is that you want to make it easier to advance in rank.  Doesn't it feel better when you get promoted, knowing it wasn't a guaranteed thing?  Sort of a filter to the organization.  Flight corporal has its merits, I'm sure, but the system as I know it is like a well oiled machine.  It doesn't need another rank.  F/Sgts = F commanders.  Sgt = 2ic.  Cpl = 3ic, mentors.  This is the general rule and I think another rank introduces laziness and uneeded length to the chain of command.

On another note, I can think of more than a few corporals who are going to be disgruntled they got gipped out of sgt-hood. :rage:
 
Top