Commissioning Decisions

[Resmoroh]

Hello All,
Does anybody know,

(a) When 347948 Jack Leslie Harries (prob b. Q3 1905 Wandswortth 1d 578) Enlisted?

(b) Which Trade Group he ended up in?, and

(c) Why a Warrant Officer (then in charge of the Admin Office of the Met Office Central Forecast Office at Dunstable) should elect to be Commissioned as a mere Fg Off? A senior Warrant Officer has more power/influence than a junior Fg Off? (or, at least, they did when I was in that world many years ago!!)

Appreciate we are probably into politics here, but would like to read any comments!!
Peter Davies

[Lyffe]

Interesting Peter.

Not answering your question, but after my father was posted to Germany in 1946 (a given some encouragement by the posting including a promotion to FS, having not long been a Sergeant) he was subsequently offered a commission. He refused the offer, partly through a lack of confidence/ambition of mixing with officers, but mainly because he was happy where he was in the hierarchy. In 1950 he returned to the UK as a W/O. As he later explained to me, for him it was very much a case of remaining a big fish in his pond, whereas he would have been a very small fish had he accepted the commission.

Brian

[malcolm_raf]

Hi Peter

The standard commissioning policy was that Flt Sgts and below were commissioned at Plt Offs whilst WO were commissioned as Fg Offs (most of the time). It was more likely to do with pay, a Fg Off being paid more than a WO but a Plt Off wasn't.

They may have had 'more power/influence' but they lacked the official authority of an officer.

Malcolm

[Andy Marden]

A senior Warrant Officer has more power/influence than a junior Fg Off? (or, at least, they did when I was in that world many years ago!!)
Appreciate we are probably into politics here, but would like to read any comments!!
Peter Davies

You are into politics Peter.
Whether he would have more influence is perhaps not the point. A Fg Off could end up as a Group Captain - a Warrant Officer cannot.
At the end of the day he would still have needed to follow the orders of a commissioned officer.
I was commissioned in 1984 as (as you put it) a "mere Acting Pilot Officer" at the age of 18. I was still senior in the scheme of things to a Warrant Officer...

[bvs]

Andy that reminds me of the old tale involving one of the last Master Pilots to be actively instructing :) (M Plt = Warrant Officer Aircrew)

Pilot Officer pupil says to M Plt ''but I thought that Pilot Officer is the lowest rank for a pilot nowadays ?''

Grizzled old M Plt replies - '' It is Son,It is !'' :)

[Lyffe]

Andy,

Yeah, but Dad knew what he was doing - and the way to get around things!

As an aside, when we joined my father at Schleswig during the winter of 1946-47 we were the first family to arrive. There were no quarters or hirings at the time so we were accommodated in the Officers Mess. I was only 5 at the time and cannot recall the fine details but I think we cooked our own meals. When we eventually ended up in flats in the town our neighbours were a W/C and his wife. My recollection is that they were kind and pleasant, and the wife was very supportive when and after my sister was born in Hamburg.

Brian

[jonny]

Hi Peter

The standard commissioning policy was that Flt Sgts and below were commissioned at Plt Offs whilst WO were commissioned as Fg Offs (most of the time). It was more likely to do with pay, a Fg Off being paid more than a WO but a Plt Off wasn't.

They may have had 'more power/influence' but they lacked the official authority of an officer.

Malcolm

Malcolm,

While looking at the LG yesterday, I noticed that a Sgt, several Flt Sgts and WOs were commissioned in the Technical Branch as Acting Pilot Officers. On the same page, however, there are a number of similar ranked individuals (including a corporal) who were commissioned as Flying Officers. Any idea why there is such a deviation to the standard policy that you describe please? Please don't think I'm trying to catch you out on this, as I have absolutely no clue. There has to be a valid reason why the Air Ministry did this - was it pay, quals, length of service, age, etc? I'd be fascinated to know, please my friend.

https://www.thegazette.co.uk/London/...upplement/5640

Rgds and thanks

Jonny

[malcolm_raf]

Malcolm,

While looking at the LG yesterday, I noticed that a Sgt, several Flt Sgts and WOs were commissioned in the Technical Branch as Acting Pilot Officers. On the same page, however, there are a number of similar ranked individuals (including a corporal) who were commissioned as Flying Officers. Any idea why there is such a deviation to the standard policy that you describe please? Please don't think I'm trying to catch you out on this, as I have absolutely no clue. There has to be a valid reason why the Air Ministry did this - was it pay, quals, length of service, age, etc? I'd be fascinated to know, please my friend.

https://www.thegazette.co.uk/London/...upplement/5640

Rgds and thanks

Jonny

Hi Jonny

The policy I was thinking of was probably the pre-war one when NCOs and WOs would have had considerable service but there were probably variations during the war based on the length of service and experience, as you suggest.

Malcolm

[jonny]

Malcolm,

Roger that. Thanks. There must have been some form of 'weighting' attached to an OR's commissioning potential. If anyone knows how it worked during the war, please can they let me know?

Rgds and thanks again

Jonny

[bvs]

Not sure if there will be an easy answer Jonny
Just as an example - one of my uncles was a 'Stores' Airman prewar,he was a Cpl by 1939 and commissioned from Flt Sgt in 1941 - with approx 13/14 years regular service,one might reasonably think he might have gone straight to F/O - but no - he started out as an APO in Oct 1941 !
He made Flt Lt by june 1944 and Acting Sqn Ldr by Jan 1946

I have seen 2 slightly different LG entries for his commissioning - but same date :)

To be Actg. Pit. Offs. on prob. (emergency): —

EQUIPMENT BRANCH.
Fit. Sgt
To be Pit. Off on prob. (emergency)
24th Oct. 1941. (Seny. 22nd Aug. 1941.)