Centralised Engineering At Lyneham

[KPax]

This may have been covered already. What do people think about the new centralised engineering at Lyneham. One question I have, what was the point if the J's are moving in the future.

[BEagle]

Back in, I think it was around 1972, I went to Lyneham as a UAS APO on attachment and was told what a crock of $hit the idea of centralised servicing had proved to be. Everyone hated it, there was no improvement in serviceability and it had destroyed squadron life and identity for the groundcrew.

Does history teach us nothing?

[juliet]

pretty sure the aussies gave it a go when they got the j. also pretty sure that they have since seen the error of their ways and gone back to separate engineering. maybe we will learn for ourselves in about 3 or 4 years. sengo trying to make a name for herself methinks.:(

[P-T-Gamekeeper]

Just to make sure guys understand what this is about.

This is not just centralised servicing for one fleet, we have had that & all its problems for years.

We are talking about centralised "mixed fleet" servicing for many engineering functions to "Improve our Efficiency"

How it makes sense for cross-type servicing I will never know.

I hope the lines Work to Rule to show OC ENG what a bag of S***e it all is, rather than try to get around all the problems.

Having worked with a lot of the groundcrew on Det, I have a huge amount of respect for the work they do. I wish the powers-that-be would listen to their advice sometimes, and stop thinking they know best - they clearly do not.

[Always_broken_in_wilts]

I am sure, like a lot of GC's and GE's I have spoken this idea is madness, and is your standard "wheel re invention" to get someone promoted push...........but once she, correction "someone" has gone they will not give the preverbial toss:yuk:

Anyone one yet been met by the "specialist rovin team"? Thoughts please:ok:

Nice to see "someone" has taken the GE's needs into account..........:}

all spelling mistakes are "df" alcohol induced

[Jobza Guddun]

Gents et al,

This may be news to some but not to others. It is highly likely that ALL RAF aircraft engineering is going this way. Centralised Maintenance Units are certainly being mooted at Marham under the LEAN / E2E and will probably happen next year, although it is allegedly only a low-down proposal.

I for one and many of my oppo's feel quite strongly about our squadron and take a great deal of pride serving on it and being part of its achievements. Groundcrew ARE proud when THEIR aircrew do well at something, and likewise deflated when they don't. The squadron system is what the RAF is all about, and always has been. Could I even be so crass and cheeky as to say that the squadron possibly means more to GC because they tend to stay on it longer than AC?

If all the engineering goes Centralised, I personally think it could be the biggest self-inflicted mistake the RAF could make. For instance, why would the vast majority of GC give a toss if the "flying squadron" achieve their CFT each month or not? Doesn't affect me, it's not my sqn anymore.

Another instance: take the sqn/station Families Day - we feel a buzz if we manage to successfully launch the 4-ship and spare for the flypast, especially when our families see OUR jets doing their thing. You all know what I mean. PRIDE. Again, why would we give a toss if they weren't anything to do with us?

All I see with this proposal/certainty is reduced availability for you fliers due to lack of morale and interest. Don't think standards will drop, but motivation will. Why work till 4am to generate a spare jet for the programme, when I can work till 2, give you the minimum and if you drop a sortie due to crew-out, thats tough.

Guys and girls with growbags:- if you empathise with my views here, YOU are the people who can probably put a stop to this centralised nonsense; nobody listens to Blunties but everyone listens to aircrew. I believe if enough aircrew with a bit of rank make enough noise, then the proposal could be quashed, while people still care. From conversations I've had with mates at Brize/Lyneham, CMU's don't have an feeling of identity or pride- is that why our AT availability is poor?

Yes, this IS my soapbox subject, it's one I strongly believe in fighting for. Despite what one of my EngO's thinks, I am not "resistant to change", I just know a good thing when I see it. And a crap thing.

If you're a champion of Centralised Groundcrew, do tell us why ripping the heart out of our system is a good idea. :mad:

[P-T-Gamekeeper]

I'm still not sure a lot of guys are getting this.

What Lyneham is getting, is in effect, centralised servicing for Tornado's and Jag's!!!(eg 2 different types)

OC Eng is effectively creating a SuperVASS, where experience and knowledge count for nothing.

I hope she can sleep easy in her castle when the first major f/up happens - which it is bound to in such an abysmal system.

[Gainesy]

Jobza,

Head, nail, hit.

Well said mate.

[BEagle]

When K****n R******k forced such a system on the Covert Oxonian Aerodrome, everyone suffered. Squadrons lost identity, the 'menders' were relocated over 2 miles from the 'benders' - and all the hard work of building up standards of excellence on the individual squadrons was thrown out of the window thanks to this so-called 'management initiative'....:yuk: . Serviceability became ever worse, team morale plummeted (folks who would previously have sold their granny to get a posting to the stn now did anything to avoid it) - everyone hated it. Great; task, team and individual needs all suffered..... To sum it up, a young ex-C130 Air Engineer on the VC10 said that his first year was the best posting he'd ever had; his second year was the worst he'd ever had and he'd do anything to get back to the C130.... I think he later PVR'd.

So now there's some new smart acronym around the bazaars to disguise yet more cuts, is there?

Such is progress.

[Sinker]

If you want dedicated service from your groundcrew, you must dedicate them to their aircraft. And you probably have to dedicate the aircraft to the crews.

It was A Line and B Line in my day. It was only when I reached 1312 Flight, with its own aircraft and its own groundcrew that I saw just what could be done to sort out those snags that are written up 'NFF'.

I remember a Greenie working for hours to sort out a radar snag and not fixing it and trying something else after the next sortie - and going through that procedure about four times before establishing it wasn't electronic at all, it was mechanical and to do with the scanning mechanism.

About 2 years later, when I was SNavO, Wg Cdr Ops asked me what I thought of a proposal to reduce the scan from 180 degrees to 120 degrees in order to prevent damage to the mechanism. The entire fleet had been suffering from ropey scan patterns and no-one had taken the trouble to really sort it out until this JT got his teeth into it at Stanley.

[skaterboi]

If you want dedicated service from your groundcrew, you must dedicate them to their aircraft

I believe the plan is to assign a Chief Tech to have his 'own' aircraft. He alone is responsible for it's serviceability and for drawing the team of teccies to sort out any snags.

The fact that we don't have even half the required CT's at Lye to do this gives you an idea of its chances of success :ok:

[Red Line Entry]

Must reiterate the plea from Jobza Guddun: there must be a few PPRuNe readers who have been involved with the E2E review and implementation (Marham esp springs to mind). Give us some justification for the move away from sqn-based maintenance. This is probably an ideal forum to help convince us sceptics!

As an ex-sqn EngO myself, I am extremely doubtful that the benefits of centralisation will outweigh the (often unquantifiable) advantages of sqn-based operations. On my sqn, every single member of the groundcrew took pride in being part of the sqn and as mentioned earlier, at 0400 in the morning this means a lot when deciding to go that extra mile to fix the jets. It certainly wasn't due to inspired leadership from me!!

(PS. We could do without the personal attacks from the start of this thread tho'.)

Edited for sp

[BEagle]

There is absolutely NO benefit whatever in centrallised servicing - except for the bean counters. Serviceability rates invariably suffer, esprit de corps vanishes out of the window - all of which was learned back in the '60s and '70s. But the idiots at the top just don't care if it'll save them paying for a few extra posts......

[Always_broken_in_wilts]

As one of HMQ's fliers what scares me most is the dilution of excellance we have so far come to expect, and recieve, from our "type" dedicated groundcrew. Now that we are mixing our "J" and "K" bretheren how long will it be before we start asking them to do the "odd job" they are not really qualified to do? How long before some poor b@astard has a serious ground, or even worse AIR, incident!

In my techie days you did a "q" course to work on a specific type and now as aircrew, with a few notable exceptions, you qualify on ONE type and thats all you operate! Where is the sense in any of this mix and match madness.

Scary times for someone of my ripe old age:mad:

all spelling mistakes are "df" alcohol induced

[16 blades]

This is what happens when you put a bird in charge of boy's toys.

;-D

16B

[Always_broken_in_wilts]

You will go straigh to hell for that one:p

But can't fault your logic:ok:

all spelling mistakes are "df" alcohol induced

[TwoDeadDogs]

Hi all
My 2d worth...It reads like their Airships are trying to introduce airline practice and/or JAR 145/66 by the backdoor and getting it wrong.....we had a guy try the same in the early 90s in our little Fuerza Aerea over here.For once, the spanner-wielders and the fliers united,unofficially, and stonewalled the process. The heli guys didn't want the unwashed from turboprop land fettling their beloved rotors, and vice versa.The process was allowed to fade away.....the downside of individuality was duplication, with two seperate radio/avionic shops and other multiplied facilities, that weren't strictly necessary on one site. Up to a point, I agree with a lot of the correspondents here, but I think airline-style multi-typing and multi-tasking will be brought in, like it or lump it. For example, our division of the national Airline has had five different Types in 21 years, often simultaneously, as one was introduced and the other phased out. It was and is expected that we adapt to all sizes and shapes, regardless. Our airline used to be crippled with antiquated union practices and jobsworthism ( mechs not allowed to change lights....avos can't change wheels,etc) that dragged us down, not helped us grow and survive. To a certain extent, those old practises are still prevalent in our Military and their servicability rates are often appalling. Also, I wouldn't like to be stuck on one Type for all of my career. If I was told by the Boss that I'd be a Jag-fixer til I fell out of the food-chain, I'd go spare. Same if I was a pilot, Military or Commercial. Perhaps there is a case for centralisation,at some level.Certainly, there is no case for not-around-hereism or stagnation of any kind.
regards
TDD

[soddim]

Been there, done that, worked with centralised servicing both in the RAF and in the USAF and it didn't work for either service near as well as squadron servicing. In fact, the only way it was made to work at all was to identify squadrons with particular sections of the 'factory' so that air and ground crew could develop a sense of corporate identity.

So sad to see the lessons so hard learned so easily forgotten.

[glum]

I have yet to speak to ANYONE here who thinks this is a good idea.

What I do want to know is why nobody actually stood up and said

"No, I won't let you do this. There is no reason other than self, and it will not work."

Is OC Eng really that powerfull?

Or is it that as usual, the Officers make their decisions, and bugger off on their next posting leaving the groundcrew to pick up the pieces?

Rumour control says it's already failing, with tasks missed and aircraft flying with open entries...

[WE Branch Fanatic]

A change is as good* as an improvement. If you're looking for promotion, that is.......

* If not better..

[izod tester]

Prior to 1970, Lyneham had centralised Line and Base servicing for the Britannias and Comets. After 216 Sqn got its own eng flt comprising elements of the old strat line and base support sqns the availablility of the Comets increased markedly. The ground crew were more motivated and happier too.

Interestingly, there had been no effort to include the C130K servicing within the Britannia and Comet centralised organization, 24, 36, 30, 47, 48 and 70 Sqns were supported by 2 Line Support Squadrons, LSS A and LSS B.

[Red Line Entry]

There seem to be 2 main themes running here.

The first is the issue of having 1st line engineering tasks for several squadrons being subsumed into a central organisation. This would lead to the removal of groundcrew personnel from flying sqns and seems to be universally regarded as worse than bad.

The second is that of 2nd line tasks being centralised for different aircraft types. In my view, this is a workable, and (depending on the circumstances) sensible way forward. Similarly, I can appreciate the move to avoid duplicating 2nd line facilities at separate bases (eg Tornado GR4 bits at Los/Mar or generic Tornado bits for all the stns). Again, PROVIDING the supply sytem is sufficiently primed to take care of the pipeline time involved, this could also be a "good thing".

IMHO, we shouldn't let our universal distaste for the first option blind us to the benefits of the second.

Comments?

[Jobza Guddun]

Quite correct RLE, and that is what is going to happen in the GR4 Force.

The 2nd Line aspect won't be a major problem, but where Lyneham is concerned, I think it'll take longer to put an aircraft through a servicing because people won't be as familiar with "the other type". We can all use manuals if we don't know something, it just takes longer. However, will the system cope after Multi-skilling when there are only slightly more than half the number of techies?

It's the 1st Line bit of centralisation which is the problem, and I'm so pleased that many of the aircrew Ppruners views correspond with my own. How can a system which blatantly doesn't work at Brize be any use anywhere else? (Don't know about Lyneham).

I don't see why 1 SEngO, 2 JEngO's and a wobbly can't manage 2 sqns worth, leave the FS's downwards embedded in their own sqn;.at least that way pride and esprit de corps would be largely unaffected and people would still give a stuff - that's what keeps most of us going after all.

I fully agree with BEagle's comments about Brize; from an eng. point of view, the VC10 sqns, esp. 101, were always well worth a posting, now most wouldn't touch 10/101 with a long thin boating implement. Don't mind long hours, lotsa work etc but when you don't feel part of the team anymore what's the point?

Hopefully some of you guys might be able to point your EngO colleagues in the direction of this thread, and if some of them take notice and change their viewpoints, it's worth it. Some of them might even openly oppose the party line,ooooohhh. :uhoh:

Some quality Mess chest-poking might bear fruit, too. (especially if you live at Marham as there's a Wg Cdr there with a big position in the game!). :}

CAS are you listening? Don't let them chop squadrons to bits!!

Thanks all
JG

[pr00ne]

Surely the whole argument that lay behind the formation of 24/30 (Engineering) Squadron and 47/70 (Engineering) Squadron from what was A and B Line Servicing Squadrons at Rompers Green was to bring aircrew and groundcrew closer together to improve morale and espirit de corps?
Is this total 180 degree turn yet another condemnation of the RAF/MoD postings policy? OC Eng desperate to be seen to succeed, sweep out the old, in with the new, all to be noticed in their one chance of making Gp Capt? Success then means the next poor sod has to do something equally radical and so the circle goes round and round.

I saw this in the early days of the FGR2 in what was then Air Support Command, Coningsby was initially going to be centralised servicing with no squadron identities on aircraft or for groundcrew, as per the majority of the AT fleet at the time and as the V-force then was.
Something changed the minds of the powers that be at Upavon, though it took a little longer to persuade them of the need for formation flying practice at Squadron level!

Someone also sat up and took notice on the Vulcan squadrons as they all changed back to squadron groundcrew and dedicated aircraft, why does this always seem to happen??

[Lyneham Lad]

Well, when I was a young 'wet-behind-the ears' sprog freshly posted to Scampton in errrmm....'64, the Vulcans had centralised servicing at 1st and 2nd Line. Working on E Dispersal, there was little contact with the aircrew and any association with Sqn pride etc was non-existent. Didn't stop us achieving the best serviceability levels that we could or taking pride in launching 4-ships from Kinloss QRA pans on Mickey Finns. Mind you, when the hooter went at 5.00am, you really did not know (for 4 minutes) whether to rush to the dispersal or wait for the mushroom cloud. But I digress.

At 1st Line level, to engender the Sqn spirit and to work as a close knit team in achieving the best levels of service and support requires aircraft and groundcrew to be firmly allocated to a Sqn. It also requires the aircrew to be full participants in the process and not to be stand-offish, as can (or did) happen. 2nd Line is different, due to the need to make maximum utilisation of the high cost resources needed, and to avoid expensive duplications.

So - centralised servicing = 1st Line bad, 2nd Line good (well, workable).

[pr00ne]

Lyneham Lad,

Do you happen to know why the V force abandoned centralised 1st Line and returned to squadron groundcrew with their own aircraft?
Surely if it was a success it would have continued, or was there a new OC Eng at 1 Group.............................

Pr00ne

[Lyneham Lad]

Pr00ne,

Probably because it all fell apart after I left (when I was forced to leave the delights of Lincolnshire and go, kicking and screaming, to hot & sweaty Seletar). Gawd, wot a shock, exchanging the mighty Vulcan for single and twin Pioneers.

That aside, you are probably right that is was yet another new chappie trying to make a name for himself.

[Red Line Entry]

What's the general feeling at those stns that already have centralised 1st line servicing? Having never worked transport, AWACS and the like I simply don"t know.

Is everyone happy with the status quo or is there any desire to go back towards a "traditional" sqn setup?

[BEagle]

It's a $hite idea.......

[16 blades]

I think some of the point has been missed here by those not familiar with Lyneham's eng setup.

Lyneham has NEVER had Sqn-based engineering - it has always been centralised. Eng Wg was, and still is, a separate entity to the Fg Sqns, from OC Eng right down to all the LACs.

The fact that Sqn based engineering works better has little to do with esprit de corps - it has more to do with the fact that Sqn JEngOs report directly to the Sqn Cdr, and can be dragged into his office to explain themselves when ac fall over. At Lyneham, JEngOs, SEngOs and OC Eng Wg don't give a sh1t if XX Sqn loses a task due to ac unserviceability, because they are not accountable directly to the Sqns, therefore do not get bollocked for slacking off or fcuking up (in the Sqn's eyes).

In modern, NMS, cuddly-fluffy business-like speak, we (the Sqns)are their 'customers' (-chokes back vomit) and as such should expect to recieve a minimum level of service. But what if we don't? Where do we go to complain? There is no direct command-chain link between us and the engineers, so when we complain, we get 'fcuking aircrew, blah blah blah'. If there WERE a direct command-chain link, a Sqn Cdr could say to his JEngO "Get this fcuking aircraft fixed", and it would happen. THATS why it works better that way.

We have always had 2 1st lines at Lyneham; when the fleet split, they were renamed 'K-line' and 'J-line' to represent the split fleet. What they are now doing is combining them for mixed-type servicing, presumably having everybody (or at least enough of the workforce) dual-qualified.

Like others have said already, a stupid idea. Unfortunately, it is an even more stupid idea than the original setup, which was already a stupid idea.

I have already been on the recieving end of this idiocy - delayed 2 hours due to some of the shoddiest servicing and associated paperwork I have seen in double-digit service.

Women - Know Your Limits!!!!!!!!!! ;-D

16B

[The Maintainer]

Anyone who believes that OC Eng at Lyneham is solely and personally responsible for this change is seriously deluded - and there seem to be a significant number of individuals in that category. If you want to blame anything, blame a system that, despite claims of 'real terms' budget increases, is seeing its spending power reduced year-on-year by rampant inflation in the defence industry and, as a result, is being forced to make some difficult choices. Stations are expected to find 'efficiency measures' by Groups, driven by Strike, driven by the Centre, driven by the Treasury. Easiesy way to efficiency measures is by cutting manpower, Eng Wg = biggest manpower pool = easiest target. I have no doubt that the changes that have taken place will have been discussed (and reluctantly agreed) by the Station Management Board (including the sqn cdrs), with endorsement from Group and Strike. OC Eng is the poor individual who has to make it happen - I know, I've been in a similar situation myself, trying to drive through a change (with which I personally did not agree) against massive resistance. While you may not agree with the changes that have been made, has anyone considered that OC Eng may also not agree, but has been put in the position of driving the change through regardless? I think some of you need to look at your posts and consider that abuse of Lyneham's OC Eng, as a small cog in a big machine, is actually inappropriate.

For what it's worth, given the choice (and many don't have it) and the fact I've experienced both, I'd rather be on a sqn - but that doesn't mean that centralised servicing can't work. I have also been at Waddington, where centralised servicing of Sentry was implemented at the start and, because nobody knew any different, it worked very well. Given time and a bit of understanding, so might Lyneham...

16B - there is a direct command chain link, it's just stepped up a level to the Staish, who I'm sure takes a great deal of interest in what his sqn cdrs tell him and would call OC Eng in if he felt it necessary.

[BEagle]

True - it's highly unlikely that this idea was the brainchild of the OC Eng in question. More likely to have been imposed from on high - and the unfortunate OC Eng has been left to get on with it.

The intangible asset of well-motivated sqn groundies is something which anonymous bean counters cannot enter onto their wretched balance sheets though.

[propulike]

I've been and had a look around the 'new' Eng setup, and I can't recall a single more retrograde step than this idea. People who DON'T KNOW about the aircraft they have to make decisions on being put under heavy pressure to achieve servicability rates.

As to 'leave OC Eng alone it's not really up to her' .... what was the job title again? :hmm: This is an incredibly poorly implemented foolish idea, with the opinions of the SNCOs on the line totally ignored. The result - I have never seen a more dis-spirited bunch of people than the personnel she is meant to be be leading, nor a more shambolic engineering line (despite the enormous efforts of the SNCOs et al. to keep things safe).

[izod tester]

I take issue with the statement by 16 Blades that Lyneham has never had sqn based engineering. In 1970, elements of the Strat Line Servicing Squadron and the Comet Scheduled Servicing Flight element of Base Support Squadron were amalgamated into 216 Sqn Engineering Flight. 216 Sqn was then responsible for 1st 2nd and 3rd line servicing of its own aircraft until disbanded in 1975.

[lynehamwife]

Sorry for posting my thoughts here.

I was told about this forum via a friend who is in the same boat as me, her husband is also a member of HLS, and going through the same thing as mine. My husband is an Engineer on the newly formed HLS at lyneham and in 20 years of him being the the RAF I have never once had him say "I dont want to go to work" until now. He is constantly short tempered and cannot sleep while he is on shift due to the stress this new system is putting on him.

This system was also implemented just before Christmas which meant that the usual xmas spirit has been non existant. Plus, no leave was allowed due to the swapping of shifts etc which has seriously dented the moral of the few lads I have met since this was started. They all felt proud of their respected squadrons when they found a Squadron identity when the J's and K's got a number (24/30eng and 47/70eng) but again, they have been made to sound like quick fit fitters again with a title 'HLS' which the lads have named 'Hercules Laughing Stock'

My husband feels that he has no direction and cannot lead his men due to the fact that this radical change of the usual working practise means everyone feels lost. He feels that he no longer belongs and that the new system leaves the Sgt's feeling useless as their lads come to them for information, but they cannot provide it as they are out of the loop as they are not trade managers anymore.

As for the posts here about working both aeroplanes it isnt whats happening as my husband says the aircraft are so radically different that its impossible for the lads to work on each others aircraft without specialist training.

My husband has been on Squadrons thoughout his career and it always made him proud. It was amazing that being on a Squadron gave them all an identity which bred pride and comaradery which kept the lads chins up even when the chips were down. Lyneham is the first place Ive heard of in 16 years of being an Air Force wife where the ground crew and aircrew are two seperate entities and it shows in the moral and the identity of the lads. They now have no pride, no interest, no moral, and most of all no clue of whats going on (as no formal briefings were held to inform Sgts and below on what was going on)......and thats from someone who see's the lads and lasses from the outside.

Like I said, I'm sorry for posting this but I have been so worried about my husband and the things that have been going on. All I hope is that thing don't get so bad that we have an accident where someone is killed because of a system that has been rushed into place for no apparent reason.

[16 blades]

Point taken, izod. I stand corrected.

What I should have said was the Hercules fleet at Lyneham has never had centralised servicing.

Maintainer,

Using that logic, there is a direct Cmd Chain link between everybody in the RAF and everybody else. What I meant was a direct link at Sqn level. Once you get above the level of the front line operators, priorities become diluted and the message is lost.

16B

[ZH875]

from lynehamwife He is constantly short tempered and cannot sleep while he is on shiftI should hope not, people are on shift to work, not sleep. Its people sleeping on shift that are letting the side down, imagine how much more work would get done, if people stayed awake at work.

[lynehamwife]

Sorry for your miss-interpreted reponse

My husband does not sleep 'On shift' He is too busy working.

A shift is the 4 days he is on. In other words, he cannot sleep while he is supposed to be sleeping off.

Having a name like that you should understand that off shift means your on your 4 days off. Are you the same person posting on the lyneham village website, as you also had a go at a young SAC there for voicing his concerns......what was the response? "Its young idiots like you that make the RAF what it is today" there as well. I won't go into what you said after that, it might get edited by the site administator.

Please try to make constructive points when posting on forums instead of stupid digs. Instead of being sarcastic, you could have asked if I meant that he slept whilst at work.

[P-T-Gamekeeper]

LynehamWife

No need to apologise about posting here. Your thoughts on this subject are most welcome.

I fear the current feelings of your husband are repeated in many homes across the station.

If you find many of your friends are saying similar things, it might be worth trying to get your points across to the senior management on station if you get an opportunity - Hive, mess function, etc.

It is sad, but sometimes it is much easier for the wives to speak to the higher echelons, as they feel no rank structure.

Just so you know, the aircrew on station are dead against this as well. None of the senior line pilots I know were consulted at all, and most of us only found out about it at the 11th hour on the rumor mill.

I agree totally about the lack of Sqn identity. The only good thing to have come out of OP TELIC is the techie mates I have made whilst on det. The togetherness out there shows how it can be done.

I shall watch out for any more posts from you. It makes a pleasant change from some of the vindictive drivel we see on here.

P-T-G

[Otis Spunkmeyer]

lynehamwife

The reason your husband is acting this way is because his is a proffesional engineer who takes pride in his work.

For which he will get no reward.

If he hasn’t worked it out for himself already – he needs to care a little less about the flying program.

The time has never been better for a ‘work to rule’. When morale is low, and there is no motivation, there is no reason to make an extra effort.

Don’t cut any corners, don’t miss any meal breaks, don’t compronise on safety. Look after the young lads and gals below you. Imagine how bewildered they are. Your only focus is your shift Flt Sgt and JENGO…and shift change. And family.

For too long the engineering world has been a ‘can do’ outfit. I know of no other trade that will work a 12 hour shift in the pissing rain without a proper meal break.

The grown ups work on bar charts, graphs and budgets. Let them worry about the things that they are paid handsomely for.

Happy Christmas

[ZH875]

lynehamwife, I apologise for the mickey take, childish etc, I am more than aware of the lack of time available to work never mind sleep whilst on shift.

I can remember one horrible day, very strong, cold winds and lots of rain, when I had just one available towing team to sort the aircraft out, they guys didn't whinge, were out constantly for over six hours and were wringing wet when they finally got back in.

The eng guys are unable to have a work to rule, to follow the instructions to the letter, because proffesional pride is their biggest enemy. If it takes 6 guys a shift to get a Herc serviceable, and one guy is lumbered for gate guard etc, then 5 guys will do the job and get the aircraft out on time. The Bean counters see this, and say that 5 men are obviously enough, and chop 1. Next time the bean counters look, some other bod is stuffed for guard and 4 men are now doing the work of 6, Ah! thay say, this job only needs 4 men and away goes another. And no matter what the circumstances are, the aircraft get generated.

As aircrew may now jump in and say "This or that was missed, or not done properly" there is no excuse in the real world, but the world is no longer real, it is fashioned by Messrs B-Liar, Brown and Buff Hoon, but at least the aircraft departs within the allotted time.

For the work we have to do, we need more MEN not Network connected computers, but we have no chance of that.

For the guys on shift in this cold time of year, Thanks guys for a job well done. I hope the HLS gets sorted SOON.

[Jobza Guddun]

ZH875,

Good follow-up, I think you saved yourself from a bit of a flaming there.

Your line about a work to rule is, I believe, basically true. However, together with that, we're all fully aware that if a WtR in fact happened, anybody who made even the slightest, genuine, mistake, would invariably be professionally hung, drawn and quartered to bring the rest of the troops into line.

Quite frankly I'm glad I'm not part of the awful smell that seems to be emanating from Lyneham Eng Wg - although I fully expect to face the same upheaval at my unit. I empathise with Maintainers' thoughts, but for me they're tempered with the thought that OC Eng is top of the tree and as such is there to be shot at, a la OCA, OC Ops and CO's, if they're not perceived to be listening to the concerns of the troops on the ground. That's why they do the jobs they do - if they can't take full-bore criticism or at least answer it, don't take that sort of appointment.

Most of our fliers will already know this, but if your aircraft is delayed, it's because your techies aren't happy with it, not because they want to play games. It only takes one major screw-up in your unit to breach your trust in us, and once that's gone it's v.difficult to get it back, so we'd rather you were late. It won't get any better no matter what scheme someone dreams up, as we can all only do one job at a time, even if we're multi-skilled!

24/30/47/70, please bear with your techies, it's not their fault, make your noises at the CO in the mess. And remember what Lynehamwife told you about her husband.

LW, some good advice was proffered by PTG, worth acting on. And feel free to post here any time you like.:ok:

Merry Cristmas everyone, and I'll have one tonight for all of you who are away from your families.

[L1A2 discharged]

What price all the work on Human Factors, teambuilding etc. etc. which has been driven from CAS?

[500days2do]

Will we get ever get the correct response from our glorious leaders to changes like this...not a chance..why ?..cos they are all yes men/women.CO's,Sqn bosses etc have only their best interests at heart.Be honest ..when was the last time you heard of a CO/OC resigning due to a matter of principle...never!Lyneham will disappear up its own arsene wenger before they make a stand.

Vote with your feet...

[flipster]

quote "Vote with your feet"

I did - and I can't recommend it enough! Also, I see my family more and sleep much better now that I have left Rompers Green!

However, while the grass is a different shade of green on the outside, I don't hear such levels of disquiet from the engineers this side of the fence as there is at Lyneham.

Besides, I thought the J/K Lines had worked pretty damn well since their inception, so why mess with them? I have always had a great admiration of the engineers but I thought that the increased integration via the 24/30 and 47/LXX Lines certainly helped to break down some of the more traditional aircrew/groundcrew barriers - despite constant OOA ops over the last 5 years. Regrettably, the new change is so obviously driven by Treasury-enforced budget cuts. It is NOT about 'improved efficiency' as DefSec and CDS keep wittering on about. Do they really think we are so daft as to believe their spin?

My advice to all who believe flight safety is being compromised - be it working hours, working practices, Resource Management, lack of communication, poor morale or just plain lack of trust/involvement (perhaps even all of the above) - THEN PUT IT IN WRITING -
Try a Human Factors Report or a Murphy/Condor with the SFSO (a most decent chap) as well as a letter to your own chain of command (JENGO/OC ENG/SQN BOSS/STN CDR). If enough of you do it, then who knows?

If you really believe something is awry, then you should do all you can in your sphere of influence flag it up with, clear unambiguous FACTS.

If the 'what ifs' constantly point to a major incident/accident in the offing, then you have little choice but to go to print - at least then you may sleep a little more easily at night but you can also look yourself in the mirror in the morning.

Overall, however, I agree that the cuts have been imposed from on high - but involving your direct superiors will allow them to show their true colours to those at the workface one way or another.

Best of Luck

[Blacksheep]

I too remember " t' good owld dayz" of centralised servicing on the Vulcans of No.1 Group. At the end of day shift at Waddington one Friday, they rounded up a weary Sergeant, Corporal, two J/Ts and an SAC as we were boarding the bus at Line Serving Squadron and sent us off to 44(R) Sqn crew room. No explanation was given. We arrived in our usual filthy condition, dressed in the rags that passed for cold-weather clothing (you had to be a Storekeeper to get brand new issue) to find (to our delight - free beer indeed!) that we were representing "Engineering" at a beer-up in celebration of the squadron's victory in that year's bombing competition. One of the Flight Commanders deigned to engage Junior Magician Blacksheep in conversation and was astounded when I told him that we had no idea that there had in fact been a bombing competition. We had noticed a slight increase in the flying activity but no-one had bothered to tell us why. Also, when we sent off an aircraft we had no idea what squadron the crew belonged to either. All aircrew were one and the same to us. I've often wondered if that conversation between a smart Squadron Leader and a very dirty, dishevelled but tradesmanlike J/T had anything to do with the end of centralised servicing shortly afterwards.

Squadron spirit and pride in achievement is no accident.

[SlopJockey]

What's up are some of the people at Lyneham having to give up their second job due to the changes to the shift patterns?:oh:

[LoeyDaFrog]

LynehamWife - Do not apoogise as you are in the wonderful position of being able to tell it how it is (without some snotty 22 yr old having a go in six months time when it comes to 6000-time). Flip, nice thoughts, I know it got you in trouble when you wore HM's growbag, but still good advice! What a shame that those of us who do actually stand up and get counted on matters of principle (ie refusing to task 'K' hercs into AFG in daylight) are labelled as trouble makers, to be told in no uncertain terms that we will never see S/L. Oh well, bugger it, as my 1st OC Ops told me, better to be a scraggly old Flt Lt with the respect of those who work for you (the SNCOs, crews who do the flying, the TG9 Ops types etc etc etc), than a Wg Cdr or groupy who is hated.

[Low Ball]

Seems like you've got the same problem as the Army. Breaking up the Regimental system never improved the fighting efficiency of the Army. What it probably does do is reduce the headcount in some way. As we aircrew know if you have a scheme to reduce headcount you are well on the way to appearing on end of year medal lists and lead in promotion stakes.

Bitter - yes please mine's a pint.

LB

[spankedcat]

I think the point is being missed completely by al those that have posted on this issue. Yes, the Herc fleet has always been ‘centralised’, with the groundcrew being separate from the aircrew. Even when the two Groundcrew sqns, 24/30 eng and 47/70 eng, were formed when the J’s were fully manned in March 2001, it was never a true sqn feeling that is usually associated with the fast jet world.
The real reason behind the gripes is the change to our working environment.
The way we worked when we were two fleets, and both fleets worked the same system, is that in charge of the overall work carried out on the shift would be a Rectification controller. He would liase with the trade managers at the start of the shift as to the priorities to be worked, with regards to the flying programme, and any other ‘dead’ aircraft to be worked. The trade manager would then organise his troops to get the work done, with the trade manager themselves liase with the other trade managers so everybody would not be working the same aircraft at once. The TM’s themselves would also make sure that any ‘hot gen’ would be passed down to the troops and passed along to the other shifts. This system is very efficient at getting work done and also has the added benefit that when the guys & girls came in from one job, if the TM wasn’t around, they could quite easily look down the diary and get on with the outstanding jobs. This also had the added benefit at assessment time to comment on the troops leadership, common sense, blah, blah.
Manpower wise this method worked well when even stretched to the bone. A SNCO could get a flying programme of 6 aircraft servicable and get his trade diary clear in a night with only 3-4 others, it was a hard nights work but it was achievable.
So as far as SNCO manpower goes, there were two in Rect’s control, and on a good shift maybe 1 of each trade, possibly 2 sooties or riggers. That adds up to 6-7 SNCO’s on a good shift and in the 3 ½ years that J line was running this system, we never delayed an aircraft because of ‘lack of manpower’, and I am pretty sure that the rest of the RAF that uses this system has always managed to get the flying programme sorted, with delays due to lack of spares or crew outs.
Right, lets take this system, and without any consultation with the SNCO’s, Flt Sgt’s or wobblys, turn it on its head and make everyone miserable and demoralised!!!!
The system now is that that 1 SNCO is given an aircraft to run with whilst on shift (12 hours) in that time he is to be tasked by the Rect’s controller (1 x C/T), get manpower from the Manpower controller (1xC/T), and whilst he is out in his ‘trailer’, he is overseen by a line walker (1xC/T). The SNCO with the aircraft now has to ‘compete’ for manpower,(which by the way has now been reduced by a third) to get aircraft ready. Also when the book is handed to the SNCO there are the outstanding jobs that still need to be done from the last time it landed. There are lots of things wrong with this system, far too many and complex to go into here, but needless to say this system throws up more questions that any seniority has answers for, so how are you supposed to believe in an idea and sell it to those under you if the people in charge, you know who you are, do not believe in it.
Please don’t get me wrong, it is good to see a bit of change now and again, but when it all goes to rats droppings can someone please stand up and be counted!!!
I have never in all my RAF days seen a decision that has had such a dramatic effect on the morale and effectiveness of guys on the shop floor and as one or two people have mentioned, I too think it will take something drastic to highlight things to people outside Lyneham.
Please leave the fixing of aircraft to the aircraft fixers and the c**p management to the c**p managers!!!!

[force_ale]

Yes but is the new system "lean"?

[HOODED]

Course it's lean, I'm sure one third less manpower was mentioned above. But will that be lean enough? More Techie redundancies inbound!:(

[bay17-20]

Spankedcat

That new system sounds awful, I spent many happy years working the old system and it worked well.

The point is that no matter how much engineers complain, nothing will change however, if assets are not ready on time, questions be asked by Ops and Aircrew, only then will the situation be looked into.

Not suggesting anything along the lines of "work to rule" etc, such childish acts will do nothing to help, but if you are rushing around trying to make this system work, think safety, and stop rushing - no system is worth an accident.

It may go against the grain - as every engineer wants to make the programme, but if morale is as bad as indicated on this thread, it will not be long before it effects your work. As the end user the aircrew will understand your predicament.

I left the RAF last year (fed up with PC tree huggers and poor management), civvy street has a better system, they give you the aircraft and the following days schedule, its up the engineers on the ground to sort it out (within CAA regulations of course).

The "engineers on the ground" in this case being the people who actually service the aircraft, not a OC Eng/SEngO/JEngO with no hands on experience and little idea of time and manpower requirements to rectify a given snag.

That's not a pop at SEngO or JEngO's in general, I have worked with some great ones, but they were the ones who supported the people under them and who did not make wholesale changes to a system that worked well before leaving the mess they created 18 months/2 years later (tweaks=OK, wholesale changes=bad).

In the short term - smile, things will get better. There's little point in being bitter about all this and you guys need to stick together. Common sense will prevail, as in time either the management will change the system or the system will change the management.

Good Luck!

[BEagle]

"...if assets are not ready on time...."

Rarely a problem in the days when the sqn on which I served had its own loyal groundies - but almost invariably the case after the abysmal centralised servicing was forced upon the fleet. Very rarely did any AT flight leave on time thereafter....and if the RAF was an airline it would have probably had its Air Operator's Certificate withdrawn with such dispatch unreliability.

Team needs. Remember those, O Great Leaders?

[HercFairy]

Where has all the moral gone?!

I have just finished my first shift on HLS, and boy do i wish i hadnt started!
I was fortunate(?) enough to be on guard over xmas and missed the start of the new lean HLS. I thought you may like a Lineys before and after view.

My last shift in Nov on A line was good, lots of happy techies doing what they love, fixing a/c. We had good comardary, morale tho not sky high was at a happy level, comms was good with everyone knowing were we where in the 'big picture' and most importantly our 'customers' were getting what they wanted.

Now to the this shift. I walked in the crew room first morning back to see not a smile or happy face. The atmosfere was darker than a mourge. I went over to control to find out the program only to be ushered out because of no sgt or c/t stripes on my arm! When I asked what work/program was going to be like the answer was "You dont need to know!"
It appears that now the only way we find out when work is needed to be done is when our team laeder finds us and tells us what to do. Gone are the trade desk diarys, the tombs of so much history, information and jobs. This now means that jobs are being forgotten about and missed. I have even heard that a/c have been flying without valid servicings! When things like that get missed something very wrong is going on!
Comms seems to have broken down completly, yesterday an a/c landed at 11am its second sortie was cancelled and this was only found out 6pm. 5 hours after it should have departed on its next trip!
We used to have a big board 20ft wide by 8ft tall with every a/c on it so EVERYONE could see what was were and what needed doing. Everything from servicings to battery changes.
Now this is all within the first month, people are losing what little is left of there moral, and a few are starting not to even care.
Sod all the lean be more flexable crap, when people start to not even care about there work the accidents will happen. People I know that used to work 7 till 7 without break or complaint, proud of the work they did are being slowly broken and worn down. I dont know about others but I am scared of what will come.

Sorry for length but I needed to say this. Remember this is after ONE MONTH, just think what it will be like when the remaining few have been broken down.:( :sad:

[L1A2 discharged]

This is becoming scary. Have you tried raising your concerns with the chain of command or SFSO or QAC?

[BEagle]

Big picture....mumble, mumble....Management Initiative....mumble, mumble....leaner and keener....mumble, mumble....in-depth scoping survey....mumble, mumble...."I hear what you say".....

And lo, the porkers did merrily flap their wings. For as the result of such foolhardiness, verily they were the only bloody things left at Lyneham still capable of flight bar the flying club aircraft.

[ZH875]

More problems caused by (mis)Management, but no doubt OC Eng will get promoted out of this.

[glum]

Rumour control has it that she's been extended. Maybe someone wants her to rectify her own mess for a change...

[spankedcat]

apparently she has been extended by 18 months.......

playing the 'work to rule' ticket to get the system changed won't work because:-
A. nobody has got a clue about what work is required..
B. the system will implode on itself soon anyway (hopefully)

To try and understand our predicament put yourself in the shoes of a big boss of a company and suddenly his PA has been taken away... now you know that there is lots of work to be done, but nobody is telling you where to start or where to go, that is how everybody feels, from the F/S's down to the SAC's. It goes completely against everything that we are taught, from basic training through to GST, and I dont mean the 'can do' attitude either, that if there is something to be done, crack on and do it to the best of your ability.
The only thing that I can resign myself to is that hopefully the system will change back to something that it was in the first place and then everybody will have to try and get motivated again!!!!

and as for lean.......there isnt a smiley for arse!!!

[SirPeterHardingsLovechild]

Don't mean to be pedantic but....

Morale (low) is for the groundcrew

Morals (very low) is for the aircrew


Carry on everyone.

Be advised that the grown ups are now aware of this thread, so be careful with the insults. (But maybe some good will come out of it)

My advice is to keep your comments short, sweet and straight to the point as officers have a short concentration span.

I know for a fact that there is a Sgt in the RAF Directorate of Corporate Communications whose daily chores include viewing these pages.

[BEagle]

Good morning, Sgt PPRuNe!

[Lee Jung]

Come on Sgt, you need to let us know who you are! Are you Mike Hegland.

Do we have to submit a FOI request to get the information?

[Otis Spunkmeyer]

I believe I was the first to mention 'Work to Rule' on this thread. Perhaps a poor choice of words, as subsequently someone has called it childish. What I meant was the practice of cutting corners.


So, we discover that an aircraft has gone flying without a valid 'Before Flight Servicing'

Do we raise a Murphy report, or at least come clean, to ensure it doesn't happen again?

Or do we cover it up? And then it happens again!......and a third time!!


Wallowing around in a cesspit of our own making.

[The Gorilla]

Of course you cover it up!! the Farce is only interested in getting the job done at whatever cost. As the number of different down sizes gather pace the only way to get more jobs done with less people is to cut corners. Fact of life?

To be fair it is the same ethos out here in civy street. Most companies have a strong desire to do more with less BUT we have laws out here to protect us. One such example of many I could list, are the Health and Safety at work rules which allow staff to walk off the job if they observe unsafe practices.

You lot of course, have no such protection either in law or management!!

:ok:

[Mr C Hinecap]

Gorilla - the Crown lost it's imunity quite some time ago. If H&S are being broken it is the same as outside - we're not dropping bombs therefore it is peacetime.
I do hope that my Eng bretheren can see their way through all of this down at Lyneham. Just glad to be an interested stacker observing from afar.

[SVK]

........So is it true that the new nickname for this whole system is JAKASS ( 'J' And 'K' Aircraft Support Squadron)? If so, at least it beats the FART vans that were running around the dispersal!:E


(Edited to include the following)

And another thing! What is going to happen when the J's move to BZN in 2008 and the K's live till Lyneham's closure in 2012...?

[On_The_Top_Bunk]

And another thing! What is going to happen when the J's move to BZN in 2008 and the K's live till Lyneham's closure in 2012...?

It will still be known as HLS and any manpower will be bussed backwards and forwards as necessary. :=

[spankedcat]

for those who can...JSP 375, Vol 2, Lft 25....stress inducers at work, last page......where are we? HLS, RAF Lyneham!

Can anybody help us???

[Lionel Lion]

Go to a secret Oxon base....the new boss is about to remalgamate the VC10 aircrew and groundies in a single unit

Best decision for years :ok:

[BEagle]

Best Boss for years...........

At least 5!:ok: :ok:

Make that 10.....

[HERCHOUNDDOG]

I have never seen so many P _ _ _ed off ground crew. They know how to make it work better but she who must be obeyed won't let them. Perhaps she needs to listen to them and not fob them off.

[lineslime]

The latest rumor, at ground level, is that she who implements change has got her promotion and has been extended @ Lyneham untill the post she is going to fill becomes vacant.

[Purr Harder]

Remember change is inevitable (except from a vending machine). The changes at Lynenam are driven by LEAN and a need to reduce manpower across Eng Wing by 130 to pay for the ‘A Brief History of the RAF’ AP issued to everyone in the RAF. The changes at Lyneham were enforced with very little input from the SNCOs, thereby discarding 100s of, if not 1000s of, years experiences. Anyone voicing any doubts about the new system is accused of fear of change. The changes at HLS are not working, are unsafe and hugely unpopular. The line is working as best they can to make a bad system work but the basic problem is the system is unworkable, without tradedesks there is no focus. The JNCOs and airmen/women have a lack of clear direction and the Sgts spend all day with their head buried in a F700 while the Chief Tech Work Controllers are under utilised and have no control what is happening around them. The AP 3003 is full of tales of esprit de corps and leadership; at Lyneham HLS the former has been ground into the mud and there is a total lack of the later. However much the groundcrew moan, nothing will change until the aircrew complain about it. It must say something about a system when SNCOs with over 20 years service are clearly stating that they simply dread coming into work and people are happier going to Basra to get away from HLS. It would be interesting for our flying ‘customers’ to express their views on here what they think of the new system. The message that will go up from Lyneham to STC is that this new system is great and will be imposed elsewhere. :{

[lineslime]

Change may be inevitable but, is it not best implemented after those in the know are consulted first & their oppinions considered. That way surely any change would then stand a better chance of working.:confused:

[line scum]

take it from a line engineer, if you want more work done give us back our trade managers and trade diary so we can utilise our time and accomplish more, thus getting more planes in the air!!!

[HercFairy]

Heres a new one for you all!

Just heard that O/C eng has said the F/S C/T Sgt ect are SABOTAGING the new system so thats why its not working well at the mo!!

Laff I nearly fixed an aircraft! :D :ok: :E

[lineslime]

How can this be so?

According to the figures published by O/C Eng, on her thankyou letter to the line (if all you aircrew haven't seen it then look on the notice board outside the HLS crewroom), 100% tasking has been met almost all the time (K&J). A bit of creative number juggling has been going on I think.:suspect:

[spankedcat]

Ahhh, another shift over and now I can sleep again. Mondays programme was met, mainly due to the fact that there was no flying over the w/end and everthing was worked over sat/sun. Can those that can check out the ADDER stats for this time last year, when we were a LOT busier, to Jan this year.

From the horses mouth (!!) : "I am not extended, I am due to be posted in August". So dont worry, there is light at the end of the tunnel, or will it be another train coming down the line!!!!

By the way, three more tool LACs/paperwork screw ups over the weekend, but apparently there are no FS concerns with this new system!!!!!

[SVK]

God help us when the first overworked, undermanned, exhausted crew mix up the K specific and J specific oil - OM15 and OM17 is it?

Remember - if no one actually can go flying then its not a flight saftety problem!

[glum]

How was anyone allowed out of the crewroom? I thought nothing was worked unless it was tasked?

[lineslime]

We all have to use the toilet at some time.:E

[SirPeterHardingsLovechild]

SVK

Mixing the Hydraulic Oils is not such a problem (OX 19 for the J by the way) The Aussie J's drained all theirs out and use good old OM15. A brake unit for a J will come filled with OM15, and for example, an Aileron Booster Pack will be tested on the rig with OM15, and then drained and filled with OX 19. So there is no problem with incompatability.

What is more likely to happen is that some tradesmen will use an unfamiliar item of access equipment, incorrect for the task and of uncertain serviceability, and the thing will topple over and three blokes will fall from a height of about 12 feet to the hangar floor.

Gives the hofficers something to do though.

How do you get 12 officers in a Mini. Just mention Accident Report and they'll all disappear up their own @rseholes.

[SVK]

SPHLC

Cheers for the clarification - you know wot us aircrew are like!

How are your guys finding it on the hangar floor?

SVK

[SirPeterHardingsLovechild]

.



Cold, and hard :oh:

[Purr Harder]

MMMMMM, apart from SVK very little comment from the Master Race on here, perhaps they relly dont care about the Line scum?
I have never seen groundcrew from WO down to LAC so fed up in 20+years of service. But hey, at least its Lean.:(

[glum]

They will, just as soon as missions or God forbid aircraft are lost though the cluster**** that is Lyneham Engineering.

[NOT P.M.]

HAVING JUST RETURNED TO WHAT I REMEMBER AS BEING A GREAT STATION TO BE SENT TO AS A SMALLIE I AM NOW REGRETTING MY DECISION TO ACCEPT PROMOTION.NOBODY KNOWS WHAT IS GOING ON AND IT WILL NOT BE LONG BEFORE AN INCIDENT OCCURS THAT I DO NOT WANT MY NAME TO BE ASSOCIATED WITH. WHAT JOBS ARE THE LINE SUPPOSED TO DO AND WHAT SHOULD BE TAKEN ON BY FLECS? THE MANAGEMENT DONT KNOW SO HOW SHOULD WE. ROLL ON APRIL AND HOPEFULLY I WILL QUALIFY FOR REDUNDANCY.
CHEERS NOT P.M.

[lineslime]

Popped into work today and saw some nice new shiney trailers parked up in the hangar, all we need now is something to tow them with. Heared a rumor that it will be LDVs but with ford transit engines transplanted. If there is any truth in this rumor then someone needs to sort their lives out, surely it would have made more economic sense to just buy transits instead.:confused:

On a lighter note, how long before one of these trailers ends up on it's side?:E

[shoutingwind]

as a liney on hls formally known as 24/30 (sorry i'm only a baby sumpie so can't remember A line and B line) i was proud when my aircraft landed and was happy to see my aircrew (yeah everyone in 24 and 30 sqn belong to me :) )but now the growbags act with great detachment to the see-inn crews and we have little pride and no morale. please for the sake our sanity please someone with more power than me stop this madness!

and growbags smile when when you see me on the pan a wave when you taxi past...

[SirPeterHardingsLovechild]

line slime

Mobile Issue Centres (MIC Wagons)

or Fart Wagons


I'll start filling out the accident report in advance!

And don't forget to make it interesting.

That is:-
No driving licence...
No additional training for towing trailers...
Drunk...
With four people inside playing cards...
Sat on half empty oil cans...
Smoking...
In front of a taxi-ing aircraft...
With the Princess Royal on board...
Who didn't get her leg over the previous night.


If you take a close look at the fold down access steps at the back you will notice a fairly flimsy piano hinge with a few rivets.

That hinge won't survive a week.

But I dare say we can't repair or modify or it would invalidate the warranty from the civvy manufacturer. So it'll be u/s for a month.

[shoutingwind]

lovechild you forgot the lack of tool checks/ control on the fart wagons so if you start to rattle on rotation be afraid, very afraid...

[SirPeterHardingsLovechild]

shouting wind

You'll have more time to do your tool checks now you've worked out not to waste your energy waving at aircrew.

I caught someone whistling, at work today. But it seems he'd just got his redundancy payoff estimate.

The Fart Wagons have tool tags but they don't survive the speed bumps on the bund road at 40 mph.

[lineslime]

I'm supprised the wagons/trailers survived the bund speed bumps at all. The tool tags, oops sorry tallys, struggle to stay on a stationary wall so what hope have they got in a mobile wagon doing 40?(hope the hitler youth didn't catch you sphlc.:E )
Just for this time of year we can add that the wagons just don't doughnut quite the same with a tralier, that has an overly high C of G, strapped to the back on an icy pan to the accident report.:ok:

[Always_broken_in_wilts]

SWind,

I am a rather sensitive soul so if you want the wave to include all four fingers and the thumb as opposed to just one digit please refrain from the "growbag" referance:rolleyes:

all spelling mistakes are "df" alcohol induced

[shoutingwind]

sorry, force of habit. no disrespect ment. please subsitute "aircrew" for growbag

[500days2do]

Swind,
s*d him...'grow bag' is good enough for me...some people are just full of themselves eh..!!!

Vote with your feet....

[Always_broken_in_wilts]

With that sort of approach don't suppose for one minute you'll be missed:rolleyes:........499 too many I reckon :E

Cheers swind :ok:

all spelling mistakes are "df" alcohol induced

[lineslime]

abiw
There is a lot worse the line operatives could be calling you. Just don't take it personally as we are all pretty pi$$ed of and morale, as you know, is low at the moment.

Just to make things worse for us the bean counters have seen fit to deprive us of sandu, unless we take 4 hours to empty the $hit bucket. Perhaps that is how AP3003 was funded?

[Now a 'J' Bloke!!]

Lineslime..... :ok:

We are your friends really...we are on your side. It is/was nice to see a familiar face in 'J' Line (and 'B'Line before that), and to have a chat about the 700 history and a bit of banter with whoever etc. I agree that the new, improved(?) system is a lot more impersonal and we feel like intruders when we arrive at JAK-ASS. It seems everyone is too busy to see us safely off the premises.

I have also been a victim of not getting away on time in the first week of LEAN...but have managed it since then, but we cannot complain on your behalf unless it is affecting us. Lord knows, someone is working wonders to get us our aircraft.

Swind...;)

And I din't really mind being called a grow-bag....that's what I am after all.:cool:

Days to do bloke..... :sad:

You sound like you have a grudge...I refer you to the above paragraph. I know some aircrew can be numptys...but hopefully, not all of us!!!:O

Regards
'J' Bloke!

[buoy15]

Centralised Servicing was brought in at Ballykelly in 1968

All ac retained their Sqn markings and were still parked "outside" their respective Sqns

Prior to that, the Sqns, 203, 204, 210 and ASWDU prided themselves in declaring their serviceability rate at morning prayers,

Early am, on day 1 of the new event, crews were queing in the newly established Line Office (Previously ENI) to go flying and were told to be patient.

Appreciate now, all the groundies have been centralised as well

"Not sure where your ac is located"

"The F700 was here a minute ago"

"We think the bowser is on the way now"

"What time were you planning to get airborne"

"Are you the SAR Crew"

"Nobody told us about you"

"The WO is trying to find the flying programme"

"Your rations have gone to the north side"

"I'm not happy with this"

"This never happened on the Sqn"

"Sorry lads, please give us some time"

"Is that your transport leaving"

Anyone out there remember OC ENG - Formby of Formby - drove a RR Silver Ghost Mk1?

I bloody well do!

Then I got posted to Singapore - Ah well!

[Always_broken_in_wilts]

L-S

Having spent 15 years doing your job....ish there are several insults I could send your way, but I don't cos I am polite:ok:

As regards morale life in my office is less than satisfying as our lords and masters continue to give us a "right royal f@ck up the hoop, but you need to be there to appreciate that :ok:

Bogs......no pay..........dont do it :ok: it's quite simple as, unless things have changed since my days, you had to volunteer for the afore mentioned duty as no one could reasonably expect you to do something "of an objectional nature', as I vaguely remember:}

all spelling mistakes are "df" alcohol induced

[phutbang]

Gents, why dont we stop the in fighting and ask the question... What will hapen to the moral after the HIOS program hits the streets later this year?
:confused:
It means no more second line i.e. that fuction goes to Marshalls at cambridge and not the minor hangers at lyneham - a smaller pool of manpower to draw upon - a reduction in the knowledge base at that level of servicing - increased pressure...etc:\

[L1A2 discharged]

But when the second line tasks are taken out to contractors all the operators will need to have done is between flights and fuel .... :uhoh: everything else will be by UPS :\


All tasks complete.
All pigs fed and ready for first wave.

[sumps]

L1A2 - it sounds likes you are one of the people who ill profit in this scheem:ok:
Got shares in MAe then or just a job application:suspect:

[exEngO]

I only recently 'remembered' these boards existed and have spent a few bemused hours reading some of the threads, including this one.

They ditched the trade desks on the line ? What (beyond removing headcount) was the logic? (apologies if this is covered elsewhere on here - I'm playing catch-up)

I was on ALSS, and at various times later AES and EOPS and saw the move away from 3-3-6 and the move to 24/30 (Eng) & 47/LXX (Eng) all of which caused varying degrees of upheaval, resentment, misinformation and grief but these latest moves sound to be even more painful.

I honestly feel for those affected :(

[sumps]

ExEngo - Right then this is the way I think it is supposed to work (loosely):

It starts with the tasking coming from the likes of ascot etc to a group of strategic planers up in Eng Ops who set up a program forecasting the next 3 months (with the coming week being resolute).
Next it goes to the Line planers and docs they allocate tail numbers to tasking numbers and then go through the books and sort out a “to-do list”.
Next there are a number of line teams comprising of a Sgt and 4 bods of differing trades who will go through this to-do list and finish off by AF/Bf’ing it to make it serviceable. Each team is to have its own mobile servicing wagon housing tools, POL, gasses and some spares – i.e. they are to some degree self sufficient.

Still with me? :ok:

If there is a problem that needs same trade supervision or independents then this person has to be taken out of the other team – thus hampering or stopping this other team from completing their aircraft tech ready state.
If the job is too large (in terms of time) then it is to be passes onto what is essentially a huge Heavy Rects team who do have trade desks. If these cannot help then they go to the minor teams (who have moved back to their old hangars).
The teams are not allowed to be proactive i.e. they have to wait until they are tasked. – The Rects team cannot move unless asked by the line – and to that end aircraft are not supposed to be worked unless tasked.

So if we lose as has been said before 2nd line (to a contract with MA) then there goes part of the manpower pool. The next thing that will go will be the redundancies an even greater depreciation – in all about 150(ish)

There has been no consultation from the Exec Engineers with the SNCOs i.e. the ones who get posted away every 2 or 3 years will leave the others, who don’t, to fathom it out. This whole process has been enforced with out much communication or training, giving some of the most the professional engineers the attitude of “I don’t give a:mad: ” – and if I was a member of rompers green I would start to get a bit worried!
:(

what do you think now?

[exEngO]

sumps - That's lunacy :oh: . Where do I start?:

The first few parts are situation normal - (except EOPS used to allocate tails based on known future hours / Return To Works etc requirements and daily 700 updates from the line)

Removing a dedicated depth of trade knowledge and more importantly, focus from the 1st Line Engineering organisation is nuts. I used to advocate the use of a 'ramp tramp' with a small forward holding of consumables but this is that writ large - too large.

Having (as a generalisation) relatively junior 'Preppies' who would snag things back to a trade desk was a good thing - it forced an assesment by a specialist eye. Dumping a SNCO with having to pull trade cover from someone generating aircraft or exercising some other judgement is piling many eggs in ever smaller baskets. Yes there would often be banter about the fairy preppers bringing in sumpy snags all night (inserts trades of choice here) but I think everyone liked the fact that there was always someone, a specialist, who had to get it checked out. I don't mean to imply that anyone's professional standards are being eroded, just that this current system seems to place more obstacles in the way of getting the right skills in front of the right snags in a timely fashion.

As for the lack of consultation with the Seniors - I have to say I am not surprised. Lyneham seems to have a reputation for militant SNCOs - I just wish those on high would stop and think why they think that - perhaps because it is one of a few units which retains it's experience in long-on-unit SNCOs who know WTF they are talking about !

As for the unreserved h'officer bashing on these boards, it'll always rankle but I would never challenge anyone's position on it: In my time on tours at Lyneham I met some total fools (at every level) who were an embarassment to to their colleagues. I also met one or 2 absolute stars who fought hard and bravely for what they felt to be right, sometimes to their own detriment (I'm talking from FgOff through to 2 OC Engs here). That said the people I met in my (brief) 10 year stint that I have heartfelt respect for to this day are SNCOs (some of whom may still be there so I'll shut up! ;) )

[L1A2 discharged]

Sumps,

Niether /neither (sp?) still in, didn't apply, waiting for a letter (if it comes).

Looking at the situation from outside that particular fence, and being afraid.:uhoh:

Bets wishes, and luck.
L1

[sumps]

L1

Saw your post in the ground forum, Im doning a lot of Soul serching/ reserching to alter the situation i asked a similar Q in the life after the RAF thread.

Good luck with the quest! - Sumps :ok:

[ExRAFboy]

I was Tech at Lyneham from 62 to 67 and worked at 3 levels of Centralised Servicing. I then spent 3 happy years in Germany with 17 and 3 Squadrons. What a difference, the morale and service life "on the Squadrons" was like being in a different Air Force. Lyneham was like G..........k with all the staff in the same uniforms.

[SirPeterHardingsLovechild]

Well, there's a VSA going on right now. This has to take place after an RIE.......okay I'll try and translate, but it might be a bit innaccurate because all I could hear was 'Blah blah blah'.

RIE (Rapid Improvement Event)
To have a brainstorming session with all the motivated youngsters with clipboards, dry marker pens and post it notes. Then, do it, straightaway.

Unfortunately, when you asked the Flt Sgt for people for this 'Lean Team', he gave you the sick notes, freaks and mentalists. And by rushing the job, without consulting the SNCO's, a botch job has been done, and it will have to be done again. The Lean Team are also under pressure to come up with more good ideas and end up producing really **** ones, bypassing many checks and balances that are in place for a reason.

VSA (Value Stream Analysis)
Something to do with checking the results of the changes that have been made

Now, this is more interesting, there are SNCO's a plenty involved here - a chance to show their balls. But this also involves a lot of people having meetings and carrying clipboards.

My spy in the camp informs me that it took 20 people all of Monday morning to decide that:-

a) Engineering Wing's task was to provide serviceable aircraft, in the correct role, to the customer.
b) It was lunchtime


This, to me, seems to be the chance to highlight any mistakes that have been made.

But bring the frightening prospect of changing it all around again.

I think I'll put some leave in.

[Pontius Navigator]

I joined a really secret sqn that had just lost ALL its groundcrew and had one sgt left. OK, we were multi-skilled but we lost a lot of personal expertise - who could fix a radio or rewire a car etc.

When we went away we took one C/T and did all the AF/BF ourselves. Then we got to know 'our chief' and started to take 'our chief' on away trips. Other crews did the same.

Then the powers realised what was happening and stopped us taking 'our chief' as other chiefs were not getting the jollies. When we got really broke 'they' would send more hired help. Then we got 'our chief' AND 'our rigger'.

No substitute for 'our ground crew' and 'our aircraft' but what a difference it made at a very local level. And if Taff Skuse is around still I mean YOU <g>.

[phutbang]

STANDBYFORBROADCAST...blah...blah...

Brace your selfs but...after one of the aforementioned VSAs I here that she who must be obayed is starting to relent over certain moves of or sizes of teams:confused: Is this a sign of cracks in the paint work? :D could we go back to normal?....Oh silly me we dont revisit old ground (such as JTs and FLMs;)) ... so what would we go back to then?...assuming we are going back...:ok:

[lineslime]

The refomation of the old primary team would be a good starting point, I don't much fancy the prospect of another 30 day primary. Now what shape was the original wheel again?:hmm:

[flipster]

Guys,

It must be tough at Lyneham right now as I know you lost friends too - but hang on in there. Perhaps this is not the time to be arguing?

But if what is happening IS really wrong - make sure you stand your ground but back your feelings up with FACTS and FIGURES (that is all that 'management' comprehend - a fact of life).

However, if Flight Safety could be compromised - don't faff - go for the jugular with FSO and a Murphy. Also, I suspect you will find the Sqns are on your side - they have to fly the ac that you service and so have a pretty personal interest to know it is being done correctly.

Best of British

[Jobza Guddun]

I can't get over what I've read about the Eng set up at Lyneham. What has happened in the last 12-15 years in RAF aircraft engineering is little short of a disgrace, and it shows no sign of abating.

As a means of entry, we have gone from Apprentices/Direct Entrants/Mechanics, to Mechanic (Technician Stream) / Mechanic (Mechanic Stream), to SAC (Technician): forthcoming is the Aircraft Maintenance Mechanic. All this in 13 years. Now somebody is trying to destroy the way we have operated for decades (and found the hard way that it is probably the BEST way too). It will not stop at Lyneham either. Some myopic so-and-so is doing their darndest to get rid of squadron groundcrew and all that goes with that, and I fear that at a Norfolk unit the end is already in sight.

To my oppos at Lyneham, please make sure we get to hear more about how it's going down there, and use the system to highlight failings, as this will give those of us who will be the next victims of the morale and tradition killing senior Engineering officers, a fighting chance to make things work, or at least not let our fliers down too many times.

[Oberon 1]

What a sheltered life I’ve led. I only discovered the existence of PPRuNe a month or so ago and have been reading the various forums with interest and, in most cases, have found them humorous, instructive and enlightening. There does seem to be though, an awful lot of ill-informed conjecture on this particular thread and, having some knowledge on the why’s and wherefores of Lyneham’s Eng Wing reorganization, I may be able to throw a glimmer of light on the subject.

It all started with a techy down at MPA fitting a spinner incorrectly. Having done the job himself, he persuaded a junior to undersign him (wrong, I know, but I don’t know the pressures they were under at the time – unwilling to speculate). Later, engine started, prop turned, spinner thrown off dinking wing leading edge in the process. At the subsequent inquiry, less importance seemed to be placed on the fact that he had done the job incorrectly, what everyone latched onto was his statement that “the process of undersigning is common at Lyneham, it’s always been done like that” (the fact that the individual concerned was not stationed at Lyneham seemed to have been irrelevant!). This very public airing of Lyneham’s shortcomings prompted OC Eng to circulate a questionnaire to all members of Eng Wg asking for their comments and suggestions on a whole raft of subjects including perceived problems with engineering standards and practices, problems with tooling, problems with communication through the chain of command, etc. etc. The results were collated and a Working Group of Eng Wg management was formed, each being given one of these problem areas to sort out.

The end result was a series of VSA’s, RIE’s, End 2 End forums, and “lean” implementation up the ying yang, which would address the problems that the WORKFORCE had identified (see SPHL’s glossary of terms on page 8). In July 04, halfway through all this lot, came the news that as part of the SDR, the RAF would lose about 16% of its trained strength, almost 8000 personnel in real terms. The next bit is a little blurry round the edges, but someone stated (estimated?) that this reduction in personnel would account for almost 150 engineers from Lyneham; this was in addition to the 130 posts that were due to go under HIOS. This equated to a loss of about 60 personnel on 24/30 (Eng) Sqn and 90 on 47/70 (Eng) Sqn. You don’t need a calculator to come to the conclusion that, come the day of the revolution, the 2 Sqns which were barely viable with the manpower establishment they already had, could not absorb such a draconian cut in manpower and be able to perform their primary task.

So, coincident with the implementation of these various “initiatives” to improve the techy’s lot, a system had to be put in place that would be robust enough to be able to handle the loss of 150 or so engineers. This is what spawned the current Forward / Depth model that Lyneham are having such trouble with at the moment. The model wasn’t the idea of our lords and masters at High Wycombe, and neither was it that of OC Eng (who nevertheless signed up to it), the “initiative” came from within Eng Wg. Unfortunately, by the time that the SNCO’s were briefed on the new concept, it was written in stone and their opinions on the subject were never sought, their only task being to implement it. Even more unfortunately, the benefits of adopting this radical new system of operating was briefed to the PUS of S for Defence and the mandarins in Whitehall and also to a group of Officers in the US BEFORE the system was up and running. These actions, I would suggest, preclude a return to the old way of operating, as it would be political/career suicide. There was much scepticism (quite rightly) and well before the event, as far as I can gather, any questions posed by the guys at the coalface, were answered by the management in order to allay everyone’s fears.

Where it went wrong was on the day of its implementation. There was (and still is) confusion on how the model should operate. Who was supposed to be doing what? What is the chain of command? At what point do HLS hand the aircraft over to FLECS? Etc. etc. Ad nauseam. Luckily, the flying programme at that time of the year was quite light – the reason that the re-organization had been planned for that time – and it was perceived that any flaws in the system could be identified and rectified without too much grief. The problem was that each HLS shift had its own slant on how it should work and was consequently pulling in a different direction to the other 3. To the best of my knowledge, only one shift has tried to operate as the new system dictates and the others are doing what they can, however they can, to achieve the flying programme – see all the previous posts on professional pride - with the consequence that no-one can identify the points where it is all going pear-shaped as there are now several different ways in which people are trying to achieve the same end result.

Nightmare.

There are many posts on this thread from individuals venting their spleen at particular areas of the system that are failing, and I can wholeheartedly understand their concern as they are professional technicians who only want, at the end of the day, to do a good job, get the aircraft out on time every time and live a worry-free life. The fact that so many of these posts exist should be of great concern to those in positions of power (my spies tell me that there are individuals at 2 Gp who are very, very nervous about the way that things are shaping up at Lyneham). I am led to understand that finally, Lyneham engineering management has taken on board (to a degree) the fact that the system needs some serious manipulation in order for it to work and will therefore be having more VSA’s, RIE’s (here we go again) that will (hopefully) sort out all the problems, but this time, the SNCO’s are going to be the major players this time and fundamental in the planning of any further changes. To that end, I suggest that you all have a damn good think on how the system should operate and suggest that you post solutions from here on in and resist the temptation to present more instances of where the system is flawed. Why not send your ideas to the Station Change Team? Anonymously if need be, but if you want to be instrumental in tweaking the system, you have to make sure that your voice is heard, but be advised, a return to the old system will never be sanctioned.

Apologies for rambling on but hopefully this goes some way to filling the gaps in this thread and I hope that I have only presented the facts as opposed to my own emotive views on the subject.

My ideal:

1. All the flying Sqn’s have their own groundcrew. They would have to post people into Lyneham for that to work and that will certainly not happen.

2. Go back to 24/30 and 47/70 engineering. That will work fine until the manpower cuts start to bite and then Eng Wg would disappear up its own fundamental orifice.

3. Something radically different to what is currently in place.

Discuss.

Obe One

[Art Field]

Having also done a catch-up of several pages of this sorry saga one conclusion comes leaping out, a major failure of management to plan, brief and control the changes, regardless of the justification for them. It is obvious that those required to impliment the new procedures were not given time and maybe little guidance as to how to introduce them as is shown by the variety of methods between teams. Such confusion is a condemnation of management training in the RAF and perhaps points to a need for more care in deciding appointments in these manpower critical times. I recall an expert specialist engineer who had to get his SENGO tick but was sadly a total disaster when confronted with the day to day control of people, it is difficult to avoid the feeling of deja-vu.

[BEagle]

"...I recall an expert specialist engineer who had to get his SENGO tick but was sadly a total disaster when confronted with the day to day control of people"

I think I know who you mean!

;)

[SirPeterHardingsLovechild]

Management in Confidence

From fairly near the begginning of this mess, we discover that the changes were based on losing 150 engineers. But this information was 'Management in Confidence'

Note to the grown ups:-

We are not idiots. You give us a long brief with lots of wankwords that no-one can understand, followed by 'Any questions?'

The very first question - Are these changes being made because we are going to lose more people?'

Do you answer

a) Fair cop, we are going to lose people and this is our plan to cope with our primary task

(You have betrayed an 'Management in Confidence' instruction)

b) Denial followed by more wankwords

(You are telling a bare-faced lie, have betrayed your troops and have lost your credibility)

You chose b)

[sumps]

Obe One

Can I clarify

1. An irreversible change has been put in place by those who are upon high – due to those in the know having the foresight of mass manpower cuts.
2. These cuts will take the manning down to a point where by we will have just about enough manpower to cover the line side of things - but barely rectifications?
3. SDR and Contractors will take up every thing else.
4. We the over ruled have been handed the smoking gun with one round left in the chamber (pointing in the direction of our feet) and no chance of carrying out NSPs.
5. You require credible solutions

So will there be a reduction in the number of deployments/duties…etc or will this be taken on by some contractor? I can’t see anyone staying in the country for more than about six months if that is the case.

We are now facing a massive drawdown in the knowledge and experience not just manpower – what will happen if this in depth knowledge and practical ability is required in theatre? – I suggest we get pushed up the multi-skilling ladder pretty dam fast if that is the case and above the Fast Jet Techies (the internal workings of the J are a lot more advanced than that of the Harrier or Tornado)

The line looks after Approximately 50 aircraft with fewer people per shift than a fast jet squadron (that’s about 3-4 times more aircraft than a fast jet squadron) and we are reducing further - All those about to remain should be put through both Q-courses (as it was put to me…if you went to civie street then you would be expected to work 747-100s next to 747-400s)
Give the line the autonomy to Engineers (put the trade desks back in with line teams) keep the trade Knowledge.
Reduce the size of the planning teams (going from 2 - 20 can not be an efficiency).

Why not send your ideas to the Station Change Team?

Is this the new name for the lean-team? How do we go about this anonymously or not?

I was told that this LEAN thing was “unzippabel” does that mean it comes to pieces as well as it went together so we can take it to Brize or is it Un- Zippable as in it wouldn’t go together in the first place?

(The last para is humour the rest not so)

S

[Oberon 1]

Sumps

The changes that have been made are by no means irreversible, but going back to the old way of operating would only bring short respite. When the manpower cuts start to bite, as a result of the manpower drawdown, it would become increasingly more difficult to function, so a way has to be found that can cope with the future losses.

HLS has, I assume, a much larger shift of techy’s than 47/70 or 24/30 had before. The difference is that half are J qualified and half are K qualified. As far as I can see, the only way that Lyneham will be able to work in the future is by implementing a cross-platform work ethos. You don’t need a trade Q to work on an aircraft, but it would be advisable to have a supervisor that is qualified. Et voila! A solution; any tradesman can work on any aircraft type providing at least one of them is qualified on type. (Someway down the road, I assume that the schools will be offering a joint K/J Q course, but knowing that the speed that the cogs turn in the RAF, is inversely proportional to the speed that the goalposts move, I doubt I will see it in my lifetime). I believe most of our civilian brethren in the aviation world are not restricted to type, so this modus operandi is not too radical a step, I would suggest. This is just one way that Lyneham may consider to be the way ahead but there may be other ways that may be blindingly obvious to you but not yet contemplated by the management. Answers on a postcard……..

I assume your comment on the reduction of deployments and duties was made with tongue firmly in cheek. The guarding commitment will undoubtedly remain the same so duties will come round more often. Unless there is a massive shift in the way that the Government sees as the role of our Armed Forces, we will continue to be on standby to assume any role they see fit, fire fighters, cattle slaughterers etc. Can’t really see deployments decreasing either, so I think you may be right in saying that the length of time that you will spend at home will decrease. That said, when I was on FJ’s, we considered ourselves fortunate if we spent 6 months at home, and I’m sure some of our Tonka and Chopper brethren will agree with that. Anyway, my spies tell me that personnel are VOLUNTEERING to do a stint on guard rather than endure the mad house that HLS has become. Is that true??????

Multi-skilling; that’s not going to be the panacea that cures Lyneham’s problems either – 100 or so places between now and April 05. It’ll help, but not a lot.

It has yet to be explained to anybody’s satisfaction, let alone mine, how under the new system we could possibly unzip the J’s from the K’s and send them off to Brize. Take 150 blokes out of the equation and it becomes impossible as far as I can see. UNLESS, we imagine that the 25 aircraft at Brize are a detachment, so Lyneham then only has to send a handful of blokes and a couple of GE’s across to keep them running.

Hmmmmmm :hmm:

Obe One

Doh - finger trouble. Read April 06 in para 4

[Stonecutter]

Oberon 1, I couldn't let this pass; you mentioned:

It all started with a techy down at MPA fitting a spinner incorrectly. Having done the job himself, he persuaded a junior to undersign him (wrong, I know, but I don’t know the pressures they were under at the time – unwilling to speculate).
I'm sorry, but I've been maintaining military aircraft for approx 24 yrs, and whatever the pressure, there is NEVER any excuse to get a job 'Undersigned'. That is why we are allowed to self-supervise. By getting a job 'undersigned' you are clearly putting the Ac and crew at risk.
I'm not being flippant or naive, but the rules are there for good reason, IF there was a culture of this at Lyneham:
At the subsequent inquiry, less importance seemed to be placed on the fact that he had done the job incorrectly, what everyone latched onto was his statement that “the process of undersigning is common at Lyneham, it’s always been done like that”.
then your later use of the words:
they are professional technicians who only want, at the end of the day, to do a good job
sounds a bit suspect to me.
SC

[Oberon 1]

SC,
I wholeheartedly agree with you, there is NEVER any excuse to get a job undersigned. The point I was trying to make was that the chap involved in the spinner incident WAS NOT Lyneham based. So there is this guy who blithely undertakes an unfamiliar task on a relatively unfamiliar aircraft (I assume he attended a Q Course at Lyneham before his det) and asks a junior to undersign. Was this philosophy taught him at his PARENT Unit?

As he was not Lyneham based, how was he in a position to state that the process of undersigning was common practice there?

To the best of my knowledge, the process of undersigning IS NOT AND NEVER HAS BEEN practised at Lyneham but his comments were the catalyst for the changes that have been implemented there.

I have spent some time at Lyneham in my career and know the calibre of their technicians is of the highest order and I stand by my statement that “they are professional technicians who only want, at the end of the day, to do a good job”

Apologies if my earlier post was somewhat vague in this area.

Obe One

[phutbang]

This is what the electronic highway has to offer…


The LeanTeam (http://www.simpler.com/case-studies/PremiershipLean.html)

These are the people implementing this system – Some observations are…

1, There’s that phrase “poor communication” again.

2, Tools…. Tools…. Tools…? What about the supply of components? Not the stacker system but the attributing of cash to spares

3, “Lyneham does not have an appointed ‘Change Officer’. It’s the line management responsibility to roll out lean and the change teams and line personnel are empowered to identify innovative solutions and make change happen” As per other posts: A Disclaimer for the implementers and the smoking gun the hands of the innocent. AND a statement that has never been banded about either!

4, If OC 24 meant these words how come the aircrew are setting up a thread like this?

5, With OC Eng’s comments …the rest of the RAF take note: ITS OBVIOUSLY COMING TO AN AIR BASE NEAR YOU!

PS…”if you want to know more” then you know who to talk to!!! ;)


More Simpler (http://www.simpler.com/case-studies/LeaningFatAlbert.html)

This above document makes us look V’ incompetent.

However there may have been a reduction of 2550 moves to carry out a minor/minor * but there is generally an increase in the time to get the aircraft through the process due to the whole process being AF lead. The first of the lean minor/minor* had Approx 20 AF techies per day thus this set the manpower president equation. E.g. Say it takes 40 days to go through a minor and during this servicing there will be an average of 15 AF Techies. That’s a reduction of ¼ of the man power = 10 days, then 5 day are removed for the lean principles. Hence the final solution is thus:

40(days) – 5 (lean days) = 35, + 10(manpower reduction days) = 45 days? (Total)

Now that’s lean for you! And that will be why you have 20 planers.

Talk Time (http://www.iqpc.co.uk/binary-data/IQPC_CONFEVENT/pdf_file/6438.pdf)

This is a conference I would like be a fly on the wall at…

1, What will the Wing Co (Depth Support) have to say? @ 15:50

2, Why not tell us first?

3, Does the audience know of the concern e.g. this thread?

Discounted rates anyone? (See end).

Our Press (http://www.raf.mod.uk/news/news_0501_03.html)

As said reduction…but who takes over MAe, BAE, RAF?…Place your bets, pick an acronym!

My thoughts. Without knowing the final manpower figure and the expected task ahead how can you change the system to fit...Knowledge is power and doesn’t it say TEAM LYNEHAM somewhere?

[glum]

The Spinner incident:

The guy is Lyneham based, and Lyneham trained.

Over/Undersigning without seeing the job, is practiced, and that's not the worst of it.

In my short time on the line, I was so horrified with just the paperwork, and the management's complete disinterest when I did point out anomalies, I left asap.

I've never seen such a bunch of un-proffesional engineers, and though there were notable exceptions, it seemed that most of the senior guys had been on Hercs since time began, and were so entrenched in the woodwork and their use of 'Lynehamisms'.

Personal standards were notably absent, with the general attitude was that 'They're freighters, and freight doesn't give a toss what you look like'.

Sorry to tell the truth, but if you believe otherwise, you're dreaming...

[lineslime]

Glum

I consider myself to be one of the exceptions. To this end I always do the job correctly according to the AP/Tech Order, no matter how long it takes, and actively encourage this. I have also been at Lyneham for longer than I care to mention and avoid the Lynehamisms, wherever possible. There are more like me about, we aren't that hard to find you just have to look.:ok:

[phutbang]

May I echo the sentiments of Limeslime – Glum cheer up bloke I know the JAP & other APs aren’t a thrilling read but stick with it! And tell the other doubting Thomas’s to :mad: :mad: off :ok:

There are loads of us (who do at least) try to get it right!

[pr00ne]

Am I right in thinking that Lyneham now has a Wing Commander OC Eng AND a Wing Commander OC Depth Support?

How lean is that?

[Jobza Guddun]

Most units have that set-up now pr00ne, or soon will have.

Forward and Depth I believe the terminology is.

[500days2do]

Yes a perfect solution in troubled times...yet another waste of space to add to the wage bill.Glad we are not a civvy outfit...would have gone bust years ago.At least the v expensive high powered help will leave with lots of experience in what 'not' to do.

Vote with your feet....

[sumps]

Am I right in thinking that Lyneham now has a Wing Commander OC Eng AND a Wing Commander OC Depth Support?

Yes..an it works something like this…
The way this will (purportedly) work will be front Line (STC) in C130 case HLS/FLECS. When an aircraft goes to Scheduled servicing/long term Maintenance it will go to Depth Support (by my understanding - Logs Wing). This will more than lightly be a civilian contractor for LYN = MAe, And probably BoWS for the majority of the rest of the fleets.
:suspect: :suspect: :suspect: :suspect: :suspect: :suspect:

[mystic_meg]

....Dyslexia rules, K.O. :{

[pr00ne]

sumps,

FLECS?

[1553]

FLECS = Trade desks working out of another hangar. Week of days week of nights (not 24/7) fixing long term faults and assisting HLS to meet the program.

[sumps]

Thanks 1555, I have been away Learning to spell - as septic peg pointed out! (Only Joking).

By the way pr00ne, that seams like a jurno' question are you digging?

[pr00ne]

sumps,

Not at all, just never heard of a thing called FLECS when I was in, that's all.
In my day it was a fairly straight forward case of first line on the Squadron led by a Sqn Ldr SENGO and 2 JO JENGO's, second line at Eng Wing level led by a Wg Cdr OC Eng and 2 x Sqn Ldr OC ME(A)S and ME(G)S.
After that it was an MU for third line.

[Where R We?]

Amazing what you find when looking for something else.

Hercules Integrated Operational Support (HIOS) aka Partnered Support from Lockheed Martin (http://www.lockheedmartin.com/data/assets/8176.pdf)

This might be of interest to those in the engineering fraternity at Lyneham

WRW

[L1A2 discharged]

a triumph of presentation skills over content. :(

(edited for chair / keyboard interface problems)

[phutbang]

All this and the program is still not being met! (not enough manpower to carry out the tasks!)...so when will it change? when Simpler give the report to OC Eng on the VSA...apparently this has been done...so stand by for change??!?

[HOODED]

How are they going to change? You just said there's not enough manpower to carry out the tasks. This at a time when we are about to cull the engineering manpower still further. This isn't just happening at Lyneham its RAF wide.

[Jobza Guddun]

Maybe it's about time we changed the way we do business at home.

Why don't we work weekends and have the rest of the week off? Lower tasking - easier to achieve.

And at least the statistics would look better, non?













:}

[LunchMonitor]

Well now I understand, the new system at lyneham is sposed to be sh1te so LH can come in and rescue it!
I do hope no-one at the upper echelons of Lyneham engineering gets a job offer from Lockheed if they get awarded this contract.

[lineslime]

Jobza

Nice idea but slightly flawed. Those responsible for tasking would allocate the most knackered frames, meaning we have to work extra hard during the week to generate them thus losing the week off. Besides, local flying at the weekend would never catch on!
Oh hang on a minute, I think it's all the rage at the mo. Still a day out of uniform is a day wasted.:\ :\

[insty66]

If it's any consolation to you all it's not just Lyneham.
I have heard that there are absolutley no plans for the Tonka Sqn Engineering elements to merge at El Adem with grass!

That'll be happening then:ugh:
:E :E

[spankedcat]

It has been a few weeks since my last confession and I can gladly confirm that the new system is indeed Garbage.

On our shift we do intergrate the Kand J guys with good results, and some are getting cross trained for servicings on different types.

Oberon 1. you were correct in suggesting that the SNCO's were not involved at all in the planning, and yes all of our questions were answered by lies. EG:-
Q. "surely all this merging is just an excuse for manpower cuts"
A. " No, the manpower across the whole of eng wing will not be affected"
Yeah, thanks for that!!!!!

Also for OB1, as a member of Eng wing I cannot recall filling in a cencus and replying that I wanted to adopt a new system to be introduced that totally wrecked any kind of morale or genuine good sprit that we all had. All I wanted is decent deployable tool kits, new 30 ton air operated jacks, and for the programme to reflect what the aircrew actually wanted the A/C to be roled to!!!

As far as the lean team go, in order to improve the working environment you might have to spend a bit, or a lot of, money and this quite clearly is not the case. 'You have to speculate to accumulate'!!!!

As for changes, any change that can be implemented quickly and is for the better is a lot better than the present situation, where we all feel like pikeys, living in a sort of limbo in a makeshift home.

If there is anyone out there who is watching and has any kind of power, any chance that you can use some of it?????

I am off to the sandy place for another 8 weeks inside 12 months and frankly cannot wait to get away from Lyneham, such is our despair at the present moment.

Any spelling mistakes are all my own doing as I have fingers like pigs t@ts.

TA SC

[PerArdua]

Feel sorry for you guys caught in the middle. I was on A line during Gulf War 1 and remember the place as full of morale and characters. Am now caught up in the Lean way with Tonka and that is killing the bases and the IPT. Hope someone in an ivory tower is reading these posts and can do something before the RAF is destroyed.

I know we always do our best but I am just looking for the exit point now. Sympathy to you all at Lyneham.

[HOODED]

All a bit late now. It has been crumbling for years, lean is just one of many initatives. Self supervision, multi skilling, rapid improvement events etc etc. It has led to less worker bees doing more and more with no breaks. The engineers are initative fatigued and most of the good ones have either applied for redundancy or left allready. Sad thing is the good ones won't get redundancy as they will get a nice blue "You're too valuable" letter. Just like the last time the majority of these will then vote with their feet anyway. This will then leave the RAF with less than the not enough anyway figure we were supposed to be going to. Still their airships will still get their fast jet jollies as there will still be enough guys to get one jet ready at a weeks notice. :(

[Desert Bat]

Centralised engineering is clearly not the flavour of the month with the PPRUNE community, but in my opinion it does have one distinct advantage. I have experienced the JEngO-constantly-being-roasted-by-the-Sqn-Boss-for-not-meeting-the-task scenario, and quickly realised the Boss had little or no interest in or understanding of the day to day engineering task, and the problems and difficulties inherent. To a nervous 22 year old Fg Off JEngO, the potentially irresistable temptation after a couple of months of this is to allow aircraft to fly as long as it still has 2 wings visibly attached, in the knowledge that they "probably" won't fall off.

With centralised engineering, the JEngO, in theory, is only subject to anger from his SEngO, who, again in theory, will understand what the JEngOs are faced with. This way, the JEngO only gets the heavy pressure when he is being lazy/incompetent, not when it's just being one of those days that all engineers will recognise.

Without going into much detail, a while ago there was a textbook example of a serious aircraft incident where groundcrew being under pressure was a significant factor, although this time not from the Sqn Boss. (blow-down bottle - anyone recognise it - read the report).

The trouble it seems at Lyneham is no-one at the top of Eng Wg can give a stuff about the task, and no-one outside Eng Wg can give a stuff about engineering (I'm told the Stn Cdr is pretty conspicuous by his absence within this fiasco). The only message getting through to STC/DLO is the official OC Eng Wg "It's working a treat" message, which going by some of what is shown on these pages may not be the case. Mind you, the programme has been pretty light of late, but it looks like you're meeting it guys.

I don't expect you to commit suicide by posting here, but I would be fascinated to hear what Lyneham's SEngOs, JEngOs, WOs and FSs have to say about all this.

The necessity for general tightening of belts within defence logistics certainly did not arise from OC Eng at Lyneham nor indeed any other Stn. Each Eng organisation throughout the RAF has been told what to expect and left to deal with it in the best way they see fit. In the run-up to recent defence cuts, it was interesting to note there were no loud voices trying to maintain the level of manpower RAF engineering requires to operate effectively and efficiently.

A number of people have been accused of implementing various schemes "only to get them promoted". I'm sure they would argue that they ARE trying to get promoted, but they are working toward promotion by doing what is right and implementing schemes that will contribute to effectiveness and so on.

More and more in recent times senior engineering Officers have found that no recognition is awarded for doing a fantastic job of running whatever Sqn/Wg/IPT you are in charge of. Recognition (often in the form of promotion) comes from saving a substantial amount of money (often with little regard to the wider effect), or implementing a really exciting re-organisation (the more radical the better) and shouting about it to the world.

Interestingly, I believe Lyneham's OC Eng Wg was in Las Vegas the day her scheme started, telling the USAF how well her scheme had been working. Also, did anyone spot the article "Lyneham Rolls Out Lean Machine" in RAF News in November? Apparently this scheme was working a treat well in advance of its 6 December start date.

It seems the Lyneham re-organisation was conducted by the few and ignored the many. Old fashioned leadership and management are becoming more scarce in the culture of engineering in today's RAF, and indeed MoD as a whole.

Has OC Eng Wg really never visited her troops out in Basra??!!?

[exEngO]

DesertBat - I'd agree that centralised Engineering per se is far from a generically 'bad' thing. (I know one JEngO who threw away his career by falling foul of direct Fg Sqn pressure in a FJ Sqn setup, and I also know a few very poor Engineers who were able to hide poor management and lack of commitment to the task behind the remoteness lent by a centralised Eng entity. ) What I am hearing though is that the current implementation is flawed in both notion and implementation.

Ref your Q ref OC Eng Wg : To those who served around and about earlier in that officer's career this would be no surprise at all.

[Jobza Guddun]

Desert Bat,

You make some valid and agreeable points there, but I'd like to take issue with the beginning of your post. You infer, probably not intentionally, that the main thing that matters for a JEngO is keeping the sqn boss happy- is that at the expense of sensible and correct engineering decisions? (We all know that this happens). I would have thought the priority is to see the task is carried out as efficiently as possible given the available resources without compromising standards or safety?

Aircrew as a breed AREN'T bothered about the difficulties we face, why should they be? Harsh but fair. All that matters to them is that they have enough aircraft to do their thing with; how much pain we've gone through to achieve that is not their problem, it's OURS. Harsh but fair. We don't care that they can't fly due to bad weather, do we?

I can imagine how a young JEngO would feel in the situation you describe, but that I'm afraid goes with the joy of being the officer. You get good bosses, you get bad ones - you either roll with it or roll over. The best EngO's just do what's right, and let the career take care of itself. I do wonder though, in your example, where was the SEngO? Why did they leave you to face the music alone?

(We might know each other, I can almost imagine the two people in question!)

There is nothing I have learned that convinces me that there is any other way forward (at least in the FJ/RW worlds which I have experienced) than with squadron groundcrew, but unfortunately the benefits as I see them are not quantifiable to some zealous beancounter with little or no squadron experience. What I DO know is the situation down there at Lyneham is not acceptable, and I fear for the safety of our aircrew should it arrive in the FJ world because that is NO way to do business.

"it was interesting to note there were no loud voices trying to maintain the level of manpower RAF engineering requires to operate effectively and efficiently."

Absolutely spot on, squire. You might add "safely" to that too.

[insty66]

JG

Just about says it all I reckon.:ok:

[Desert Bat]

Believe it or not, I think we sing exactly the same tune. My comments were erring on the "devil's advocate" side, but I stand by them all the same.

You correctly remark that a FJ SEngO should protect his JEngOs to a reasonable extent. Equally, the SEngOs and OC Eng Wg at Lyneham should have their sights set firmly on providing aircraft to meet the flying programme (is this currently the case?). They should give the JEngO the motivation and guidance to do the job, and instill the sense of duty, urgency and importance that perhaps is lost at centralised units.

Unfortunately at Lyneham it appears the command chain from JEngO downwards is subject to the "long screwdriver" from OC Eng Wg, which may be compared to the hypothetical FJ JEngO not being protected from unreasonable pressure from the Sqn Boss. The role of the SEngO is pivotal in either case.

Even with the best intentions, a JEngO straight from the University-IOT-EOT sausage factory is not always going to be able to handle himself in the way that may be expected by those with more experience. Does OC Eng Wg at Lyneham take her JEngOs seriously? Where does she get her feel for what is happening on the "shop floor"? Are the Junior Officers in Lyneham Eng Wg employed as JEngOs, or are they seen as staffwork dogsbodies, or YTS trainees? These are the OC Engs of the future being developed!

My comments regarding the "long screwdriver" notwithstanding, the Stn Cdr is ultimately responsible for what his Wg Cdrs are up to (another benefit of centralised engineering?) , and will step in if the situation becomes too serious.

Lyneham has a long standing commitment to providing AT in the Gulf, a long way from senior Eng Wg management. Would anyone care to venture an opinion how the Eng detachment is managed in comparison to Lyneham Eng Wg as a whole?

We are running out of time before everyone simply stops caring.

[pr00ne]

Not wishing to divert this thread in anyway shape or form, but there is a historical aspect to all this, one I fear that the RAF may well be missing with its current focus on “Lean” “Rapid Improvement Events” and contractorisation.

The V-Force went centralised servicing in a very big way in around 1963, that was at a time when the V-force WAS the Air Force so there is no way it would have been some career enhancing push from someone at Group or Command level as I like to think that it was a rather different RAF then.
Now this was a change from traditional squadron groundcrew to huge centralised servicing organisations, yet, in about 1972 or thereabouts, it all reverted back to the old traditional Squadron allocation of aircraft and their own groundcrew, WHY?
Any of the old V-force types on here who post on a regular basis know?

My arrival on the frontline coincided with the Phantom, the only front line type I ever flew, when I arrived the squadrons in both 38 Group and RAFG were of what I would call the ‘traditional’ type with their own aircraft and groundcrew, yet at Coningsby there was still a whiff of controversy in the air as 38 Group, then a part of Transport Command don’t forget, where there IS a tradition of centralised servicing, had been planning to run the Coningsby wing on a centralised service basis with a pool of aircraft owned by Eng Wing, no squadron markings and no squadron groundcrew. I have to say this passed me by completely as I was rather focussed on getting to grips with flying the beast, but someone somewhere changed someones mind and pretty rapidly. This was at a time when one of the Coningsby squadrons was to have been on rotation to the Middle East yet I never heard (or cared at the time I have to admit) why this decision was reversed.
Anyone involved at the time still around?

Is the RAF in danger of really losing the lessons of history, again…………………

[lineslime]

DB
I think the Lyneham Eng Det is managed very competently in comparison to Eng wing at home (going by the ones I have been involved with).

Jobza
We do care if the aeroplne drivers don't get to go driving due to bad weather. More to the point when we have just changed the role from full roller (with boards) to full para, even when the met forcast for the following day does not lend itself to the ejection of silk retarded meat bombs.

pr00ne
Absolutly. It may take three or more changes before somebody realises that it just ain't right, but then again...............

[Jobza Guddun]

Lineslime,

Point taken.:ok:

[lineslime]

Jobza
It isn't the drivers fault when these things happen, as we all know they pitch up waiting to go all keen and eager (just like the see off crew), it's the planners and those responsible for tasking.

[phutbang]

Any one know the result of the last RIE? how big a change is it or is it a big change?

[KPax]

Is this a standard day in Wiltshire or has Centralisation finally bit. ie no 'J' frames and very little else.

[lineslime]

Don't know about centralisation having bit, but it sure bites.
Trade desks are going to reappear, in the loosest sense, in the form of combined J/K rigger/sootie desk & J/K fairy/leckie desk. It's a start I suppose.
What is going to happen when the numbers of FLMs, oops I mean AMMs, is sufficient? Are the J/Ts, SAC(T) Q Ops, etc currently on HLS going to end up on FLECS? If so will FLECS become split into 4 shifts with 24hr operating? Or will Eng Wing just disappear up it's own arse?

[Jobza Guddun]

LS,

So is the wheel being reinvented at Lyneham already, LS? I hope the silly sod responsible for the mess there pays for it.

Our SACs have been told that many of them will be booted off the sqn to make room for the new AMMs-the ones who haven't gained Q-OPS will be the first to go. Begs the question, where are these people going to? Can't be 2nd Line, that's going civvy.....

[lineslime]

Jobza
We are currently on wheel AL3. As for the SACs they will either be shafted in a style not yet seen, sent to work in a shed somewhere or farmed off to somewhere practicing centralised maint. The silly sod responsible will no doubt be promoted and given a pat on the back for such a jolly spiffing idea, if I had my way they would be left to answer to those affected.

Nasty rumor now of proposed changes to the shifts. Does anyone really think that 4 days, 4 off, 4 nights, 4 off is a good idea? If this does happen then I suppose that all beer calls will have to be held on the 3rd day.

[monkeybumhead]

The internal dream sheets have been released thanks to the latest RIE. The options are to work on HLS as a professional tyre kicker, doing 4 days, 4 off, 4 nights, 4 off. Work on FLECS which will consist of 2 shifts working shifts of 4 on & 4 off consisting of days & nights (how this will work with 2 shifts is beyond me) or a heavy rects team working normal days (this bit sounds familiar) on rects that benifit from continuity.
Whoever came up with the new proposed shift for HLS (4d, 4o, 4n, 4o) obviously hasn't listened to public oppinion as many are against it, guess it was someone who wears a light blue shirt an works Mon-Thur 8-5, Fri 8-3ish with weekends and public holidays off. I don't suppose the days of 3,3,6 will ever return, but then again if you give it another 5 years who knows?
To add to this successful operation morale defeat, the traps in J3 have been cleaned of all poetry because the cleaner hasn't got a sense of humor.
:\ :\ :\ :\ :\ :\ :\ :\ :\ :(

[spankedcat]

DB.
To answer the question 'has OC eng ever been to Basrah', Errrr NO!
In fact no management above Flt Lt has ever been down to see how things work here, on the J side of life anyway. The other Dets in this part of the world have a minimum of the Sqn WO to fend of interfering busy bodys that this place tends to generate, but not us.

On a lighter note, talking to Aussie J engineers yesterday, they cannot believe that we have gone back to a single line running twin fleet ops after they tried it and then canned it because of the flight safety implications. Oh well.....

As far as lean goes, there have been so far in industry 6 or 7 variants of this system and every time the 'inventors' of the system try it in an engineering environment it fails, so they go away and call it something else. Lean works well in a manufacturing environment where processes can be removed saving time and money(manpower), but in an engineering environment where the work is flexible and non-routine it cannot be adapted as it removes the flexibility and skill base from that environment.........sound familiar!!!!!!

[KPax]

Talking of shift cycles, why not try the new shift cycle in ATC at LYE. 2 mornings, 2 afternoons, 2 nights 4 off. This means if you start the cycle on a monday you work part of the next 7 weekends. It is called WTR and is based on no shift being allowed to be longer than 8 hours. You have been warned, you will be next.

[monkeybumhead]

KP
Can that pattern work with 4 shifts? If not then I don't think it will get implemented on the line, but then again centralised maint has been tried elsewhere and failed so I guess you could be right. I wait with baited breath.
On another point, is the leave policy for this shift pattern day for a day (unlike the 6 for 4 on HLS)?:hmm:

[Jobza Guddun]

Wonder how many techies applied for redundancy at Lyneham....

Can we nominate people for it, too? :}

[SirPeterHardingsLovechild]

1. Quite a lot


2. Er...yes you could.

The redundancy application is confidential.

So you could therefore apply on someone else's behalf. Even if your victim found out in time, the first he would know about it would be when he got a confidential letter confirming receipt of his application! Unless you intercept his mail.

Maybe its already been done and someone is going to get a shock!

I thought of this many months ago, but it is a tadge beyond a jolly prank.

[monkeybumhead]

Any ideas what the next big change is going to be? So far I am of the understanding that those who stay on HLS will be doing the flight servicings, role changes and minor rects and FLECS will be doing the rest.
Answers on a postcard please.

[lineslime]

Just seen the list regarding who is going where and doing what after the next change. Staying on HLS and not happy at all, the only saving grace is that the shifts are staying as they are (2,2,4).

[Otis Spunkmeyer]

I hear that she is no longer OC Eng Wing!

Has the Turkey voted for Christmas?

[glum]

Isn't that just because she got promoted though? that was the last rumour I head...

[lineslime]

I pitty the poor sod who has to sort out the mess she is leaving behind. Who knows they might decide to change things to, lets say, A line, B line, primary team & heavy rects. But then again we haven't operated from B site yet so watch this space.

[KPax]

I believe the AFBLT got the impression that people were not happy with this 'wonderful' idea, in fact they looked a bit shellshocked by the end of the brief.

[SirPeterHardingsLovechild]

She is no longer OC Eng Wing. Engineering Wing ceased to exist two weeks ago.

She is, however OC Forward Support Wing.

...and Forward Suppport Wing is not to be abbreiviated to FSW because whoever's idea it was has just realised...that they are

F@cking Stupid...w...w...w...Whatever

Our cousins in the Army may like to brief us on what Forward Support really means!

Or perhaps the Station Rugby team could advise.

And you retired/retarded EngO ppruners may have an opinion.


C'mon Tranche 2

And will you dissolusioned Tranche 2 non-qualifiers stop PVR'ing as its reducing my chances.

Edited to add: If that OC FSW was an April Fool joke, then I have fallen hook, line and sinker!

[monkeybumhead]

Lost interest in the goings at the mo as I am buggering of to colder climes, where I hope organisation reigns supreme. Just don't know what I am going to come back to.

[k1rb5]

Surely a 3-5-2 formation utilising the wing-back theory would be best http://www.smilies-world.de/smilies/smilies_Picture/party_smilies/19.gif

[SirPeterHardingsLovechild]

Nice username k1rb5

They'll never work that one out.

Registered Feb 2005. Penetrated the next day. :eek:

[k1rb5]

Now you're just showing off in front of your cyber-mateshttp://www.smilies-world.de/smilies/smilies_Picture/boese_smilies/19.gif

[lineslime]

Now now ladies, keep it civil.
:ok: :p

[k1rb5]

We'll kiss and make up over a http://www.smilies-world.de/smilies/smilies_Picture/party_smilies/19.gif

[lineslime]

Nice to see.

The change from Eng wing to Forward Support Wing makes us sound like HMs finest plumpers of duvets now. Does that mean we now no longer indulge in the task of engineering?

[KPax]

Things appear to be getting pretty deparate frame wise at Lyneham, any signs that the next set of changes are going to improve things, or is it too late.

[The Helpful Stacker]

The change from Eng wing to Forward Support Wing makes us sound like HMs finest plumpers of duvets now. Does that mean we now no longer indulge in the task of engineering?

Errr no, you support the a/c. I don't think that S&M wing will be too happy to be lumped in with a load of moaning and bitching techies either.

Anyway, you'd need to be a civvy to 'plump duvets', service personnel are the ones you go to when you need a few more screws from tech store to build that shed at home.:p

[lineslime]

Been away from Lyneham for a couple of weeks now and am glad I have missed the outcome of RIE2. Has it messed things up too much or is everyone coping well? I suppose I will find out soon when I return to chaos central.
Apologies to our those who are involved with S&M, is there really a need to indulge in sordid practices, but we moaning and bitching techies aern't that bad really. Would you really object to being lumped in with us, it could be worse you could be lumped in with some other less wonderfull trade.

p.s. Any news on those screws as my shed is looking a bit sorry at the mo..............

[Desert Bat]

Heh heh

Just heard what the PMC at Lyneham had to say about all this at the Dining-in on 13 May.

Well said, that man! (most of it, anyway)

[exleckie]

Go on then, tell us all more, or at least a few pointers.:E


Exleckie

[KPax]

Was it something to do with 'what genius decided to send so many K's to Cambridge at the same time'. Then again there may have been more

[phutbang]

...or how about;

...when they come back from Cambridge where has all the manpower gone?

...maybe...something to do with the continuing lack of spares?

...or may be that old fave'...who over tasked the fleet by retasking the aircraft that have not arrived back yet?

...I know...what silly @rse carelessly bent the airframe thus reducing our capability?

how about...?

...Go on then DB, do tell after all it is a rumor network...and there is no I in team!

[SirPeterHardingsLovechild]

Salisbury Cathedral

XV179 Memorial Service

OC Eng Wing (Forward Support Wing) : -

'I am the way, the truth and the life...'

The Congregation : -

'We know that, now get on with the bible reading!'



:ok:

[Purr Harder]

Hmmmmmmmm six RIEs (Rapid Improvements Events) in one week, each taking up 7 people. Should they just be called events as they are not rapid, as they take all week and they do not improve ANYTHING.

Perhap we should have an RIE on the RIEs?

[phutbang]

I think that the Japaniese have taken this LEAN thing too far!!!

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/phutbang/defencecuts.jpg

Is this the size of things to come at Lyneham ? :uhoh: :confused: :ugh:

[1553]

The latest round of RIE's are over. Wonder what,s going to happen now ?

[fatter albert]

I regret to inform the PPRUNE community of some devastating news.

RAF Lyneham's OC Eng Wg (or FSW or whatever, as if I cared), exclusively responsible for what you read in this post, has been awarded an OBE for her efforts.

I've had enough. The RAF can go and f%ck itself.

[SirPeterHardingsLovechild]

fatter albert

Someone has beaten you to it.

Today, a well respected Chf Tech (if a little short, fat & Welsh) who has got redundancy in Tranche 1 was offered promotion to Flt Sgt if he agreed to stay in. This was by signal from PMA.

He replied by signal, and it was a two fingered one.

[fatter albert]

SPHL

He was my Chief when I first arrived at Lyneham and deserved the promotion more than anyone I have ever met (except for yourself obviously). Here we have a superb Chief with decades of dedicated service in the RAF who suddenly feels he wants no further part of engineering in the RAF.

You know as well as I do, he's not even in a minority.

The Chief deserves hearty congratulations anyway, and very best wishes for the future.

[Mini G]

Marvellous news about the OBE!

What's that for then?

Single handedly trying to reduce the RAF to 41,000?

At least it answers the questions to why the toys were out of the cot the other night?

On another note to this, since when did engineers have to justify engineering decisions to Air Ops?

[opso]

On another note to this, since when did engineers have to justify engineering decisions to Air Ops? Ever since engineering decisions meant that aircraft weren't ready for sorties. Which would make it since at least 1918...

[insty66]

I think mini G phrased the point poorly.
Of course Engineering decisions should be held to account............. but pressure should never be brought to bear where someone is cornered into declaring u/s aircraft fit/ready to go. It gets dangerous.
Lets face it if you don't trust your groundcrew to say the jet is u/s why on earth should you trust us when we say it is s?:=

[DP Harvey]

Lets not get into a pi$$ing contest over trust and judgement.

The business of placing an aircraft U/S is very much a matter of team work. There should be no objection to anyone rasing a work order on a jet. The important point to be addressed by the technicians, the ops staff and the aircrew is whether or not that particular work order prevents the jet from flying. We have the means to defer faults. Perhaps the amount of paperwork associated with a deferrment tends to make it difficult to implement. A system might be unserviceable (ie not available for use), but the aircraft can still be serviceable.

[insty66]

DPThe business of placing an aircraft U/S is very much a matter of team work. There should be no objection to anyone rasing a work order on a jet.
A bit self contradictory I think!

My post wasn't about trust , though I can see why anyone may have thought so. Especially my last sentence which was tounge firmly in cheek.
It was about when pressure is brought to bear on people to "sign it up" or variations on that theme. That's when it becomes dangerous, it is unfortunatly becoming more and more commonplace and if the engineering staff at Lyneham are subject to that kind of pressure we should all be concerned.

The rest of your post I agree with totally, indeed as my handle might suggest I have a very strong working relationship with the form F703 :ok:

[Mini G]

Opso,

Thank you for being the only one to grasp the thread of my last sentence.

[insty66]

miniG

Read it, re-read it, then re-re-read it. Don't get it:\

I have obviously missed something so please share:ok:

[C130 Techie]

If you provide sufficient manpower and resources to provide a realistic chance of achieving the task then most of the problems of pressure, trust and aircraft limitions will go away. OK there will always be situations when problems can't be fixed before the next flight but this should be the exception rather that the norm.

The current situation at Lyneham appears to be one of chaos. Many people don't know who they work for or what they are expected to achieve. The reorganisation appears to have been poorly thought out and implemented, the important people (those involved at thhe workface) were not consulted and it has now become a face saving exercise. The RAF is not a democracy but common sense must prevail. Good leadership involves getting the troops on your side from the start

The present situation = Poor morale, unnecessary pressure, lack of direction = POTENTIAL FLIGHT SAFETY NIGHTMARE

[Desert Bat]

It's obviously all going swimmingly if it justified the award of an OBE.

[Controversial Tim]

So, OBE eh? Well done ma'am, it'll make you proud every time you look at it to remember how you earned it.

Any truth to the other rumour doing the rounds - that she's not being posted until she's sorted out the mess she's created? (I don't know whether to be happy or pi$$ed if it's true though)

[Desert Bat]

No, you're rid of her in August, which is when she was due out from the beginning. Don't know where she's going, as long as it's not here I don't care. That said, we're being farmed out to Stations anyway, which fortunately will be the last place you'll find her now she's got her OC Eng tick.

I have just found out who was responsible for the disgraceful OBE. Care to post, sir, and explain why? I know you have an account.

Regards

Desert Bat (a very very bitter man)

[Jock Pi]

Here here DB!

I too know who was responsible.

Sir, your comments/reasons would be valuable here!

There is too much modern management speak coming out of the engineering empire at Lyneham. How about some good, old-fashioned LEADERSHIP?

It just goes to show that an MBA in the wring hands is a very, very dangerous thing! :ugh:

[ZH875]

MBA - Master of B*gger All, the single degree most resposible for the mismanagement of the Armed Forces.

Methinks the proposer of the OBE dare not answer his critics in open forum, or evem behind closed doors.

Recommendation should have been for the firing squad...

[Always_broken_in_wilts]

Maybe she earned it "in kind":E

all spelling mistakes are "df" alcohol induced

[Jock Pi]

God, I hope not!! :yuk: (Still, it wouldn't be the first time!)

[Lara crofts pants]

Just read this thread. OBE????**. You must be kidding!!
For what? and recommended by who?

please tell me - I'm confused

[fatter albert]

If you need proof, look at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/birthhons_main_11_06_05.pdf

We're having a little competition in the office. What does OBE stand for? Answers on a postcard please, best entry wins a knighthood.

Let me start you off:

Other B#gger's Efforts (everyone knows that one)

Oblivious to Basic Engineering

Oblivious to Basically Everything

[Always_broken_in_wilts]

Our Bitch's Evil:E .......only a thought:p

all spelling mistakes are "df" alcohol induced

[Always_broken_in_wilts]

Promotion and a gong.............perhaps ZH has got it:E

all spelling mistakes are "df" alcohol induced

[KPax]

I see her plan is still bearing fruit, very little flying planned in the near future for the Wiltshire Air Wing, any comments from the sharp end.

[Now a 'J' Bloke!!]

Hi Gang;

A trip got scrubbed yesterday after there was no spare frame. Task went to the TriMotor in the end..(PS..Thanks for helping us out guys!!).

The situation is that if there is no task, then aircraft are not worked or prepped meaning that you have to have NO crew-in snags all day for a successful programme. Open to correction...

Edited for Red Wine Speeling

J Bloke...:confused:

[Otis Spunkmeyer]

From the Defence Intranet Turd Polishing Dept (Unclassified)

Logistics Transformation Success Story - The Lyneham White Van Men!

At RAF Lyneham, the Hercules C130 repair and maintenance teams are speeding up the turnaround times for their aircraft.

When an aircraft is returning from a mission, it radios ahead its unserviceabilities and snags. To speed up Hercules repairs, the Mobile Issue Centre (MIC) truck, formerly known as the Fast Action Response Team (FART) wagon, was procured from MT, saving it from the scrap yard, and kitted out by the Hercules K 'Lean' Team.

The Lean Team is dedicated to reducing waste, cutting bureaucracy and adding value to everyday practices. Because the squadron is forewarned of the aircraft's faults, when the aircraft lands, the MIC truck is waiting at the flight line with the right technicians, spares and equipment on board to repair the aircraft.

The maintenance team arrives on the flight line and commences a hot-debrief with the aircrew before the aircraft is shut down. This eliminates the time that was spent de-briefing and collecting all the relevant equipment and spares before any repairs could take place.

As OC 24 Sqn *** ****** said, "It's a welcome sight to have the team ready and waiting to fix the aircraft as we taxi in. Working hand in hand with the rectification team on the flight line is something we do on deployment and it's a welcome move at home too". Lyneham have plans to develop the MIC van idea and put a fleet of MIC trailers on the flight-lines.

Another Lean Team has also looked at the process of re-roleing C130 aircraft between missions. C130 fuselage load-bays are designed to be reconfigured for each sortie to be able to carry different cargo, for instance, troops, freight or tanks. When an aircraft lands, the load-bay often needs to be reconfigured for the next flight at very short notice. A multi-disciplinary team of airframe and movements personnel has been put together and provided with a van equipped with the correct tools and common re-role equipment to make the process more efficient. The Re-role Team works with the Air Load Master to ensure that re-roleing is done efficiently and correctly.

SAC *** ***** of the C130J Lean Team put the process in perspective. "It might sound simple, but by applying lean to the re-role process we hope to avoid having over £1M worth of re-role equipment unaccounted for, whilst at the same time improving aircraft availability and operational effectiveness". "Re-role spanner time won't be reduced, but the chaff around it will".

Harmless Bull**** or Dangerous Propaganda?

I could pick holes in this rubbish, sentence by sentence.

But my spirit is broken :{

[lineslime]

Absolute horse turds if you ask me. I mean I haven't seen movers taking part in a role change at Lyneham, only down route if it is somewhere nice. I don't know if you ever had the chance or pleasure of the white knuckle ride that is/was the MIC wagon. The brakes didn't work properly for starters. As for having the spares ready to fix the aeroplane when it landed, at times rocking horse droppings are more readily available.

[Always_broken_in_wilts]

Taxied in squillions..ish times and never been met by the mythical fixing team yet :rolleyes: ... in fact it's fairly regular for the de blank or see off team to fail to materialise:confused:

Not a whinge just an observation :rolleyes:

all spelling mistakes are "df" alcohol induced

[monkeybumhead]

Don't blame the lineys for the non attendance at these vital times in your life. It is down to the silly old seniors who fail to task us. I mean heaven help us if we have independant thoughts, that sort of thing will never do.

[Always_broken_in_wilts]

I say again....Not a whinge just an observation! No doubt in my mind promoted bird is to blame!!

all spelling mistakes are "df" alcohol induced

[monkeybumhead]

Me thinks you may just be right. The sooner things get fixed so as we work like a well oiled machine the better. Unfortunatley I don't think it will ever happen.
Not long till life ex so little me is happy to be seing the back of it.

[SirPeterHardingsLovechild]

Otis Spunktrouser, allow me.

Logistics Transformation Success Story - The Lyneham White Van Men!
Trying to fix something that wasn't broken.

At RAF Lyneham, the Hercules C130 repair and maintenance teams are speeding up the turnaround times for their aircraft.
No they are not.

When an aircraft is returning from a mission, it radios ahead its unserviceabilities and snags.
They always did do that.

To speed up Hercules repairs, the Mobile Issue Centre (MIC) truck, formerly known as the Fast Action Response Team (FART) wagon, was procured from MT, saving it from the scrap yard, and kitted out by the Hercules K 'Lean' Team.
The MIC wagon was rarely used and long term unserviceable itself. It was 'white fleet' (hired) so no-one saved it from the scrap yard, it wasn't ours.

The Lean Team is dedicated to reducing waste, cutting bureaucracy and adding value to everyday practices.
Removing some of the bureaucratic tool checks has already resulted in a torch spending a couple of weeks leant up against an elevator control rod.
Because the squadron is forewarned of the aircraft's faults, when the aircraft lands, the MIC truck is waiting at the flight line with the right technicians, spares and equipment on board to repair the aircraft.[/I]
The Lean Team is a nice place to put all the sicknotes who aren't allowed to work on aircraft. They have endless meetings before deciding to paint squares on the hangar floor to store your drip trays. Then they have an out-brief before a self congratulatory press release. Then they invite an Air Vice Marshall to look at the squares.

The maintenance team arrives on the flight line and commences a hot-debrief with the aircrew before the aircraft is shut down.
No they don't
This eliminates the time that was spent de-briefing and collecting all the relevant equipment and spares before any repairs could take place.
No, sorry. The MIC trailers are stationary and don't contain the necessary tools to either change a wheel, pump up a tyre or charge an accumulator! Some turn round!

As OC 24 Sqn *** ****** said, "It's a welcome sight to have the team ready and waiting to fix the aircraft as we taxi in. Working hand in hand with the rectification team on the flight line is something we do on deployment and it's a welcome move at home too". Lyneham have plans to develop the MIC van idea and put a fleet of MIC trailers on the flight-lines.
No comment

Another Lean Team has also looked at the process of re-roleing C130 aircraft between missions. C130 fuselage load-bays are designed to be reconfigured for each sortie to be able to carry different cargo, for instance, troops, freight or tanks. When an aircraft lands, the load-bay often needs to be reconfigured for the next flight at very short notice. A multi-disciplinary team of airframe and movements personnel has been put together and provided with a van equipped with the correct tools and common re-role equipment to make the process more efficient. The Re-role Team works with the Air Load Master to ensure that re-roleing is done efficiently and correctly.
Rubbish. No disrespect to Movers & Loadies but nothing has changed here. And we used to have a dedicated role team but a previous SEngO disbanded them.

SAC *** ***** of the C130J Lean Team put the process in perspective. "It might sound simple, but by applying lean to the re-role process we hope to avoid having over £1M worth of re-role equipment unaccounted for, whilst at the same time improving aircraft availability and operational effectiveness". "Re-role spanner time won't be reduced, but the chaff around it will".
Re-inventing the wheel.

Have you got a Lean Team down there monkeybumhead?

[ZH875]

The only thing at Lyneham that needs to be 'Leaned' is the Lean Team.

[On_The_Top_Bunk]

Well, after having our butts tasked to the hilt over the last few years on the J it's nice to have this enforced break so we can all get our summer leave in.

:ok:

[fatter albert]

SPHL

I agree with everything you have ever said or thought, except for your choice of aristocratic pin up. Your office makes my eyes bleed.

ZH875

We all know there's only one post within engineering at Lyneham that Lean needs to be applied to.

[SirPeterHardingsLovechild]

http://www.nos.org.uk/images/patrons/Camilla.jpg

PHWOAAAR!

[C130 Techie]

SPHLC

Mate - You are one troubled cookie, get help before it's too late!!!

I refer only to your taste in the "fairer" sex and not your views on lean

[The Rocket]

http://www.1007.com/cgi-script/csNews/image_upload/Morning_20Show_2edb.prince_charles_horse.jpg

Neigh lad, I say Neigh lad.

[monkeybumhead]

SPHL
Not yet but give it time. I mean everything is working quite well at the moment, but then eng dets usually do work better when there are less senior sirs sticking their noses into the running of them. I know I shouldn't say that as some self important to$$er will now see the need to do a bit of wheel reinvention down in this lovely little rock.
I didn't know you were into equine activitys, whatever floats your boat I suppose.:hmm:

[reddeathdrinker]

I was speaking to some Herc guys the other week in Cyprus, and they all reckon that the new engineering system at Lyneham is a load of b******s. More work, less people, and more bull****.

We're going through the same leaning processes at Kinloss, and it's having a devastating effect on morale.....

[phutbang]

Was any one present when the two AVM's walked through the engineering establishment the other day?

I believe that the conversation went something like this...

OBEng ....so when the aircraft come in if they are U/S then they are fixed by FLECS and if there is a large amount of short to medium term maintenance then it is carried out by the Continuity Team.

AVM. What!...in my day as an EngO we used to call that The Line and the other group was called Heavy Rects!...Are you telling me that you have reinvented second line?

OBEng...Er No...The aircraft just come down more U/S and therefore are on the ground for longer.

AVM. So how come they weren't this U/S when you had two lines running?

Apparently the subject was changed at this point due to the transparency of the situation.

The next day there was an overheard office meeting (and this sounds like a bigger U-Turn than a Labour policy).

JEngO. Did the AVM's do a Q&A session in the hanger after the walk round or did they go because they were behind time?

OBEng. No they did a Q&A but the crew room was so packed that they had to turn people away.

JEngO. So what kinds of Q's were asked and what were the responses?

OBEng ...Oh there were many but I think that the AVM's got a fell for the place and will understand that there are many problems here and now this information will go up to the top and something will get done about it.

At this point the conversation stopped. It is not known if it was due to stunned disbelief of not.

So does this mean that now OBEng has orchestrated all this havoc that she does not trust her own convictions and is doing the normal trick of leaving it to the next one in (apparently someone form an IPT, by the end of summer) and walks away with the prestigious gong? - I think I shall follow the footpath labelled PVR - it will be the fastest way to sanity - Good riddance to the Royal Ar5e Farce!!!! :mad:

[Desert Bat]

You'll all be glad to know now that her promotion to Gp Capt is CONFIRMED.

The new guy is from Strike, not an IPT. He arrives on 8 Aug. She leaves a week later. The guys are holding a leaving do, but she's not invited.

[YoungAlbert]

I think that's harsh 6 blades, it's just that this f***ing female is useless enough for all of them! The people responsible for her 2 promotions should be ashamed/ shot/ ashamed whilst being shot.
How Lyneham has a single GE with this situation on top of the "no flying pay" problem (that's been well documented) is beyond me.

[BEagle]

Enjoy your 'Ditch the Bitch' party; things can surely only get better....

We had a useless SEngO once who just disappeared without trace - just left a note to the Boss to say he had left.

[dogsquad]

Will her replacement be any better. He/she can't be worse. Hold on tight.

Where is the party by the way.

[lineslime]

Having left the wonderful wiltshire establishment I wonder if anyone can confirm the rumor that crews are going down south to do such nice things as MCT, as serviceability at base is that poor. If this is happening will it spread to the hot sandy areas as well?

[fatter albert]

Well, we have an almost total change of Hercules engineering management to look forward to over the next few weeks, including down South.

What could possibly go wrong?

[SirPeterHardingsLovechild]

1. At the Station Arrivals Brief last week, the Staish told the audience that he was fed up with reading what's going on at his station on Pprune.

2. Good evening Sir.
or
2(a). Good morning Staish's Adj. Tea white nun.

Okay. Select bold to indicate anger...

Next week, the Lean Teams are going to look at how we can get our aircraft serviceable more efficiently. ie with less people, low morale, half the shift on gate guard, lack of spares, less time on the ground, passengers sat in the terminal, etc.

They are going to discuss a revolutionary way to deal with a Herc returning to Lyneham. It shuts down on Bay 1, the crew are debriefed, aircraft A/F'd and refuellled. Then...wait for it...the aircraft is towed to Bay 2, where the rectifications will be carried out. Then...it is towed to Bay 3 where it it fitted with the correct role.

STOP!!!

This idea is utter bollocks!

If you are still discussing this idea at lunchtime on Day 1 then you will be the laughing stock of the RAF.

Staish, sir. This is what some of your top people are doing in your name. Under your command. No doubt timed to coincide with the New Years Honours list.

PS. This was a revolutionary idea...er...about 100 years ago, for manufacturing industry. These are not Ford Model T's. These are 40 ton transport aircraft, and the bays don't line up, and we'lll have to stow the power set 3 times, and the tug drivers are civvies who don't work for Eng Wing anyway etc etc

:{

PPS. I am not 'resistant to change' or an 'obstacle' or even a 'weevil' (we've always done it this way)

You may think you'd be well rid of me on Tranche 2 redundancy.


You'd be wrong.



Don\'t forget to let the Inertial Nav gyros run down for 20 mins before you move the aircraft!

There, take the morning off.

Well done everyone.

[Safety_Helmut]

SPHLC

That must rank as one of the most barking mad ideas I think I have heard for quite some time.

What kind of halfwits come up with things like this ?

Safety_Helmut

[On_The_Top_Bunk]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I wonder if anyone can confirm the rumor that crews are going down south to do such nice things as MCT, as serviceability at base is that poor.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



This is true, as of last Sunday.




You are taking the p155 surely? 16hrs flying for 30 mins MCT?

[fatter albert]

This clever scheme was brought to you by the bearded wonder from Simpler (you don't want to know how much Simpler are making out of all this). He also brought you the "Waterspider", and many others you wouldn't believe.

According to him, an aircraft move is a one man task (driving the tug) and takes less than a minute. Actually, the first time the idea came up he told us we should TAXI the aircraft from bay to bay. He also reckons that the reason not a single airline uses this system is because "RAF Lyneham are light years ahead of any airline".

It really is all very clever.

If you haven't already, check out this link for more details:
http://www.simpler.com/case-studies/PremiershipLean.html

I particularly like the final line.

[BEagle]

Presumably they do know that it's winter right now in the Islas Malvinas? Not the best time to conduct MCT......

[L1A2 discharged]

Last line is too true, but only if their airships don't want:

a. Flying to take place

b. People to remain in uniform (although ....)

c. The military of all colours and variants to partake in trust me tones' (can never get an apostophe in the rght place ..) next adventure.

etc etc. :(

[StopStart]

Oh my god.....where is that utterly horsesh*t article from? What was the brief to "Simpler" then? I'm assuming it was sack lots of people, save lots of money and it doesn't really matter if we ever get any aircraft on the line? If so, bravo! Job well done. That was a few million quid well spent. I'm no expert, but I'd rather have a happy workforce and serviceable aircraft than a happy management consultant and unserviceable aircraft. But then what would I know....

Still.....at least you've all been "encouraged and empowered" by the new system.
You could "lean" that phrase down to "sacked" though I guess....

I did like the closing line though.....surely given the roaring "success" of this system, sentiments such as those expressed in that line could be construed of sabotage or at least the encouragment of sabotage....?

:mad:

[juliet]

re: simpler. first clue that these people dont know what the hell they are talking about is when in the first paragraph it is said that there is only one aircraft type operated from lyneham. dont even try to tell me that you can treat the k and j as one type when it comes to engineering. each has its own separate issues regarding engineering, you cannot just jump between the two. does oc eng even realise that we have j's now and that it isnt a 50 aircraft fleet of k's anymore?

[Purr Harder]

Well here we are almost 1 year down the line from the survey done for Simpler in Eng wing, and guess what the hangar is still cold, the tools are still inadequate, the infrastructure is still bad, communication is still poor and tools stilll do not match the job.. The tradesmen are not empowered or encouraged and to a man hate LEAN and everything it stands for. It has destroyed Eng Wing ( never mind we will just change the name to Forward Support Wing). We have the worse rate of S aircraft ever and the lowest morale I have ever seen. The guys are happier doing Gate guard or going to Basrah than working on HLS or FLECS. The LEAN Rapid Improvement Events are a total waste of time, the outcome is already decided by OC FSW (OBE). All the troops want to do is be able to fix aircraft 24/30 & 47/70 used to manage it. If this is speading to the rest of the RAF God help us. Can some one in power please put a stop to this madness.

[TAC Queen]

Nice to see the system (LEAN) of only working on the aircraft that are scheduled to fly the next day work so well on the day they wanted multiple frames on 30 mins readiness.
2 hours after the time stated they would be ready we received ours. Thank god there were no lives at risk.
What a complete shambles we are. We are not a business; we are here to wait until we are needed. We should be ready 24 hours a day. Maybe we should change R1 to be
Ready to move within the time it will take to get a frame tech ready.
That way if I get called to go at 3 in the morning I can go back to bed and then take my family on a few days holiday to prepare them for my imminent standown through lack of frames.

As a small note to SPHLC
Welcome back me old bithicuss
Just no more danger (you know what) OK