Jaguar Overseas Training Flight [Archive]

Talking Radalt

1st Mar 2006, 06:20

...or alternatively, during a recent land of sand det, sit a Scum photographer right next to the ramp much to the smug delight of the little tw@t whilst all the other journos were sat further forward, then deny him permission ot use his camera and then "run out" of sick bags when the slimey yellow-spined oik felt a little queasy (during a very gentle transition worthy of 32 Sqn I hasten to add) :E
I find it SOOOOOO funny that out of all the journos I've hosted/escorted/answered stupid questions for, it's always the Scum who categorically come out top as THE most unmilitary people ever to walk the face of the Earth.
Torygraph always cut a dash in safari suits and stout brogues,
Daily Mail go all modern and Rohan...
But the Scum.......a fecking shell-suit on a military flight.
What's that? Take the pi$$? Us? :uhoh:

Kitbag

1st Mar 2006, 06:34

There can be no doubt that OTF is valuable training for crews in transiting across national borders and I can't think of a FJ unit which doesn't do it. Perhaps the stun wouldn't be able to raise it as an issue however if it had been a days trip out and a days trip back midweek, rather than a weekend city break with 3 nights in a hotel, unless of course the guys stayed in visiting Officers Quarters at Aviano AB, that doesn't seem to be the case here. Even people who didn't work hard at school can see the need for a bit of common sense in these days of financial restraint. :ok:

spectre150

1st Mar 2006, 08:45

Right chaps, here is the deal. We need to get our stats up to date so we need a couple of crews to take a pair of jets away for the weekend. I know you spend a long time in hot shi$$y places so you can pick somewhere nice. However, you have to stay on base and dont be seen to be having a good time, in case we offend the press or non-flying types. Any volunteers?

plassey1

1st Mar 2006, 09:26

As a humble but much exploited taxpayer watching my taxes being wasted on a range of useless ventures - my comment is :-
The services seem to be the only thing left of any value - so if you did have a few drinks after your training detail then I can only hope it was my bit of the tax burden that paid for them - cheers to you all.

GengisKhant

1st Mar 2006, 09:57

Did they manage to sneak the upright piano in the back seat of one of the T birds for the end of det sing/bar B Q burn along song? Or am I confusing them with another Colt Sqn?

tonkatechie

1st Mar 2006, 12:53

I have no problem with you guys going anywhere, but with one clause: if it's somewhere nice, would you mind doing a 'proper servicing';) and find something that requires me to come out and do a quick fix before heading off to the local bar? Cheers:ok:

airborne_artist

1st Mar 2006, 13:06

TT - I think a number of those who took part were hoping to give the local ladies a "proper servicing" :ok:

Hummingfrog

1st Mar 2006, 13:11

This is a terrible waste of taxpayers money. Whatever next. These RAF pilots using taxpayers money to enjoy themselves will only give our hard working politicians ideas. I can envisage all sorts of jollies been organised by politicians using this as RAF detachment as an example.

The politicians will want to, at the taxpayers expense:-

Travel 1st Class.
Hold meetings on world poverty in places like the Bahamas while staying in 5* hotels.
Use Taxis to visit friends.
Get approx £10,000 per year to pay a mortgage on a flat in Edinburgh and keep the profit when they sell it.
Have a chauffer driven car to take them to Aberdeen to catch a flight home and give their girlfriends a lift to work.
Claim motor mileage for Scottish trips when they are out of the country.

Where will it all end:confused:

HF;) (most of the examples are taken from that waste of taxpayers money the Scottish Talking Shop:mad: )

(hope it was as good as our mountain flying detachments to BK in the 70s. Recce the slopes am ski pm)

Lafyar Cokov

1st Mar 2006, 13:49

Blimey - 18 posts and no Southside justifiaction of the amazing journalistic accuracies, must be a record.....:D

Monty77

1st Mar 2006, 13:52

plassey1: cheers mate, clearly one of the silent minority:)

hummingfrog: good call. But don't get me started on the real loafing/freebie experts. Yes, your Euro f*cking MP. Now there's a gravy train on a circular track. They make the oily local lot look like toddlers. Their expenses alone are way in excess of the average salary on this website. Leaving party politics out of it for a second (I'm full-on Tory by the way), check out the Kinnocks.
100,000 a piece basic before their admin staff have even started filling in the claim forms. Jolly to Italy for the weekend? Go for it lads. It's a drop in the ocean compared to what other 'public servants' get up to. Even their cars use more fuel as their mileage allowance is way, way more than that granted to HM Forces.

By the way, be honest, how many of you know the name of your Euro MP?

maxburner

1st Mar 2006, 14:21

If any of the chaps from Colt who went on this det are reading this forum, I hope you had a bloody good time. Jollys / training opportunities are one of the things I miss most about the military life, so I'm glad someoine is still having a good time.

As for my Euro MP's name.....I have no clue and less interest. Couldn't that oxygen thief Prescott be shoved aside to Brussels and give us all a break?

spectre150

1st Mar 2006, 14:56

Didnt get a chance to read it but saw over someones shoulder a half page piece in the Daily (fe)Mail today including large pic of the sqn cdr. I suppose there is nothing else going on in the world worth the column inches......

philrigger

1st Mar 2006, 15:44

I do not think that many ground crew will begrudge anybody a few days away. Nice work if you can get it. A small number may be envious/jealous though. Get the trips while you can, you'll miss them after service life. The cost is but a drop in the ocean compared with other defence spending (and MP/EMP allowances).

'We knew how to whinge but we kept it in the NAAFI bar.'

...and thats what the toe-rag who spoke to the Scum should have done !!!!!
:ok:

FJJP

1st Mar 2006, 16:05

He'll be found out - smug gits like him will eventually let it slip out. You know the type - 'great, innit - I dropped them right in it this time, didn't I?'

Then I hope he drawn through the eye of a needle and given a good thumping by those around him that don't like to see the Forces dragged through the media mire.

Sounds like a candidate for a few less pleasant duties [after he gets out of the med centre, of course]...

southside

1st Mar 2006, 16:06

Yeah, your'e right. How could I ignore this one. Well, despite what you may think I think that if you can get away with it then crack on. I'm just surprised that the RAF haven't learnt the lessons from last year. In the RN we still go away on jollies but nowadays they are generally during the week and involve an element of flying when we arrive in the host country...no more the piss ups in Amsterdam I'm afraid.

What concerns me though is this scenario.

Little old fella in Jockland reading his daily rag, turns the page to see this...
DEFENCE ministers are facing questions about the safety of British forces in Iraq and Afghanistan amid claims that a key defensive system on RAF transport planes was scrapped to save money.

Disgusting, he thinks. How can the Government even think of sending our boys into battle without the adequate kit. What do they mean they need to save money...???

and then the following day he picks up his rag and reads...

SIX RAF top gun pilots flew their Jaguar fighter-bombers to Italy for a weekend skiing break, it was revealed yesterday.
The jaunt — deemed an “official training exercise” — cost taxpayers up to £30,000 in fuel and accommodation.

And that gentlemen is why you should be very careful when planning your beano's.

dessert_flyer

1st Mar 2006, 16:22

We could plan a trip to the a*se end of nowhere and the gutter press would make it look like a 5 star trip to the bahamas contaceptives supplied. Lets face it, they needed to fill up some tabloid space and picked on this, gave it their own slant and put it in the paper as a scandel. It sold some extra copies and the editor got a pat on the back, unfortunately when their is a slow news day this sort of total rubbish will appear.
The scum and news of the screws i believe are the same publishers? and thats the second bit of military hitting they done recently, (beating up of iraqi's), they got something against us at the moment. Remember this sort of thing next time you go into the newsagents, and when there is another conflict and they proudly boast how they are the newspaper supporting our boys and girls, we know it is just to sell thier rag, and they dont actualy give a rats a** about us.
d-f

southside

1st Mar 2006, 16:52

But you have to remember that the Editor of the currant bun is a big big fan of the Armed Forces. She has flown with many of us - we even took her Husband flying and all she is reporting is the facts....(a little jounalistic licence but thats allowed)

Fg Off Max Stout

1st Mar 2006, 17:40

A fact that seems to have evaded tabloid hacks and readers is that military aircraft have to be flown to provide training for military aircrew. In most sane people's opinions, if you have to train and manage to fly somewhere nice and enjoy your downtime - well done. I thinkit would be more wasteful not to take these opportunities, which don't actually come up all that often. To avoid them, to appease some sort of tabloid induced guilt about enjoying one's job, would be ridiculous, but is the probabl MoD response.

The cost of hotels probably equates to holding the jets on the brakes for a couple of minutes and if the crews buy a couple of beers out of their salaries (not the defence budget), good luck to them.

Of course, using tablo logic, the tax payer funds the defence budget, which pays the salaries, which buy the beer! So maybe Sun readers have a right to question what aircrew spend their money on. Perhaps after landing and debriefing at an away base, the formation leader could phone the Sun, and in the next day's rag there could be a phone-in poll. I can see it now:

Sun Poll: Should Skygod Formation, posh biggles ruperts, be allowed to fritter your tax money on a pint now and enjoy the local ents or should the stay in their rooms and do tech. Txt your vote now.

This could extend to all aspects of a pilot's life - fantastic financial advice from the Sun:

Fg Off Bloggs wants to put down a deposit on his first home. Sun readers say NO! Get a council flat instead. Spend £500 on an 0.9l Nova and spend the other £14500 on accessories for it. Use a credit card to buy the biggest satellite dish you can get for your council flat and fill it with DFS sofas. Pay nothing for 2 years and then have the bailiffs take it away.

Plt Off Prune is considering buying a bespoke Saville Row suit and some Jermyn Street shirts that will cut a dash for years to come. The Sun says NO! Buy a Burberry pattern shell suit and some £400 trainers that are cool this week but so uncool next week that the local hoodies will throw empty WKD bottles at you. Add to that some Elizabeth Duke male jewellry, (the sort of 3 carat plate chains that make your skin go green and give you heavy metal poisining) and you da shizzle, homie!:ok:

This post could carry on ad infinitum, so I'll stop and do something more productive instead. In short, poke off Sun and find some real news to write about. (I hope Sun readers don't mind me using the internet).

southside

1st Mar 2006, 17:47

A fact that seems to have evaded tabloid hacks and readers is that military aircraft have to be flown to provide training for military aircrewor you can use a simulator...but the sim doesn't have any ski slopes or a bar at the other end.

Fg Off Max Stout

1st Mar 2006, 17:56

Playing Devil's Advocate again Southy, or just trolling. If you are a pilot at all, you will know very well the limitations of simulators. They are generally very good for procedural and emergencies, but never perfectly replicate low level, handling, air traffic and many other real world aspects of flying. That is why sometime (shock, horror) pilots have to fly real aeroplanes! And, if when they have finished doing that for the day, there is a bar adjacent, do you begrudge them a pint?

It's nice being a pilot Southy. Keep dreaming, buddy!;)

dessert_flyer

1st Mar 2006, 18:08

I do agree with you south with reference to reporting the facts, however they have used their paper to put a slant on it to the detriment of the armed forces. This was not an accident but a deliberate ploy to gain some headlines and therfore sell more papers, at our expense. I do not believe that any hack is the friend of the forces, they are in it for their own self esteem and to get a pay rise.
ps: what was her husband doing on a miltary aircraft?

Ewan Whosearmy

1st Mar 2006, 18:19

A fact that seems to have evaded tabloid hacks and readers is that military aircraft have to be flown to provide training for military aircrew.

It may well have evaded them, but that's hardly the point here and you're not doing yourself any favous by intimating that it is.

I agree with Southside: the issue here is that whilst there are British forces dying in Iraq/Afghanistan because they lack the correct kit, it's just a tad bewildering that a squadron in Norfolk has enough of a budget to take 6 jets to Aviano for a skiing weekend (allegedly). It is that incongruency that is the problem, and the tabloids and broadsheets have a right to point it out.

Safety_Helmut

1st Mar 2006, 18:39

Scary, but I find myself agreeing with southside again. We can't claim poverty on one hand, and seen to be squandering money on the other. The reasons for the trip don't matter to them, it's just another story that sells papers.

S_H

Fg Off Max Stout

1st Mar 2006, 19:22

Having organized elements of such landaways on the mighty Wokka, I can tell you that the cost of putting the crew up per night in a hotel equated to less than two minutes of rotors turning time. If you think that the money these guys spent on eating, drinking and sking did not come out of there own pockets (salaries and allowances), you are very much mistaken. It certainly didn't come out of the procurement budget.

I agree that the procurement and supply chain is in rag order but that is an irrelevance to this case. Stamping on training sorties with any sort of visible enjoyment to them (an over-reaction that I can see gradually gathering momentum) will not have any effect whatsoever on the availability of CBA or desert boots. Speculating on the cost of fuel is pointless too. Trg sorties will continue to happen as long as the RAF has manned aircraft, and if landaways are not conducted to enjoyable destinations, they will be conducted instead to rubbish destinations - all at virtually the same cost to the taxpayer. If the media can't understand this fact, much like that of low flying, then it is the media that must be educated. Let the PROs and CCOs spell out the facts to them, rather than the MoD/RAF capitulating to appease tabloid whines.

Before we get too heated, just remember that this story is tomorrow's fish and chip wrapper. Tomorrow some vacuous non-story, celebrity tittle-tattle,will hold the nation in thrall and this will be forgotten - until next time this story is dusted off by the editors.

Fg Off Max Stout

1st Mar 2006, 19:31

Safety,

If the reasons for the trip don't matter to them, it's just another story that sells papers

then maybe we should not be concerning ourselves or changing our behaviour and policies based on their opinions.

Safety_Helmut

1st Mar 2006, 19:56

Max

I think you're right, but this is the kind of thing that sticks in the public's mind, not the fact that we can't afford DAS for all of our aircraft.

S_H

Ewan Whosearmy

1st Mar 2006, 20:13

So what is your point? When ops are on no training flights? Hardly sustainable.

Nope. 'Whether Ops are on or not, don't blatantly squander money'. Seem reasonable to you?

Ewan Whosearmy

1st Mar 2006, 21:51

Deliverance

Frankly, i don't care what anyone else does - the USAF is spending $250m on each of the 300-odd F-22As it intends to buy, but that doesn't mean the RAF has to do the same, does it? And if you are of that school of thought, look at the way one of the richest Air Forces in the world does it: It's fairly common in the USAF for a two-ship to do an out-and-back, or RON, to somewhere only vaguely work related - but at least they cover their arses by giving the odd capes brief whilst there, or take a jet to PDM, or attending a conference or playing Red Air for another squadron etc. I have never heard of six-ship F-15s or F-16s buggering off to another country for absolutely no reason whatsoever (I am sorry, 'to get familiarity with foreign ATC').

With regards to the worth of the training at Aviano: had they gone during the week and worked with the Block 40 Vipers out there, then stayed the weekend and got pissed, shagged Italian birds and done some skiing, I wouldn't bat an eyelid. Why? because they could have done some DACT, or looked at the work the Yanks are doing with their Sniper pods, or a host of other things that could have given them something to come home with.
My opinion has nothing to do with rivalries between types (for the record, no, I am not Helos).

If you can tell me that the trip gave 6 Jag mates more than just some familiarity with foreign ATC, then I am open to conceding that you have a point. Beyond that, I've said what I think and will leave it at that.

neilmac

1st Mar 2006, 22:35

Time Flies

1st Mar 2006, 23:25

I can not understand why these "journalists" insist on filling their rags with something that you really can't class as news.

It is frankly getting a tad tiresome reading the inflated, twisted, inaccurate, sensationalist bolleaux printed about our boys every few weeks. :mad:

OTFs are invaluable and we carry them out for umpteen reasons that will never make the print in The Sun. That would justify the whole matter and Mr B E Lend would not get the pat on the back from his happy editor!

In most sane people's opinions, if you have to train and manage to fly somewhere nice and enjoy your downtime - well done. I think it would be more wasteful not to take these opportunities, which don't actually come up all that often.

I totally agree. I am also certain that if squadrons were forced to abandon OTFs it would only add to the ever increasing problem of morale/retention.

To the "Lords and Airs" whom browse these threads...do not try and appease the misinformed public by cancelling OTFs. Instead try and use whatever methods possible to educate the public/politicians/Sun editor on the real reasons behind these training flights.

Anyone who has taken part in an OTF will realise the value they possess. They offer an opportunity to carry out some kinds of work just not possible in the UK, as well as some that is...in a different environment. In our "Expeditonary Air Force" it is vital to focus on operating overseas or in unfamiliar territory. This is made possible by the use of OTFs...or visiting Valley. ;)

threepointonefour

2nd Mar 2006, 00:16

I'm with southside and Ewan Whosearmy on this one ...

... actually, I'm not. I do believe they're talking b-ll---s.

The justification for spending a pleasant weekend away (after a legitimate training sortie) lies in the fact that these guys spend at least half the year out of the country (away from families and loved ones), living in crap tents with a 20 min phone call per week, getting bl00dy shot at and still being paid far less than their contempories in the civilian world. And I would afford this courtesy to all denominations of RAF aircrew (and those groundcrew who actually contribute to the smooth running of the Royal AIR Force).

( I suspect none of these guys could get half a dozen mortgages ... )

threepointonefour

2nd Mar 2006, 00:20

Aviano is a NATO training base including FAC training (Jags are SA as well as recce) and where which Jags I believe were based during the Bosnian conflict?? I was under cover in Sarajevo! Jag served us brilliantly for 30+ years so show them off one last time to NATO should be a privilage and so what peeps enjoy themselves, good grief that will never catch on in this NEW RAF , waste of money?? Lets look at poiliticians or MOD Procurement service? Well done 41 (F)

Slight correction, the Jags were based at Gioia Del Colle in southern Italy for the duration of the Bos conflict. I add this for accuracy only, the point is still valid, as Aviano is a legitimate stopover en-route to 'eastern' destinations.

neilmac

2nd Mar 2006, 05:54

3.4

Cheers it was 50/50 which one I could remember where they were based and picked wrong one!

Wrathmonk

2nd Mar 2006, 07:21

If we were to take this to the logical conclussion ie no money can be spent on anything non-operationally related until we of all 3 services have the right equipment then we should also say goodbye to, amongst otherthings :

- Cocktail parties (on the back of RN ships) at friendly ports (US / NATO etc). No need for defence diplomacy with our allies surely.

- Adventure training - since when has diving in the Red Sea or white water rafting in Arizona or sports parachuting for non-Paras contributed to operational output (and if you're talking "developing leadership" then that arguement reads across to overseas training flights when, for many junior pilots and navigators (yes, I know the Jag doesn't have a nav but it's not the only the Jag force that conduct OTFs...) it is the first time they have flown in a foreign country).

Just out of curiosity do the RN pay port charges when they are tied up alongside Bahrain / Barbados / Hong Kong etc for R&R - if so surely they should anchor outside international waters and conduct all resupplies by air / ship. In fact, an RN mate told me the main "reason" given for port visits is to allow navigation in unfamiliar waters...

We need to get a reality check on this. Yes they went away for the weekend - I know for a fact that the government did not pay for the skiing portion of the trip so whether they skied, drank themselves stupid or visited museums it matters not. In the grand scheme of things £30K is peanuts (ie 30 chairs in MOD Main Building!). Most of this would have been fuel charges anyway (and the hours will have been part of their monthly allocation anyway and therefore would have been spent whether it was flying high level (and therefore more economical) to Italy or at 250' (and shorter, but more fun) around UK. 6 people, 3 nights in Italy - I reckon at most £1.5K out of the sqn budget.

As already alluded to I reckon the story came from a disgruntled worker at Coltishall who is facing the prospect of either losing his/her job (if a civvie) or having to move for the first time in umpteen years (if military).

Move on - there are far more important things to discuss. For instance, surely southside, being dark blue, doesn't go on beanos - he must go on dandys .... (with apologies to all those from outside these shores or who do not have kids and therefore don't understand the comic references!):D

threepointonefour

2nd Mar 2006, 07:27

- Adventure training - since when has diving in the Red Sea or white water rafting in Arizona or sports parachuting for non-Paras contributed to operational output (and if you're talking "developing leadership" then that argument reads across to overseas training flights when, for many junior pilots and navigators (yes, I know the Jag doesn't have a nav but it's not the only the Jag force that conduct OTFs...) it is the first time they have flown in a foreign country).
:D

I forgot to mention my pet subject of waste of cash ... the ski champs. Not only do those personnel who go on it waste tons more cash, they also slack off work while everyone else fills in for them while they're away 'on duty' ...!

And as an aside, the (quote) 'member of the RAF Colt groundcrew' who complained is eligible for a number of perks NOT available to aircrew - I seem to recall lineys having afternoons to go to college for further quals ... somehow I can't recall that same opportunity?

I'm all for both the above, if everything else is allowed ...

Blodwyn Pig

2nd Mar 2006, 07:46

i'm just loving all you growbags desperately trying to justify a weekend jolly for a bit of skiing!
we all know it was weekend jolly, they got busted when someone grassed them up, i expect they'll stop them for a month or two until the fuss dies down, and then they'll carry on as normal. but all this trying to justify it! purrlease!:rolleyes:

Wrathmonk

2nd Mar 2006, 08:18

3.14

Might be right there - those in glasshouses shouldn't throw stones and all that. Amazing the amount of money we spend on getting people NVQ's and the like so they can then apply for redundancy!

Pig

They won't stop - they did nothing wrong (even if it would appear they took twin stickers with gingers in the back!:p ). But then seeing as you left HM Forces 16 years ago you're probably not up to speed with current aircrew training requirements. Personally, I'd have waited until the Italian F1 GP or summer and the south coast of France before using up my annual entitlement for an OTF.

whowhenwhy

2nd Mar 2006, 09:34

Let's see, the currant bun slagging us off. Anyone remember the story about the editor landing in the proverbial last year after assaulting her husband? Didn't that go very quite very quickly? Ever wonder why?

I think a lot of newspaper editors were told to hush up or some of their own laundry might get a public airing. Why? Because there was more to the story to come out as to why she hit him, and they all know it.

The vast majority of them are self-serving scum (excuse the pun) who don't print or transmit the truth. They tell us what they think is important.

Going to calm down in a dark room now.

Archimedes

2nd Mar 2006, 09:45

Perhaps it might be appropriate to note here that the Sun's defence editor was previously with the Mirror, and was the reporter responsible for the 'Army's vile abuse of prisoners' stories. He moved onwards and upwards soon after it transpired that the story was actually 'Mirror conned into thinking photos taken in Preston originated in Iraq'.

He therefore has a history of not allowing the truth to get in the way of a good story - yet corporate comms (or whatever they're called) ensured he was the first newspaper journalist to get a ride in a Typhoon, apparently sending the message that he can print any old rubbish and will still be pandered to. One consolation is that he was rather unwell during that flight.

peppermint_jam

2nd Mar 2006, 11:03

I used to think that the Sun was the "Armed Forces Friend", but whilst it would seem they are on our side when it suits them, the rest of the time they can't wait to report about the RAF going on a jolly, or the Navy pranging a ship, or the Army getting rough with the locals in whatever desert they are fighting in. After all, most of the public have no idea of what happens behind the wire of a base. So fortunately our beloved current bun is there to fill there heads with this kind of rubbish, which makes us look all look bad. Then 6 months down the line when there is another radical dictator spoiling for a rumble or our own firemen pleading for more cash, we step into the breach once more and become heros again. I hope the little snipe who went squeeling to the papers is taken behind the hanger and given a damn good shoeing.

soprano54

2nd Mar 2006, 13:00

Well done Seek & Destroy hope you all had a good time. Fond memories - The 'Jack Daniels' frenzy, Digger 3 o'clock and champagne. Long may OTFs continue regards to all ex 54(F) Sqn - Army (Be the Best)

Training Risky

2nd Mar 2006, 13:13

What are the chances of the Scum being banned from all RAF Officers' Messes?
How about all RAF stations? Why not the whole hog and ban it from the ante-rooms and JRMs of all HM Armed Forces installations?
I have mixed feelings about that: except for the 3rd morale page, I think it is filled with drivel about celebrities and dumbed down stories posing as 'news'. On the other hand I do have flick through it every now and again to get an idea of what the proles who buy it are learning about current affairs in the UK and abroad.

Strictly Jungly

2nd Mar 2006, 16:08

Good luck lads (and lasses) if you can still get on these trips............shame on the Current Bun.......friends of the armed forces....I should cocoa!!!!!

Grab it whilst you can say!!!!!!!!!!

99FeetLong

2nd Mar 2006, 19:26

How much does a flying hour cost? How much does a night's accommodation cost?
Picking a figure I ll just pretend there were 12 out there (probably less, I can't imagine there were 6 T birds). hotel night one hundred quid each? £3600 pounds total for 3 nights? Imprest at £30 each? £1080?
Total expenses £4680, call it £5000 for cash.
The jets fuel and maintenance cost £25000 in total? I don't think so. For potentially 4-6 hours flying for 6 a/c. So where the sun got that figure from who bloody knows.
The fact is the guys paid their own beer (apart from £30's worth) and rented their own skis.
The £5000 is insignificant compare to the cost of the flying of the jet. What's therefore the difference between flying it in the UK or Italy, apart from the training value?
Guy's who say you can achieve the level of training in the sim don't have a clue. And the one's who say that by flying str8 line to Aviano you are not learning anything have obviously never flown or think they are god's gift to flying. The day a pilot swears he has never learnt anything from a sortie is the day he should hang up his flying boots. There is not a sortie I can think of, even str8 forward transit I have not found a learning point.
I wish people like those jealous ones that surround us would give it a rest, if they really think it's that easy up there why aren't they part of the broterin'?
Lads, well done, hope you had a nice time in aviano, I know exactly where you were coming from. Funny how they never report the heroic acts that sometimes one is ask to consciously take, however you let off a bit of steam and these b****ds are quick to slag you off.
And the ones who think they are part of us, but come up with some of the comments I have read, think again.

flyinrags

2nd Mar 2006, 21:07

Whatever the actual cost of the flts to/from Aviano, It was half the amount that it would have cost to fly the jets for 2 waves on the Mon and Fri. Apparently now the guys are not to ski on any OTF even if it is all out of their own pocket. Looks like a few trips to the Opera in Italy instead - until that gets banned too!

southside

2nd Mar 2006, 23:33

Just out of curiosity do the RN pay port charges when they are tied up alongside Bahrain / Barbados / Hong Kong etc for R&R - if so surely they should anchor outside international waters and conduct all resupplies by air / ship. In fact, an RN mate told me the main "reason" given for port visits is to allow navigation in unfamiliar waters...

Yes they do pay harbour fees whcih are bloomin expensive. In fact its cheaper to keep a ship at sea rather then have it alongside. If only we could refuel at sea then we could stay there forever....OR we could purchase a couple of Nuke ships and then we would never have to go alongside....

.........and before you mention the good lads of the RFA.....

....there are 8 RFA tankers to support close to 83 surface ships.....which would mean we would have to travel around in groups of 10 or more...we don't do that.

sooms

3rd Mar 2006, 05:46

3.14

When exactly did the Jag Force spent 6 months away, in hot sandy places getting shot at?

Truth is, the Jag Force has contributed nothing...repeat nothing to the operational edge of the RAF since we were kicked out of Turkey at the end of 2002.

We have wasted millions on keeping the Jag flying to 'provide a core of experienced single seat pilots for Typhoon' - How many Jag pilots will get a Typhoon cockpit? Enough to justify spending millions keeping Colt open, moving s****y six to CGY and sending them to the states last year and this year?

Jackonicko

3rd Mar 2006, 09:50

Sooms,

Even if what you said were correct (which it isn't) then simply "keeping the Jag flying to 'provide a core of experienced single seat pilots for Typhoon" was a worthwhile ambition.

Risking some swollen heads, it's plain to the unbiased observer (and that excludes those not good enough to be selected to fly the beast) that the Jag Force has been something of an elite - taking the best of those who graduate from Valley/Brawdy/Chivenor (at least since they stopped taking Lightning pilots). Make no mistake - anyone who wins proper Wings (as opposed to budgie wings, which I might boast about to folk who know no better....) has earned my total respect, but I have to say that many of the really high calibre people I've met (not all, by any means) have been from the Jaguar force - from the rapidly promoted shooting stars like Mike Seares, Bob J, Graham W, etc. to the hugely professional aviators who have remained in the cockpit, like D-Reg B and POD.

It's equally clear that the Jag GR3A (for all its performance and especially payload/range limitations) has a cockpit that in some respects represents a good learning environment for Typhoon - paper tidy, with EFRCs and ETAPs, with an operational helmet sight, IDM, RAIDS etc.

That's why Sir Jock has been so keen to get a high proportion of Jag mates onto Typhoon (and a very high proportion of Jag chaps from 54, 41, and 6 will find themselves on the Typhoon by the time 6 stands up on Typhoon).

But keeping the Jag and Coltishall has not only been about retaining a cadre of single-seat fast jet OS pilots for Typhoon. Colt has always (rightly) been a pretty 'retention positive' place, while the Jag's exclusion from some recent ops has sometimes been driven by a political need not to make the jet visibly 'indispensable'. Before the decision was taken to withdraw the Jag from service early, the aircraft and its air and groundcrew at least bore their share of the brunt of overseas detachments and deployments. Even today the presence of a rapidly deployable force in the frontline that can do Recce/TIALD/OS (doing recce and TIALD with greater accuracy than some other platforms) could be of huge value, if it is needed.

And it's cheap. Every Jag flying hour costs considerably less than a Harrier, GR4 or F3 hour. A Jaguar squadron costs about half as much as a GR4 squadron to run, and achieves better availability. If you deploy it you can do so with a much smaller logistics footprint and with half as many personnel. All of the figures are in Hansard, if you choose to look for them.

Finally, every Jag hour flown has been a GR4 or Harrier hour that hasn't had to be flown, making it faintly more probable that those latter types might reach their planned OSDs. Some believe that a Jag and F3 SEAD force should be retained (in place of two GR4 and one GR7 squadrons) in order to spread GR4/GR7 hours over a larger pool of aircraft, in order to allow the key types to reach their planned OSDs (2017 for the GR7/9, 2023 for the GR4).

LateArmLive

3rd Mar 2006, 11:15

That's a pretty impressive pair of rose tinted specs you must have on Jacko!

BEagle

3rd Mar 2006, 11:55

"......then stayed the weekend and got pissed, shagged Italian birds and done some skiing...."

Thought we were discussing Jag mates?

Sorry!

sooms

3rd Mar 2006, 14:34

Rose tinted specs and then some...

Jacko- How long have you worked on the Jag Force?

Do you know what RAIDS is? Like to see potential enemies quaking in their boots with the thought of the RAF deploying their raids pods operationally.

I understand some of what you're saying however-

The Jaguar has not participated in any operations since Jag Det was moved out of Incirilik in 2002- FACT. Whereas the GR1/4 force has been continously deployed on operations since 1990 and the GR7 force has been deployed on Telic and Kandahar since then also. The money spent on Colt and the Jag force could have been spent on easing the burden on the part of the RAF actually doing the biz.

Granted, the Jaguar has given good service, is still a relatively capable aircraft and has a smaller logistic footprint, but it has no place in the sort of op we are engaged in nowadays.

Getting airborne with an EPW and TIALD, ECM, etc.. from el-udied with an outside air of plus 45c?- not very likely.

Operating in the mountains of afganistan with a MSA of 19000ft?

If we were deploying to Denmark and fighting AQ or whoever on the north german plain ok.

Coltishall is an ok station and is a popular posting for some. It suffers from being stuck in the 1980's and people staying there too long or returning too often - a lot of people, especially groundcrew, are going to have a big shock when they come back to the real air force.

I met and worked with some excellent people during my time at Colt, however I can tell you that an excellent pilot does not always make an excellent leader. Everyone has their own opinion of someone and it depends where you are in the Koala Bear Tree on how you perceive people. I am not aircrew but served on SAR, C130, SHF(CH47)and GR4 Sqns as well as a Jag Sqn and I can tell you there are just as many high flyers in those forces too.

Jackonicko

3rd Mar 2006, 15:28

Rose coloured spectacles or realism?

No-one would pretend that the Jag's payload/range and performance characteristics are great, but equally only a fool would deny that the aircraft has made a contribution in the Middle East (even pre Adour 106!), while India has demonstrated the type's utility 'hot and high' over the Kargil. There are obviously many things that Jag can't do. There are other things it does better than other platforms.

Jag came within a gnat's of being used in 2003, and the reasons they weren't had nothing to do with the type's usefulness and capabilities.

With better, more appropriate weapons (how many inert 1,000 lb Paveways did the GR4s drop in Iraq, for want of a proper low collateral damage weapon?) the Jag could still be filling a very useful role. Not least in keeping hours of what remains of the 142 GR4s. How confident are you that those airframes will make it to 2023 without major attention? Or off the GR7s and GR9s. Think many of those will make it to 2017 without a new back end?

With your SF background, you'll doubtless be aware how happy some Jag customers are that their needs are being passed over to other platforms.....

I'm fully aware of what RAIDS is, and what it's primary purpose is. I'm also aware of what it's potential uses are.

engineer(retard)

3rd Mar 2006, 15:40

"With better, more appropriate weapons (how many inert 1,000 lb Paveways did the GR4s drop in Iraq, for want of a proper low collateral damage weapon?) the Jag could still be filling a very useful role."

Jacko

Am I misreading this or are you suggesting that we use Jags as low collateral weapons. I do not think that they have MACE lugs on the Jaguar to attach to the Tonkas shoulders.

regards

retard

Jackonicko

3rd Mar 2006, 15:55

retard

I really did laugh out loud.....

Nice one!

sooms

3rd Mar 2006, 17:03

southside

3rd Mar 2006, 17:06

Exactly. Which is why they have to waste thousands upon thousands of pounds worth of my money going on a jolly boys outing to COLD places.

Splash Coxswain

3rd Mar 2006, 17:23

Took the decision at our place today to cancel our crewroom copy of the Scum!

Southside,

Put a fecking sock in it! You are like a scratched gramophone record!

southside

3rd Mar 2006, 17:34

SkyHawk-N

3rd Mar 2006, 18:23

Southside, I'm actually a member of the public and don't mind MY money being spent by any RAF guys, especially the Jag guys, carrying out these 'sorties'. I'd rather they spent MY money than chavs and chavettes spending it on Burberry and prams (if you've even been to Swindon you'll know what I mean!).

I'll bug out now. Bye. :ok:

Biggus

3rd Mar 2006, 18:26

southside

You yourself admitted that port visits are expensive, so what are all the port visits undertaken by the Grey Funnel Line, if not a waste of money??!!

Raymond Ginardon

3rd Mar 2006, 19:26

Jacko,

"has a cockpit that in some respects represents a good learning environment for Typhoon - paper tidy, with EFRCs and ETAPs,...."

EFRCs and ETAPS??? Who have you been talking to??!!!

Ray

threepointonefour

3rd Mar 2006, 21:24

Jacko-
It's pointless turning this into a Jag Vs. anything discussion- it's not the subject of this thread.
I am only pointing out to 3.14 that the Jag Force does not and in all likelihood will not go to hot sandy places and get shot at (atthe moment anyway).

I also refer to your point higher up the thread ...

My point was not to argue for the Jag sqn's right to do this, but the right of every serving RAF sqn - it's irrelevant that you perceive the Jag force as a waste the past 4 yrs ... the fact is that they have held a capability and whether used or not, it has existed. The point is, the weekend (Overseas Training Flight) was budgeted for and in very real terms they have spent a negligible amount of money anyway ... these OTFs do not need ANY justification, as their existence already does that.

On a slightly different note, I know of a service sponsored 'Leadership Development' exercise taking place soon - individual cost for 7 nts skiing abroad is £80 (and it's duty - ie weekdays away from the office while colleagues cover the already undermanned sections) ...

I'm sure you could all point me in the direction of a holiday firm that will give me the equivalent deal for less than £750? But hey, all those going will develop their leadership skills, so that's all ok, but god-forbid that our pilots get to practice overseas training and civilian IFR procedures at an unfamiliar airfield.

in all likelihood will not go to hot sandy places and get shot at (at the moment anyway).
Sooms, you prove my point entirely, thank you. We prepare now, not panic when the need arises (I would like to believe that!) - just because the pilots enjoyed themselves (at their own expense) while they were away is, again, irrelevant to the justification for the flight.

threepointonefour

3rd Mar 2006, 21:29

I wont put a sock in it until you lot realise that you cannot continue to make mugs out of the general public and you have to stop taking the pi$$ and act responsibly.
To think that you can get away with a jolly boys outing to Italy for a skiing weekend is poor leadership. Stop wasting my money

It's hard to believe we share the same flying training system and yet can be so different ...

Re 'mugs out of the general public' ..? I refer you to your previous comment of 83 ships/boats (whatever you call them) !!! And since the end of the empire, there's surely NO need to sail those ships to places like the USA, Hong Kong, Dubai or even run aground in Australia - we must have the best guarded islands in the world with 83 of the finest warships guarding our shores?

83 ?!!!

MostlyHarmless

3rd Mar 2006, 22:05

My point was not to argue for the Jag sqn's right to do this, but the right of every serving RAF sqn
Couldn't agree more. Yes, it's nice to go somewhere different for a change - it's also damn handy to have an understanding of what it takes to get some of HRH's toys from A to C when B doesn't do things the same way we do.
Southside, do you think we're born with that knowledge? Or is it something you feel we should cuff when foreign policy fails and we need to get to C about 48 Hrs ago?

jindabyne

3rd Mar 2006, 22:16

Don't really want to get involved, but can't resist ---

All this talk of OLF. When with pointy and triangular things at HQ 1Gp in the 1980's these things were called 'rangers', which then became OLFs. Same thing, different title- old git some 25/30 years ago. Point is that once per year, each crew (or pilot) was allowed to fly away to a NATO base to gain interoberabilty experience; usually Thu - Mon. Preferably this meant low level in-theatre, hopefully with a bit of DACT. If it did, and even if didn't, then the chaps had a bit of time to themselves after some lenghty time away from 'home' on frequent two/four week exercises. Sounds tough, but I guess not anywhere near as tough as today. Sorry, but groundcrew didn't have the same opporunity - unless the jet went U/S.

Whatever, it gave young bloods the opportunity to plan and lead oversea deployments, and old bloods the chance to sit back and 'follow'. And, dare I say it, fill the bomb bay with ripe green peppers, vino, prawns etc on the return leg.

They gave a good training return at low cost - accomodation was either on-base, or at a hotel (and meals) that were at fixed rate allowances. Same today I think, ie you pay for the extras.

Bloody good for morale, bloody good for experience, great fun, bad for the liver, and so teribbly,terribly wrong today. Sad.

UnderPowered

5th Mar 2006, 21:28

OK, I can resist no longer.
I am 'very well versed' in facts about the Jaguar, the Sqn concerned, and Higher Command policy on OTFs. Thus, in case we're concerned about facts rather than just venting our spleens, I offer the truths that I know:
1. OTFs are mandated by HQ 1 Gp. So presumably, the fact that one was conducted cannot be an error in leadership at Sqn level.
2. Jackonicko's information on the Jaguar is all correct. I can't remember your name, but yes, it does have ETAPs and EFRCs. Moreover if you have an emergency, it will tell you where your nearest suitable is, the runway orientation, the runway length, all relevant frequencies, steer you to it, put a cue to it in the helmet mounted sight, tell you when you're going to get there.....and then display the ETAP for your approach. You can even load pictures of scantily clad (insert species of your choice for political correctness). Oh, and that lot is 2 presses on the TV screen and 2 on the HOTAS. Oh, and the TV's big, big, big, and it doesn't reflect the sunlight.
3. The Jaguar had force elements declared at readiness. It stands by to deploy anywhere its asked at quite short notice, and fully retains its combat capability. It also has enough life left in it to do it. And the people who operate it WANT to be on ops with the other mates who are.
4. Most of the stuff that's not on it that make people think makes it less capable is ready to be installed under UOR. All the paperwork/TDP/maths/software etc has been done. Oh, yes, and I'm not sure, but isn't it the only bomber to have successfully operated with ASRAAM connected to its HMS?
5. I learn alot when I go on OTF. It helps me deploy to war (and to foreign exercises) better. Especially at short notice.
6. The vast majority of skill and experience gained on an OTF is not type specific. The skills and experience (and especially the ability to not get maxed out by the foreign differences and then have a flight safety event) are transferrable to other types that these boys will go on to fly.
7. Nobody on this OTF took the pi$$ in any way, shape or form. Whether it was in the air, allowing the JPs to lead, because they'll be the middle managers on the next op, or at least if no op comes up, the worldwide peacetime deployments that the Jag will still conduct; or whether it was on the ground, where they were stood down, and chose to spend their own money in a certain way.
8. I agree that there is alot of wastage in the forces, but the OTF has a direct bearing on operational output. Fact. AOC 1 Gp says so in ordering us to do it, achieve the stat, and report back why if we don't. I don't think we have to justify what we do during UK based stand-down, so what's different here?
2 more things:
Is any of what I have written wrong?
Are we fighting amongst ourselves, rather with the rubbish newspaper that published incorrect information that potentially discredits ALL of us? Including you, Southside, unless you don't have HM the Queen's Crown somewhere on your uniform. Because Joe Public doesn't know light blue from dark blue from 41 Sqn from 846 Sqn from 4 Regt.
And to the senior men:
I'm begging you, PLEASE don't capitulate, based on the bolleaux that a pr@t from the Sun writes. We're Her Majesty's finest, stick it to them! (Sorry, that was a bit of emotion, I guess I'll be waiting ANOTHER couple of years for ACSC now!)
Blimey! I don't usually talk that much.....
Thankyou
Underpowered

LateArmLive

5th Mar 2006, 21:40

Totally agree with underpowered on the OTF side of things (even with the Jag stuff too!)
If the OTF to Aviano was anything like the one that we did not too long ago...
A. We took off from a military airfield and landed at another NATO airfield. Cost? Nil, other than what it costs to run the jets.
B. Accommodation was provided at Aviano, but the boys decided to pay for a hotel in Cortina out of their own pockets and have some snowtime over the weekend. Cost to the taxpayer? Nil.
C. The JPs were given the responsibility to organise and lead the whole shebang, and this provided them with experience that they couldn't get in the UK. Value? Lots. Cost? Nil.

Unfortunately, letting the truth out doesn't make a good story. :hmm:

bigglesUK

5th Mar 2006, 21:49

Would be nice if the people of our press put as much effort into waking the present government up to the fact that RAF aircraft are deployed into war zones unequipped to do the job properly. ie Tornado aircraftin Iraq unable to drop munitions as they have the wrong ones, or aircraft flying with less than adequate protection against enemy fire ?loss of C-130 and crew springs to mind, these are far more costly and a waste of time than moaning about an overseas flight that at least will not cause loss of life to the crew or the loss of millions of pounds worth of aircraft due to enemy action.
Maybe that the editors od owners are after a knighthood for leaving the PM in peace over important stuff ?

southside

6th Mar 2006, 11:39

OTF or Continental Navigation training is a valuable and necessary aspect to our flying training.

Staying in Hotels for the weekend and spending the tax payers money on Skiing is not valuable nor necessary.

Jackonicko

6th Mar 2006, 12:43

Which bit of

"the boys decided to pay for a hotel in Cortina out of their own pockets and have some snowtime over the weekend. Cost to the taxpayer? Nil."

did you find impenetrable Southside?

Turkey.

spectre150

6th Mar 2006, 14:10

By the same token, money spent on sport/recreation at the weekend in the UK is neither valuable nor necessary. After all, the taxpayer pays my salary and so the same principle applies doesnt it? :* . Sorry, I succumbed to emotion :p

Fg Off Max Stout

6th Mar 2006, 14:27

Southside, old chap,

as I have pointed out on other threads previously, you have an incredible ability to disagree with any statement being made, regardless of how blatantly obvious and factual it is. I do not believe for one moment that any tax bucks were spent on skiing and what members of the armed forces choose to spend their salaries on when off duty is entirely their prerogative.
Therefore, pas de problem, non-story. QED.

southside

6th Mar 2006, 15:45

Good, that settles that then. So there were definately no claims submitted for this trip then. Good. at last that one is cleared up then.

FJJP

6th Mar 2006, 15:49

Is this guy just unbelievable?

Southside, you just will not let it go, will you?

threepointonefour

6th Mar 2006, 17:30

I reckon it's about about 60 members 'FOR', and 2 'AGAINST' ...

That's over 95% 'FOR' ... overwhelming in anyone's book. And as we all know, there's always 'one' who doesn't 'fit in' on the sqn (and should maybe consider a career in critical journalism) ...

Daf Hucker

6th Mar 2006, 18:37

If we just ignore Southside and his intrusions onto otherwise very readable threads, he'd eventualy have to make his statements so outlandish that even he'd realise that he was a kn*b.

Mowgli

7th Mar 2006, 00:03

Hi everyone! I haven't been here for a long time, but when a builder friend brought me his Scum Rag to show me the article I knew there'd be some fun to be had here. One point that hasn't been raised (and I've just read all the posts), is the recruitment value of this story. Now I know that at the selection interview you would be well advised to say that you read one of the on-side broadsheets, but we all know that a few good men will have taken a glance at page 3 in their youth. I reckon a young blade/blade ess will think it's pretty cool to take some jets to the Alps for a bit of fun in the snow (more cred if the boys had been snowboarding).

There are very good posts here explaining the value of such excursions. I can only commend them to the doubters, and suggest they actually READ carefully what's been written. It's all there!

Southside. I don't believe we have met. I have considered your viewpoint and have read your replies to these posts. I respect the open debate opportunity afforded us all here.

I feel well qualified to have an opinion on the subject being discussed here, based on personal experience, not conjecture or rumour.

Southside, you are either wrong, misguided, or just have an axe to grind.

Salutations to the glorious 41sqn, the Jaguar that has served UKplc so well, and all those who have flown or supported them. We could all do worse in the UK than to actually celebrate those aspects of our little island which are worthy of our praise. We seem to have a culture of envy. Shame.

Iain Watson

7th Mar 2006, 09:01

Probably against the rules being a civvy, but...

Southside......

If we want any more **** from you we'll squeeze your head....

Now, in the mean time, leave the thinking to those with brains.

Iain.

UnderPowered

7th Mar 2006, 23:19

Welcome back Watty! Long time no speak. Can you get me a job?

I have a 95% suspicion that Southside is a wind-up merchant, on the basis that nobody could be that stupid.

2 points:

1. Admin Guru was a better wind-up merchant, so either be better or give it up.

2. They tried to get on-base accommodation, but were denied by Aviano, so they had to stay in hotels somewhere, rather than on base. On Sunday, however, they chiselled their way into on-base acommodation in order to minimize the impact.

Is that good enough?

southside

8th Mar 2006, 16:44

Which bit of

"the boys decided to pay for a hotel in Cortina out of their own pockets

Thats ok then. At least they paid for the accomm themselves and there was no impact to the public purse.....

They tried to get on-base accommodation, but were denied by Aviano, so they had to stay in hotels somewhere, rather than on base. On Sunday, however, they chiselled their way into on-base acommodation in order to minimize the impact.
or was there....the plot thickens.

anyway, never mind all this conjecture...
I hope they all had a fab time. I've been on enough landaways to appreciate the training value they give and of course if you can manage to have a couple of beers in between sorties (without breaking the rules) then crack on lofty. Good on ya Jag blokes...nice to see.

Jackonicko

16th Mar 2006, 10:58

How was the "pointless training exercise with your outdated jet", Bob. Manage to embarrass anyone flying more modern machines, or did you just die gloriously?

UnderPowered

18th Mar 2006, 15:55

I, on the other hand, finished the det $1.25 up! Please don't tell the tax man, though...

buoy15

18th Mar 2006, 20:08

Perhaps the Sqn has not done an OTF for ages, and as they are rapidly approaching the new financial year for their budget - they have to "use it or lose it"
Foreign landaways provide valuable planning and training and boost Sqn and Stn morale by getting the lads out of the rut for a weekend
Well done to get 6 Jags to Italy and back
In the good old days the STANEVAL/TACEVAL team would have been impressed
£30.000 will probably keep Prescotts office supplied with headed notepaper for a year
Maybe the Sqn got funded by a "loan" that we don't know about?
Love Many, Trust a Few, Watch the Sun, they're gunning for you!

OCCWMF

20th Mar 2006, 10:59

Aaah yes, the office of the Deputy PM......... perhaps we could send Southside there - he could really do some damage:ok:

Kitbag

20th Mar 2006, 11:07

Bouy 15, bearing in mind that the OTF was allegedly reported to the Sun as a 'jolly' by a disgruntled member of the groundcrew I would question the idea of it raising Station morale. Maybe I could borrow your rose tinted spectacles?

teeteringhead

20th Mar 2006, 14:32

as they are rapidly approaching the new financial year for their budget - they have to "use it or lose it"

... doubt if there's too much in the budget for anything for the Jags next year :( :(

Bruiser Loose

20th Mar 2006, 18:45

To the 95% of you on this thread:

Sorry. The whole RN is sorry. We will take ourselves away and sort ourselves out. SS is one of us and we pray forgiveness from the other services.

SS:
Have you ever heard the saying that if you think there are no w@nkers on your Squadron..........................it's you?

Anyway, back to the thread. OTFs, Landaways, Endaways or whatever your service call them. Even if the training benefit that we achieved from going foreign wasn't worth it (and I'm not saying for one minute that it isn't), the morale that is generated by going away for a weekend now and again must surely raise the OC on any unit. In these times of stretch and overstretch, we need to hold on to our people. The cost of training new personnel, both aircrew and ground crew is huge. If we can encourage (a few) people to stay by giving them something to look forward to (now and again), then the savings in the training budget must outweigh the small amounts we are talking about here.

Does anyone know the cost of training an ab initio pilot/obs/wso these days?

southside

20th Mar 2006, 23:47

Hey, where does it say that Im against OTF, Landaways etc... Im all for them. Good training, good for morale and good for team building. However, in recent years the RN have taken OTF a little more seriously. We (generally) have a true justification for going there. When we get there we stay in Military accom (if available) and we (generally) fly a number of sorties wither with or against the host nation. We plan the trip over the continent to include an element of tactical/training and we always include the host nation in the planing and execution of those training sorties.

Gone are the days (sadly) that the RN flys to Grenoble for the weekend, hops on the ski bus and buggers about for the weekend before flying back.