Talk:Royal Canadian Air Cadets

COLONEL R.J.A. PERRON

I believe the whole section about the Colonel, Director Cadets, has been entirely lifted from the National Defence website, even though source has been provided...this technically constitutes plagiarism, no? Luke 07:08, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

I have removed the section as a copyright violation from: Department of National Defence See Source Page Flying Canuck 21:09, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Warrants are not Sr NCOs

I changed the rank table to separate the Warrant Officers from the F/Sgts and Sgts. Warrant Officers are NOT NCOs. WO1s, WOIIs, F/Sgts and Sgts are all Sr Non-commissioned members but Sgts and Flight Sergeants are the only ones of the four that are also NCOs.

Where is the reference that refers to any cadet as an NCO (Non-commissioned Officer)? (PS. Please sign your comments by using four tildes ~~~~ Sancho McCann 08:34, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

The National Defence Act categorizes members of the Canadian Forces that are not commissioned officers as Non Commissioned Members. I will update this terminology in this article. Sancho McCann 21:57, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

But cadets are not members of the Canadian Forces. 216.23.136.226 20:31, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, correct... I forget what sentence I was originally referring to. I think the article used to say something like, "cadets, like members of the Canadian Forces are called non-commissioned officers", but both errors in this statement have since been corrected it seems. Sancho McCann 04:58, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Actually QR and O CF defines NCO as those of Cpl and Sgt rank and NCM as anyone not an officer. There is no differentiation in the Cadet Program as there are no longer cadet officer ranks. Cadets are cadets. 24.108.176.42 04:19, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

NCM is a phrase peculiar to the post-unification CF, and refers to everyone but commissioned officers. For the purposes of splitting up ranks lacking the Queen's commission, the appropriate terms for Army and Air purposes (whether CF or Cadet) are Warrant Officers (Chief Warrant Officer, Master Warrant Officer, Warrant Officer - WOI and WOII), NCOs (Sergeants, Master Corporals, and Corporals in the CF, although Cpl is often termed as a Junior NCO - Flight Sergeant, Sergeant, and Corporal) and Other Ranks (Privates, Recruits/Leading Air Cadet, Air Cadet).

The navy, lacking the strong warrant officer presence of the army, splits between Chief Petty Officers ("Chiefs"), Petty Officers ("POs") and Other Ranks - "men," while historically suitable, has, for obvious reasons, fallen out of use. Navy warrants were, originally, closer the officer side, and were either near-civilian specialists (surgeons, pursers), or near-officer ranks/appointments: gunners, bosuns, and (sailing) masters. Today's CF has no naval warrants, although I believe the RN has retained them.

Insofar as this applies to Wikipedia articles, the term "NCM" seems to be avoided altogether when discussing cadets, whilst the older terms (Warrants, NCOs, and Other Ranks) are used as appropriate.

24.108.176.42, cadets, in a well-run unit, fill the roles of their CF counterparts - the terminology definitely applies.

Quadra 00:30, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Three Aims correct

In the three aims area it said air, sea and land while the air cadets (The topic of the page) only develop an interest in the air element of the CF. The sea cadets handle sea element and army cadets land element. At the time of this edit the cadets page is down so I do not have the exact wording so, I will wait until the page is back up and I can get it from the book.

CATO 54-01 gives the aims of the RCAC : a. to develop in youth the attributes of good citizenship and leadership; b. to promote physical fitness; and c. to stimulate the interest of youth in the Air element of the Canadian Forces. I would have thought this would be more appropriate for this page than the aims of the organisation as a whole. 216.23.136.226 20:54, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

It makes little sense to choose the reference that suits a point of view. QR and O Cadets is the senior document to CATO. At the same time QR and O as is pointed out says cadets shall not be promoted but appointed ... at the same time the Air Cadet Rank CATO uses promoted and suggests QR and O is to be amended. Go figure???

On the other hand, it doesn't matter whether a child is in sea, army or air cadets one aspect of the aim of the program is to bring attention to all elements of the CF while participating in a focused elemental program. Air Cadets and Army Cadets visit HMC ships. 24.108.176.42

Summer Camp Chart

We should work to create a simple chart that outlines the requirements and a short description of each summer course. Gliding and Flying are currently discussed in paragraph form, but I could see this getting a little out of hand as more courses are added. Sancho McCann 08:47, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Also, if anyone could get all the crests together for the "camps," that might add some colour to the page; see Royal Canadian Sea Cadets for an example.Quadra 18:06, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Our summer camp chart still needs some work. I moved all of the badges into the chart, but the badges are different sizes. We also need a short description for each of them. This is an area that anyone could help out on. What do you think about stating the length of the course, a brief statement of outcome for a cadet that is on the course, and perhaps some prerequisites? Sancho McCann 22:19, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Thoughts - not wanting to step on feet!

Another note: have a look at the Sea wiki page - would a comparable treatment of the ranks be of interest? Also, HMCS Quadra, has, at least for the past six years, never had an Air Cadet presence, excepting glider and power pilots coming over to use the confidence course.Quadra 17:11, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I think so... Right now, each of the upper level Air Cadet ranks has its own wiki page! I'm sure these are not notable individually, but notable only because they are related to the Royal Canadian Air Cadets. I'd like to merge them with this page very soon. I really like the RCSC page and would actually like to have this page evolve to something close to it. Sancho McCann 19:20, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

And no worries about stepping on feet :) Let's make these pages great. Sancho McCann 19:23, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Air Cadet Banner

I've been trying to find out information about the RCAC banner and am having no luck. How did you find out what it looks like? Any suggestions about where to start? Sancho McCann 21:01, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Material for public consumption

Cadet ranks should have the modifier cadet in them in accordance with QR and O (Cadets) (a separate document regarding the Cadet program not CF QR and O) The is one aim of the Cadet program..wtih three parts..it ends to instil in youth an interest in the sea, land and air activities of the Canadian Forces ... it applies to all cadets sea, army, and air and is not element specific. The League and the CF spend considerable time discussing terminology and consistency would serve everyone best. Somehow someone put a photo of a missile in place of the C/Sgt rank ... I removed it and will leave it to you to replace. Sorry if I messed with the graphics coding. It would be best to leave out any reference to an additional rank (C/F/Cpl or whatever). No announcement has been made and certainly, Wikipedia is not authorized to speak on behalf of the cadet organization in advance of any formal announcement. The issue is still a rumour until and if it is announced. Cheers. 24.108.176.42 05:25, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your help. Have you thought of getting an account? I agree that the additional rank should not be included yet as there are no references to support it yet. From looking at the file history for the missle picture, I think the Sgt rank picture actually linked to a picture of a missle that was called the Sergeant ... wierd. We'll need to find a new picture. Sancho McCann 08:07, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

The Flight Corporal rank has been announced internally, though not yet officially introduced, via Commanding Officer's conferences and the like, and is the subject of intense discussion on www.cadet-world.com/cwforums, an entirely unofficial site for members of various cadet programs operated by Cadet Instructor Cadre on their own time, including officers currently serving with DCdts in Ottawa and various regional headquarters. Quadra 18:16, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Additionally, I've cleaned up the image problems... FCpl should stay - we're Wikipedia, not a DND press release. Ditto for "Cadet" everything; not only is it not reflective of common practice, but it looks incredibly bad to repeat the same word more than is needful. Quadra 18:48, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't think we can include the Flight Corporal rank unless we can give a reference so that somebody else can verify our statements (see WP:V). I'll try to find something. Sancho McCann 20:50, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

I'll see if I can get a citeable e-mail from one of the headquarters officers on Cadet World. Quadra 21:30, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Each of you. Quadra and Sancho have a lot to offer fixing these pages and making them reflect well on the Cadet Organization. You have the technical skills. It is also worth considering that members of the CF are constrained in their ability to produce material for the public on any CF or Government program. DAOD 2008, and Q R and O apply. Therefore precision is paramount rather than perception, guess work, or rumour. It would be counterproductive through your well meaning and important effort to cause a CATO or Routine Order to be constructed and issued thereby amplifying those regulations and further restricting participating in this process by members of the organization unless authorized. That is a serious consideration.

With regard to "cadet" rank ... this is an encyclopedia, and using cadet, while repetataive it is the correct nomenclature for cadets of all elements in both french and english. 131.137.245.199 22:48, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

How about this... we leave the "Cadet" in the ranks section of this article, but mention that in practice, cadets are often simply referred to as their rank without the "cadet" prefix. We could reference the Level 1 training handbook for this. Sancho McCann 17:46, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Quota vs Vacancies

Does this fit in? It seems very detail-ish that even people within the organization often don't know. I think this distracts from the flow of the page and doesn't add much to our description of the RCAC. It would be like an article on Company X including a chart of number of management positions. What do you think about removing it? Sancho McCann 17:54, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

• It probably doesn't add much and doesn't mean much to anyone unless they are in the program. An alternative may be a link to the CATO, but the same comment applies ... what does it mean unless you are an Air Cadet Sgt, and want to know your chances of FSgt?? 131.137.245.199 20:53, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

"Organisation"

This is entirely a semantic question - any better title than "Organisation" for the cadet outfits? (ie, RCAirC Organisation) "Service" sounds better, but doesn't really work grammatically in that context, and besides might not be the best term (that's a different discussion altogether!). "Movement" sounds like something one sees the base doctor about... maybe lower-case "organisation" would be best? Quadra 23:19, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

I like lower-case "organisation". Sancho McCann 22:21, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Verifiability and Reliable Sources

There has been some discussion on this page and several edits/reverts related to a Flight Corporal rank. It was mentioned above that "precision is paramount rather than perception, guess work, or rumour". This is captured well in Wikipedia's policies on verifiability (WP:V) and reliable sources (WP:RS). These policies remove ambiguity about what is appropriate material to appear in a Wikipedia article. The phrase that I think expresses the idea the best is, "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth". Please read these policies if you're concerned that an edit that you have made has been reverted or corrected inappropriately, and continue to help us make this a great page. Sancho McCann 19:04, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Aims and motto deserving of subsections?

Do you think the aims and the motto should be in subsections or in paragraphs in the intro? (The aims are currently written in two places: a paragraph in the intro, and repeated in a stand-alone section.) Sancho McCann 05:14, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

• Stand alone -- multiple editors have created redundancy 131.137.245.199 16:42, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

• For now, for continuity with the other CanCadet pages, have placed aims in a para, along with the motto. Quadra 00:46, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Colours versus Flags

The Flags of the RCAC sections needs a major rewrite. There are many statements are either not true or personal opinion. 1)The sqn banner may also include an embroidered squadron crest rather than the RCAC crest. 2)QR and O (Cadets) specifically states that the flags used by air cadets may not be referred to as Colours. You can't have a Colour Party without colours so they are Flag Parties not Colour Parties; 3)Flags parties don't "typically" carry 3 flags. Only the units that don't obey the regulations. The Manual of Drill and Ceremonial only indicates the carrying of 1 or 2 colours or flags.CU L8R AV8R ... J-P 03:05, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

RCAirC squadrons do typically disregard the 201 and carry three flags - poke about on their official photo galleries if you wish! As far as the embroidered squadron crest, please check your source on that one; Canadian and British air unit crests don't, to the best of my knowledge, find their way onto official flags. Could be wrong, though - haven't ever seen an Air Force squadron's stand of colours.

Every single CF Sqn's banner has their crest embroidered on it. An example is here: http://www.snowbirds.dnd.ca/site/_assets/grfx/history/431sqd_colors.jpg Air Cadets Sqn's are similarly allowed. When my squadron had their crest approved, the Air Cadet League arranged for us to get a new squadron banner with the crest on it rather than the air cadet crest.CU L8R AV8R ... J-P 22:50, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Colour parties... it's a long-winded debate in the making. RCSC tends to call their sheet-on-a-stick carriers colour parties due to Naval custom (colours, to us damp ones, means any ship's nationally-identifying bit of cloth, not a consecrated item - and, in the freaky habit of the naval service, this terminology continues on land), entirely separate from the Army traditions from which the RCAF (now Air Element) sprung, whilst Army and Air cadet units seem to divide into two camps. One is that the 201 calls the formation a colour party, so whatever they're carrying, be it consecrated under the Sovereign's own eye, or be it a DND-stamped pillowcase, they're a colour party. The other view is that, as the embroidered sheet on a stick isn't a colour, the formation is a flag party. From an entirely personal POV, I'd say the 201 would be the deciding and senior document - the CF "colour party" might include no item that is actually a colour - banners, ensigns, command flags, the Canadian Flag; all these are carried by "colour parties." Anyway, enough rambling. Point here is that the terms are debatable - therefore, we mention the debate, or at least the possibility of debate (the difference between the 201 and the CATO). Quadra 05:08, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

The 201 is not the senior document as it is a MANUAL not orders. In both the Cadet Admin and Trg ORDERS and Queen's Regulations and ORDERS (cadets), it is mentioned that the flags are not to be referred to as colours. Also, carrying the Canadian Flag along with the ensign and sqn banner does not seem to be authorized by the CATO covering the use of cadet flags (CATO 12-05). Finally, the 201 gives directions for both colour and flag parties. All these together should mean that there is no need for a debate. CU L8R AV8R ... J-P 22:50, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

The three-flag party isn't authorized - but it is incredibly common: thus, it'll stay. I'll double-check the 201 re: terminology for the formation (never heard of a CF flag party in that context). As for the not referred to as colours, the question there is what, precisely, "refer" means - whether something like "Pvt Jones, grab the squadron flags," vs. "squadron colours," or if it's a blanket deletion of "colours" from the cadet vocabulary.

Bayonets

Anyone got a decent reference as to why the RCAirC ban on bayonets? The current air force, the old RCAF, and both the historical and the current RAF, use them... a good explanation, for personal interest, would be nice; however, for the article, a referenced work would be even better. Quadra 05:08, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Aims

Language indicating the elementally-focused nature of the CF-related training would be desirable; can one of the would-be (or actual!) PAFFOs come up with something suitable? Thanks! Quadra 00:26, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Link added

Added link to the Civil Air Patrol for comparison purposes, because they fill the same function. If it was inappropriate, remove and no hard feelings.

Bizznot 03:43, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Huge green thing

I noticed the page still has the "This article or section is currently in the middle of an expansion or major revamping." template on it. I have taken it off as the changes seem to have slowed down and it appears to be pretty stable. If anyone objects, please put it back. :) --Flying Canuck 00:41, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

External links

Just a note about external links: I have removed the link to cadet world per WP:EL#Links normally to be avoided #10 and #2. --Flying Canuck 01:02, 10 January 2007 (UTC)