A new food for the Australian Army in battle conditions.

[Elwingflys]

Do they still put cigarettes in them or have you all gotten too health conscious?

[Collo]

Not any more.

My first Platoon Sergeant use to make his own rat packs. What he use to and I assume he still does is collect bits an pieces from the CRPs' he was issued and stick them in a new bag. To this he added his own unique items such as Smokes, fresh choc etc. Using his wifes' craft shop he would re-seal the plastic. To the unsupecting eye, this was a brand new Rat Pack.

The look on the faces of the platoon when he pulled out a smal pack of smokes was priceless. Every FNG would trawl through the packs to the find the smokes.

Morale of the story:
Only Sergeants can get away with and have the time to repack a CRP and add smokes.

[Elwingflys]

LMAO
Officers just think they run the services. Everyone else knows it's the Sargents and Chief Petty officers.

[Collo]

I heard this somewhere but I can't remember where:

"A good Sergeant lets the Officer think he runs the unit."

[Elwingflys]

Exactly!

[Collo]

Got to love'em don't you Elfie.

[Elwingflys]

Ya sure do.
The men may be the car that the officer drives but the sargents are the wheels that keeps everything moving along smoothly for both of them.



(Told you I think weird)

[Collo]

Some might say that they are the engine.

[Gun Bunny]

... And Warrant Officers are the road. If we weren't there, the trip would be a hell of a lot harder.

Further to the incident with the food, in my opinion, the OIC safety should get the sack and be up on charges; and the bottom line regarding the rations is they are made for ADF Personnel, not civilian kids. There is a bit of green paper that comes in every ration pack that lists all the ingredients. If you're too stupid to know what satay is, then why not read the ingredients and see if you can swap the main meal for something else?

Collo, I agree completely with you.

RSM-F

[Elwingflys]

Got to agree there. Someone dropped the ball.

My hubby is highly allergic to cheese. Not other dairy products, just cheese. I spend forever in the store reading labels. He says I can't spend less than an hour in the store...well that is why. If you have a bad allergy you can't trust others too much either.

[Collo]

They sure did.



The instructors would come undee the follow. Now some cadet instructors are not military. Some are Active/Reserve or Past service personnel but a large majority have not served in the ADF/R so are classed as Defence Civillians and if I remember correct and nothing has changed they will fall under the DFDA (1982) and could face military charges under the following:

DEFENCE FORCE DISCIPLINE ACT 1982 - SECT 11
Recklessness and negligence in relation to a member of the Defence Force
             (1)  Where a member of the Defence Force is charged with a service offence arising out of activities (in this subsection referred to as the relevant activities ) upon which the member was engaged in the course of the member's duty or in accordance with the requirements of the Defence Force, a service tribunal, in deciding whether the member, by act or omission, behaved recklessly shall have regard to the fact that the member was engaged in the relevant activities in the course of the member's duty or in accordance with the requirements of the Defence Force, as the case may be.

             (2)  Where a member of the Defence Force is charged with a service offence arising out of activities (in this subsection referred to as the relevant activities ) upon which the member was engaged in the course of the member's duty or in accordance with the requirements of the Defence Force, a service tribunal, in deciding whether the member, by act or omission, behaved negligently, shall, to the extent that it is required, for that purpose, to have regard to the standard of care of a reasonable person, have regard to the standard of care that would have been exercised by a reasonable person who:

                     (a)  was a member of the Defence Force with the same training and experience in the Defence Force or other armed force as the member charged; and

                     (b)  was engaged in the relevant activities in the course of the member's duty or in accordance with the requirements of the Defence Force, as the case may be.

             (3)  This section does not, except to the extent expressly provided, affect, modify or alter the application of Chapter 2 of the Criminal Code to service offences.

          (3A)  In particular, subsections (1) and (2) merely provide for matters to which a service tribunal must have regard in deciding whether a member was reckless, or negligent. They do not alter the definitions of recklessness and negligence in sections 5.4 and 5.5 of the Criminal Code .

          (3B)  Subsections (1) and (2) do not limit the matters to which a service tribunal may have regard.

             (4)  In this section, service offence does not include an old system offence.

For those of you in the US, the DFDA is similar to the UMCJ.

[Gun Bunny]

So why haven't these people been charged?

[Elwingflys]

That's what I would like to know. Someone's brother-in-law? (sorry to be cynical)

[Collo]

Unless the case is highly published and has mainstream media coverage, the ADF tend to keep all disciplinary measures in-house. The only time I have known military justice findings being broadcasted to the general population are when the case at hand relates directly to the public. This case I do believe does not and there for any disciplinary measures carried would be as per normal and kept private.

If they haven?t been charged, it is a result of finding by an independent inquiry such as either a quick assessment or other initial investigation. As Guns mentioned above this reached the desk of the CDF. For those who don?t know the CDF is the Chief of the Defence Force. He (currently Air Chief Marshal Angus Huston AO AFC) is the senior officer in the ADF; much similar to the Chief of Defence Staff for the UK and the Chairman of the Joint Chief for the US.

 For this case to be brought to his attention, an investigation into the reasons why this occurred would most likely have been launched. From my view point, the banning of CRPs? to cadets is a an outcome of that investigation. So I am sure someone would have been in the **** , it?s just publicised.

[Elwingflys]

The easiest way to find the outcome probably is , if the family's name was ever published, to go on line and see if it is quiet or they are screaming. Now that you explained the initials, then if it went that high up, someone's butt is definitely in a sling. And good for that!

[Collo]

I know that this might sound cold or hash (to that I say get over it ) This Cadet who passed should be in a sling aswell (or at least his parents).

The minimum age for entry into the ADFC across all three services is 12 1/2. By now one would assume that a person of 12 would be self aware of what they are allergic too and what food products contain such allergen. Even if the cadet themself did not know about Satay beign another word for peanut, his parents should have had that nigling feeling in their head to approach the staff and say "hey my son is allergic to peanuts, can you make sure he doesn't eat anything realted". I take it that the basic awarness level was not raised.

Both parties (espc the Cadet Instructor Officers) need a good kick in the pants.

[Elwingflys]

That is very true. There is very likely enough guilt to go around.

Sometime do a thread to explain the cadet thing. I hate to hijack this one.

[Collo]

The Cadet thing?

[Elwingflys]

The cadet organazation. I thought it was something like ROTC (don't ask me what it stands for) which is a bit of military traiming but usually in college. But you seem to be talking young kids. Just curious as to what it is.

[Collo]

I see.

The ADFC or Australian Defence Force Cadets is a defence sponserd youth orginsation. Ages from 12 1/2 through to 20. It is similar to the JROTC in the states. They do military training such as drill, service knowledge and the like but do not participate in any combat training.

Our equiv to the ROTC would be the Uni Regiments such as Sydney Uni Reg, Uni of New South Wales Reg etc.

[Elwingflys]

That is nice. Lets the kids learn a little respect and dicipline as well as probably have some fun. I can't imagine them being too hardnosed to the young ones. Save that for boot.

[Collo]

Yeah Cadets is pretty laid back. You get an introductionto military life one could say.

I also forgot to mention that each branch of the ADFC is broken into two sections. Staff and Cadets. The Staff (whom are responsible for the above business of the CRP) are either reserve, active duty, past service or never served. Despite being only cadet bodies they come under the DFDA as I have mentioned before as Defence Civilians which means that somewhere down the line someone is in a sling or has already been slung.

[Gun Bunny]

Unless the case is highly published and has mainstream media coverage, the ADF tend to keep all disciplinary measures in-house. The only time I have known military justice findings being broadcasted to the general population are when the case at hand relates directly to the public. This case I do believe does not and there for any disciplinary measures carried would be as per normal and kept private.

Are you kidding? A lot, and I mean a LOT of cases are published on www.austlii.edu.au and if its appealed, www.defenceappeals.gov.au

Lots of coverage.

RSM-F

[Collo]

Crap, I totally forgot about them. (smacks head)

Thanks for that mate.

[Gun Bunny]

haha in the wise, wise words of napolean Dynamite... GOSH!!!