Joint Helicopter Command........

[Dundiggin']

With the advent of JHC - has the RAF been stitched......:hmm:

[serf]

Like a kipper

[South Bound]

Why do you ask that?

[London Mil]

With the advent of JHC - has the RAF been stitched......:hmm:


....... and has it taken you 7 years to figure that one out:eek:

[The Helpful Stacker]

I don't think so.

Yes we of the light blue have green jobs as our masters but of late all the high visibility operations involving JHC have used mainly RAF run assets, making us look better value when placed alongside TWA and the wheezing FAA fleet.

Surely at some point someone (possibly Gordon Brown) is going to ask why we have one highly professional air force and two highly professional pizza and bluely delivery services.

I see the AAC disappearing into the RAF the future, possibly to save the Army from loosing men and tanks in a budget cut and the FAA retaining only an anti-submarine/ship board operations element.

[PTC REMF]

I think you need to have a chat with some AH mates just back from the 'stan to see how ineffective The AAC is.

[The Helpful Stacker]

Yes I will concede that the AH lads are doing great in Afghanistan but what is that, six a/c from the entire TWA fleet?

[Pongochap]

Yes we of the light blue have green jobs as our masters but of late all the high visibility operations involving JHC have used mainly RAF run assets, making us look better value when placed alongside TWA and the wheezing FAA fleet.

RAF - 'better value'. I just fell off my chair! Right, well, I suppose why deploy with 30 people when 60 will do.

Of course, why would you have a Maj/Sqn Ldr in comd of a Sqn when a Wing Comd will do. A lot better value - obviously. Silly me.

Oh and the 6 AH are the only AAC aircraft doing anything. The Corps hasn’t got Lx in Afghanistan, Iraq and Bosnia. Oh and the AAC doesn't support BATUS, Belize, Brunei, SF Ops, UK and foreign exercises and tasking and there isn’t a Defender Sqn either.

I hope the 'wheezing FAA fleet' will take a sharp intake of air as the Sea Kings operating in the Lebanon fly another SH task whilst the rest of the FAA undertake a variety of commitments in an impressive array of roles.

Anyone not in the RAF is just delivering fast food or Blueys though. Obviously.

[South Bound]

THS

it is awfully tempting to quote what you wrote to me about Chinook vs Merlin - stop talking uninformed rubbish was about the gist of it I think.

AAC and RAF Rotary do 2 distinctly different jobs. RAF has its nose put out of joint when the AAC got Apache, but is now getting well on side seeing the genuinely effective cooperative missions in Afg. Personally don't see an argument for changing anything at the moment, seems to be working fine

[Weezer]

I don't think so.
Yes we of the light blue have green jobs as our masters but of late all the high visibility operations involving JHC have used mainly RAF run assets, making us look better value when placed alongside TWA and the wheezing FAA fleet.

THS
Is there any danger of you sounding like you know what you're talking about? I suggest you spend some time with some of the folks in the support side (DLO/DPA) of the house. As a result of moving all BH under land command, we now have to compete with tanks and other, relatively inexpensive, equipment for support budget. We're now a very expensive fish in quite a small pool. If we had remained in the DLog(strike) 'pool' we would have been quite inexpensive when compared with Tornado, Typhoon etc. The result is that as soon as project cost overun or another savings round is run, we're high on the target lists for any cuts, with minimal amount of room for horse-trading across projects.
Don't even start me on what being in Land command does for our troops when considering projects like SLAM.
So, in short, yes we've been stuffed (along with the AAC and FAA).
However, your fishing exped looks like it worked. :D

[The Helpful Stacker]

However, your fishing exped looks like it worked. :D

Its too easy sometimes.:}

[Pongochap]

the AH lads are doing great in Afghanistan but what is that, six a/c from the entire TWA fleet?

Well, there's fishing and then there's blissful ignorance.

[Safety_Helmut]

That was no fishing expedition. More like another typical example of sh!te posted by THS.

S_H

[forwardassist]

Dundiggin'
So what prompted your intriguing, yet throw-away, opener? I'm just bursting to know! :hmm:

[Op Tastic]

What an opener for debate... and THS and SB grace us with insight and comment normally reserved for the Oracle.

Current:

AH proves itself as a true Army platform and rightly sits on the gree side of the fence.

Future:

RAF SH fleet combined with AAC - working together - no noses put out of joint and Crabs able to get Blueys delivered on time and right location.

AT Fleet sub-contracted out to 'who-ever' but not run by the current bunch.

Typhoon Air Defence scrapped - who exactly is the enemy we are dog-fightin' against - put the money into more SH. Remaining a/c fit niceley into the new RN Marine Air Wing. Littoral ops and rum rations.

As we all know,and to quote the Oracle, "There will be a great victory!"

I'm off for breakfast...

[South Bound]

I do love these forums and the self-important members that feel the need to comment on the validity of others' posts. OT - I wasn't trying to be insightful, rather I offered a brief opinion that the situation seemed to be OK at the moment based on current operations. As for THS's post, well, if we all agreed, this wouldn't half as interesting, would it? Go and have your breakfast and come back a nice smiley chap.

It would be nice to know what prompted Dundiggin's original post tho...

[Dundiggin']

I am not ignoring your requests as to what prompted the post.

- I am gathering information to give you a more informed response.:ok:

[microlight AV8R]

If I hold muybreath anu longer I will burst:E

Edit: Spelnlig

[Pierre Argh]

"Highly Professional Airforce"... as you seem to have ruled out the AAC and FAA, one wonders who on earth you might be talking about?

... no surely not, you cannot be serious?

[Talking Radalt]

RAF - 'better value'. I just fell off my chair! Right, well, I suppose why deploy with 30 people when 60 will do.

Have you been in the JHF HQ building at Kandahar? Ye gods.
So many people (wearing light blue berets), so little to do. "I know, let's all sit round the big table and errr.....agree what we talk about the next time we'll all sit round the big table" :rolleyes:
Exactly the same is true of the flight line where the light blue berets have bagged everything, vehicles, tentage, hardened hangars etc, in the name of the AAC "because the RSM says so".
Last time I looked an Army RSM was (thankfully) absent from my chain of command.
Up at Bastion life is far simpler. Why? Because there isn't an AAC self-licking lollipop anywhere to be seen.

[sixbarrelldiplomat]

Before we go into a full blown peeing contest, I'd just like to say that I have been involved with JHC since it's inception. Some aspects work, some don't and sniping at our brothers dressed in green isn't going to change much.
I've worked with some shambolic people in my own service(RAF) and some first class individuals in the Army, and vice versa. Pigeon holing people on the colour of their beret only holds us back.
The AAC are doing a fantastic job in the Stan, as indeed is the SH Force and both deserve mutual respect for excelling at different jobs requiring different attributes. As a SH Mate, the British Army are our customer, and we forget that at our peril....ask 12 Sqn RAAF who kindly handed their SH to the Army after playing by the truckie fleet rules.
As for the RN, God I've tried to understand them, but they seem to exist to perpetuate their own PR and to maintain traditions developed when the earth was believed flat.

[South Bound]

TR

you are so right - just how many people does it take to look after a few Lynx? Roughly the same as it does to look after the Wokkas and AH combined. Good job we have lots of spare space out there for them all...

[Tourist]

sixbarrelldiplomat.

Stick it up your @rse.

Decided that emergency banter was all that was required to refute your post.

[GasFitter]

What an opener for debate... and THS and SB grace us with insight and comment normally reserved for the Oracle.
Current:
AH proves itself as a true Army platform and rightly sits on the gree side of the fence.
Future:
RAF SH fleet combined with AAC - working together - no noses put out of joint and Crabs able to get Blueys delivered on time and right location.
AT Fleet sub-contracted out to 'who-ever' but not run by the current bunch.
Typhoon Air Defence scrapped - who exactly is the enemy we are dog-fightin' against - put the money into more SH. Remaining a/c fit niceley into the new RN Marine Air Wing. Littoral ops and rum rations.
As we all know,and to quote the Oracle, "There will be a great victory!"
I'm off for breakfast...

This just shows you that you think Defence Procurement is all about military need and capability - and not about thousands of voters keeping our politicians in a job ......... By the way, Father Christmas isn't real!

[Arthur's Wizard]

The JHC has been around for what, 7, 8 years? And for the first time in all those years, the Commander is something other than RAF and all of a sudden the Crabs feel threatened.

Did you expect the RAF to command it forever? The FAA don't drip about it all day with truculant comments and yet haven't had a sniff at the command.

[Talking Radalt]

The JHC has been around for what, 7, 8 years? And for the first time in all those years, the Commander is something other than RAF and all of a sudden the Crabs feel theatened.
No, not threatened, just a bit :ugh: :ugh: :ugh: with all the barmy Army nonsense that now permeates every aspect of our working lives with the possible exception of the colour of the head dress we wear although I suspect that's not far off.
For example, there are Landrovers running round Kandahar bearing (RAF) Sqn insignia of a well known mythical horsey type creature, being driven by and permanently allocated to Army folk who "forgot" to bring any MT to the party, but because we're all "joint" we have to give up our assets to bail out the pongoes.
Now let me ask you this....Do you think this arrangement would be so popular if the tide were going out instead of coming in?
And they have the audacity to say WE don't know how to deploy.:hmm:

[Arthur's Wizard]

errrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr ok!

So your gripe about the Army dominating the JHC (They do have more helicopters than the other 2 services put together) stems from you having to give up a Land Rover due to poor Pongo admin?

Ask the Green Types who the second class citizen's in JHF (NI) are; I can assure you that it isn't our light blue bretheren.

[South Bound]

Not 100% sure it is JHC's attitude to light blue that is the problem, after all the RAF have been fairly represented in the 2-Star department since its inception. Is it rather that the mainstream RAF (STC) has kind of forgotten about the SH world? I can't actually find much written down about where rotary fits into AirPower doctrine at all, although I do believe there may be a project in the offing to study it and understand it.

Personally (and I am RAF) I think all the rotary should be under one banner, RAF or AAC, whichever is best suited (not intending to start a fight on that one), but it just seems barking to have 2 (3 if you count CHF) groups of people working so closely together under different rules/regs/terms of service etc. JHC is a bit of a compromise in that respect providing essential oversight of the different processes.

[Talking Radalt]

errrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr ok!
So your gripe about the Army dominating the JHC (They do have more helicopters than the other 2 services put together) stems from you having to give up a Land Rover due to poor Pongo admin?
Errrrr, not exactly. The MT issue is an example of how the J in JHC apparently stands for "Army", not the sole reason.
Maybe the RAF should start operating tanks (not those piddly little things the Rocks had). Proper big Chally 2s. Then see who whinges.
Trouble is the Army in general firmly believe their own Be The Best campaign and think they can do absolutely everything and anything far, far better than absolutely anybody else, ever, in the known Universe.

[Always_broken_in_wilts]

TR,
It's not just JHC that has **** all "purple" in it.

I am sure you already have but try a visit to AIR STATION Basrah and see just how the Green Machine runs that place. Every "chinless lab owning tea from Fortnum and Mason daddy owns shropshire stupid stick carrying daft hat wearing" wonder drives the 2-300 yards to work in a brand new disco 3 but try getting fours jinglie buses for the Herc det:ugh: :ugh:

Happily the det is off to the "Deid" leaving behind all those quaint little customs like RSM's, this bars for permanent staff, CBA everywhere unless of course you are out jockstrapping, tent inspections by the Camp Com blah blah.........:rolleyes:

all spelling mistakes are "df" alcohol induced

[iss]

Sod whether or not the 'RAF' has been stitched. The question has to be if the RAF guys in JHC are better supported by their Brown-job Bosses than when the previous Light Blue hierarchy

[Arthur's Wizard]

Maybe the RAF should start operating tanks (not those piddly little things the Rocks had). Proper big Chally 2s. Then see who whinges.
.

A very interesting reply. So am I to understand from this that your argument is based on the fact that the Pongos (and presumably the FAA) should not even own aircraft let alone head up a Joint Command?

Mmmmm. Great argument:rolleyes:

[Talking Radalt]

A very interesting reply. So am I to understand from this that your argument is based on the fact that the Pongos (and presumably the FAA) should not even own aircraft let alone head up a Joint Command?

No, my argument is based on the premise that the Army consistently poke the RAF for being a bit light weight yet man-power heavy, disorganised, afraid of a bit of bad weather and generally battle-shy, yet if one scratches ever so gently beneath the surface exactly the same can be said of a large portion of outfits like the AAC (note: a large portion, not all)
Army (very loud) "We're great! You're shi!t!" :}
RAF <sigh> "yes, ok, you win" :hmm:

[Tourist]

To be fair.
They may, in fact, not always be great, but you are ****e.....

[Stitchbitch]

On the subject of JHC and cheapness, value for money,etc..why do we in the RAF still have commisioned officers flying SH when everyday I see SNCO AAC pilots doing the same job ? Okay, delivering blueys and cabbying the Brig about may be slightly diffrent to carrying a stick of paras but the 'driving' jobs just the same.:oh:

[althenick]

On the subject of JHC and cheapness, value for money,etc..why do we in the RAF still have commisioned officers flying SH when everyday I see SNCO AAC pilots doing the same job ? Okay, delivering blueys and cabbying the Brig about may be slightly diffrent to carrying a stick of paras but the 'driving' jobs just the same.:oh:


Good point - And the Fleet Air Arm for that Matter.

[BellEndBob]

Or C130's, VC10's, Tri Stars, E3D's, FJ Backseaters etc etc.

Stand by to be told how 'special' they all are and how the Army has it all wrong.:rolleyes:





:E :E

[GasFitter]

On the subject of JHC and cheapness, value for money,etc..why do we in the RAF still have commisioned officers flying SH when everyday I see SNCO AAC pilots doing the same job ? Okay, delivering blueys and cabbying the Brig about may be slightly diffrent to carrying a stick of paras but the 'driving' jobs just the same.:oh:
Because if the MOD insisted that all aircrew in the Army had to be commissioned, the Army couldn't produce the quality of people to fill all of the cockpits .... or of course you'd have to get a bigger bunch of chinless wonders whose father's own some shire county, train them for a significant period, so that they could go back to their preferred regiments after one productive tour having had "jolly good fun flying "a toy" for a few years! Now that's a waste of money, training, time and effort - but hey, it's the only way that the AAC will get any understanding or representation in the higher places of the Army as they are not taken seriously. Infantry and tanks, that's what the Army do - AAC are the glorified General's taxi service! Leave the professional aircrew within the RAF to do the proper stuff whilst the green jobs enjoy themselves under the direction of the ignorant 'Teeth Arm' who continue to blah on about the uselessness of the 'Air Environment' because they can't see it on the battlefield, whilst simultaneously demonstrating they don't understand it at all!

[Talking Radalt]

Stand by to be told how 'special' they all are and how the Army has it all wrong.:rolleyes:

You've got it all wrong.

[A and C]

A lot of the NCO aircrew in the RAF that I have met would be well up to doing the flying job, but for you it seems to be a question of " if they don't fit into the officers mess then they cant fly the aircraft".

History shows that the greatest achivments of the RAF would not have happend without NCO pilots.

[[email protected]]

Because if the MOD insisted that all aircrew in the Army had to be commissioned, the Army couldn't produce the quality of people to fill all of the cockpits .... or of course you'd have to get a bigger bunch of chinless wonders whose father's own some shire county, train them for a significant period, so that they could go back to their preferred regiments after one productive tour having had "jolly good fun flying "a toy" for a few years! Now that's a waste of money, training, time and effort - but hey, it's the only way that the AAC will get any understanding or representation in the higher places of the Army as they are not taken seriously. Infantry and tanks, that's what the Army do - AAC are the glorified General's taxi service! Leave the professional aircrew within the RAF to do the proper stuff whilst the green jobs enjoy themselves under the direction of the ignorant 'Teeth Arm' who continue to blah on about the uselessness of the 'Air Environment' because they can't see it on the battlefield, whilst simultaneously demonstrating they don't understand it at all!

Tosser.

Message ends.

[[email protected]]

I can't believe I'm taking this thread seriously. It was started by a Puma crewman, ffs!

Get back to pushing your trolley, dundiggin'. :yuk:

[Dundiggin']

[email protected]:

Goes to prove just how higorant you are matey..... 'second senior service' my @rse. Leave the flying to the RAF at least they know what they are doing and what flying is all about without pongo interference. Stick to digging holes in the ground you're good at that.. :ugh:

[[email protected]]

Still a loadie. Maybe if you'd done something with your life since you left school you'd have progressed beyond handing out bag rats to those better than you.

[Dundiggin']

[email protected]

There was a serious reason for this thread - and you're not it!
Go and play somewhere else instead of getting pathetically and inaccurately personal.:8

[GasFitter]

Tosser.
Message ends.

Very articulate! I think you've just made my point for me!

[GasFitter]

A lot of the NCO aircrew in the RAF that I have met would be well up to doing the flying job, but for you it seems to be a question of " if they don't fit into the officers mess then they cant fly the aircraft".
History shows that the greatest achivments of the RAF would not have happend without NCO pilots.
I think the interesting question would be to the RAF commissioned aircrew, would you do the same job, for the same money, as an NCO - with Flt Cdrs being officers (Flt Lts) and Sqn Cdrs being Sqn Ldrs - that's novel!
You've completely missed my point - the argument was turned on its head with respect to the AAC. Soldiering and tanks first AAC in the 'also-ran' list. How many AAC (or its predecessors) CGSs have their been? Not just guys who have done it outside of their preferred regiments?
I fully concur with your last point, though!

[Always_broken_in_wilts]

The reason the RAF have commisioned dudes as drivers is because the technology we employ demands the sort of understanding only a highly educated individual can master:ok: Which is the main reason they are paid so highly:ok:

But in the AAC the pre requiste to control a small chopper is that a couple of weeks prior to selection you were seen to be bloody good at either shouting loudly or simply punching someone to establish your point of veiw...............al la warthog we rest our case oh articulate one:rolleyes:

Still if the AAC pay peanuts.........................:E

all spelling mistakes are "df" alcohol induced

[Taffer]

The reason the RAF have commisioned dudes as drivers is because the technology we employ demands the sort of understanding only a highly educated individual can master......

....so, that's why SNCO's are flying the AH then?


I'm really getting a good vibe off the service rotorcraft community - can't wait to join you lot in a few years time if I get my wings. Sounds as if you really have a great respect for each other.

Cynical, moi?

[GasFitter]

....so, that's why SNCO's are flying the AH then?


You've just made the point that the AACs NCOs are as good, if not better, than their commissioned counterparts! They probably have accents and went to Comprehensive schools, though!

[Taffer]

You've just made the point that the AACs NCOs are as good, if not better, than their commissioned counterparts! They probably have accents and went to Comprehensive schools, though!

Shock horror!

Maybe my lack of Service bias is due to naivety, which a few years in the wardroom should correct.

I have an accent, went to a comp. school, and I also possess a chin - does that stop me becoming an officer? :ooh:

Despite not going the pongo route, I have the utmost respect for the AAC NCOs - however, I'm sure many of the barcoded crabs will give a reason as to why they should be the only ones allowed to fly Wasteland's and Wastospatiale's finest.

[South Bound]

Normal nonsence being posted on here then. Any chance of getting back to the original thread about perceived problems with how JHC functions rather than trading the same tired RAF vs AAC rubbish?

No? Didn't think so.

[GasFitter]

[QUOTE=Taffer]
I have an accent, went to a comp. school, and I also possess a chin - does that stop me becoming an officer? :ooh:
QUOTE]
Only as a green job!

[ORAC]

So why do the US Army make their WO pilots commissioned officers then......

[GasFitter]

So why do the US Army make their WO pilots commissioned officers then......

Because they've had years of practice!

[yme]

:p Get a Life!

[GasFitter]

:p Get a Life!

Who? .

[Dundiggin']

The reason behind this thread is the perceived creaping cancer of 'Army-ism', together with a hint of RN and what appears to be, none of the familiar RAF experience-based reasoning and common sense, which is contained within some of the policies forced upon the RAF SH fleet by JHC.

eg: Night Flying Currencies.

After countless years of flying a minimum of 1hr per 90 days night requirement which was found very minimal but satisfactory, we now find ourselves chasing a rolling 3 month currency of 4.5hrs, which has to include 3 RNF approaches. Now that may not sound much but in the last 9 weeks we have just completed 6 weeks of night flying in two 3-week night flying periods. Flogging virtually the same routes, fields and confined areas carrying the same netted USLs in order for us to maintain this OTT and in our view, unreasonable requirement. In 37yrs of flying I have never ever had to chase so many bloody ticks. This particular 'chase' not only p1ssed off the natives, it knackered the aircrew, the groundcrew and possibly more importantly, the aircraft! Despite querying the new currency requirement with JHC we were told that it will remain asis!! Why in these times of financial contraint, have these costly 'requirements' remained? This smacks of forced and unreasonable embuggerance for the sake of it. It has a heavy hint of Army inflexibillity, a small hint of RN and definitely no RAF common sense in it!

Which takes me back to the thread......
'has the RAF been stitched by JHC?' -

I believe that by virtue of its' 'Junior' status in the supposedly 'TRI-Service' emporium at JHC the voice of RAF reason no longer has the authority or effect it had in days of yore. And it is beginning to show.

Why is there no flexibillity based upon the Sqn role or Combat Status (LCR/CR) or maybe an experience 'allowance' or some other form of differentiation? Or is that too complicated? If you are LCR or if you are AH then you need more night flying. Incidentally there is nothing wrong with SNCO pilots per se but don't start that dirge again! However, with no experience 'allowance' we are all 'tarred with the same brush' and it's going to cost plenty! On normal SH Sqns which have been running very nicely and competently for 40+yrs - why change the currency requirement? I can only think it is the beligerance, intransigence and inflexibility of the of the louder voices in JHC where, if there happens to be a louder RAF voice it is out voted by the 'senior service' Joker being played!

This perception is damaging the RAF 'coalface' and discrediting JHC in RAF eyes. We don't appear to have a strong enough representation looking after our interests in JHC. Very wisely the RN have kept their 'arbiter' such that 'if it doesn't suit the RN interest' then they don't do it!! The Army has Gavan (?) which does the same thing. The RAF seemingly has buggerall! This has got to change!!

I look around at my fellow Sqn mates and I see dissatisfaction, a sense of injustice, confusion, resignation and a whole heap of cynicism. It's almost as if one hasn't got a vote anymore which is bad joo joo........:ugh: .

[ZH875]

So why do the US Army make their WO pilots commissioned officers then......


Because they've had years of practice!Should that read: "Because they've had Months of practice!":)

[timex]

Flying Currencies. After countless years of a minimum of 1hr per 90 days night flying requirement which was found very minimal but satisfactory,we now find ourselves chasing a rolling 3 month currency of 4.5hrs, which has to include 3 RNF approaches. Now that may not sound much but in the last nine weeks we have just completed 6 weeks in two three-week periods of night flying. Flogging virtually the same routes, fields and confined areas carrying the same netted USLs in order for us to maintain these OTT and to us unreasonable requirements. In 37yrs of flying I have never ever had to chase so many bloody ticks. This particular 'chase' not only p1ssed off the natives, it knackered the aircrew, the groundcrew and possibly more importantly, the aircraft! Despite querying this new currency requirement with JHC we have been told that they will remain asis!! Why, in these times of financial contraint have these costly 'requirements' remained? This smacks of forced and unreasonable embuggerance for the sake of it. It has a heavy hint of Army inflexibillity, a small hint of RN and apparently no RAF reason in it!

So you think 1 hr in 90 days makes you current competent and capable? Don't think so.
The Navy have had these requirements for quite a while and the Army only did 1 hr in 8 wks prior to JHC so why you blame the Army for the changes is anyones guess.
The AAC also had a rule for minimal Night flying during the Summer to avoid annoying the locals.
Sorry to tell you but aviation has moved on in the last 37 yrs.

[WIWOWessex]

Sorry to tell you but aviation has moved on in the last 37 yrs.

You are quite right, it has moved on and technology with it. However with the financial constraints and operational strain everyone in the JHC is having to cope with, all these flying currency requirements are doing is making life more difficult.
Why in this largely NVG world do we have to maintain RNF approach currency? Why do we have to fly at night every month to maintain operational effectiveness?
The whole currency debacle smacks of the rantings of a senior officer (with probably only a single flying tour under his belt) making changes for changes sake in the effort to increase his eventual pension plan.:ugh:

[Dundiggin']

Thanks timex

I didn't say 1hr per 90 days made anyone 'competent' or 'capable' what I hoped I was implying was that the bottom limit was there if you needed it but you'd be stoopid to only do that minimum per 90 days. The Supervisors would soon sort that out, the whole point was that it was there if you were desperate. This new limit puts more people on the wrong side of the line and is currently p1ssing everyone off.

Thanks WIWO Wessex

I couldn't agree more mate.........

[LFFC]

Very wisely the RN have kept their 'arbiter' such that 'if it doesn't suit the RN interest' then they don't do it!! The Army has Gavan (?) which does the same thing. The RAF seemingly has bugger all!
The RN have Fleet, the Army has DAAvn (Director of Army Aviation) and the RAF has ... er ... the RAF Training Group at Innsworth?

[Shackman]

This all reminds me of the training requirements on SH up to the mid 80's, when all aircrew had to do dedicated training sorties - for instance 1 hour's TST (Tactical Support training), which was moving a netted load from one side of Odiham to the other, or to pretend move troops from Grid A to Grid B, and until you were 'current' you couldn't go tasking. However, because it was TRAINING it couldn't be done on task, and task hours couldn't be counted towards it. So tasking was frequently cancelled to enable us to do the training so we could then do the tasking - but by then we had run out of hours on the aircraft!!!!!

So what is the training bill for a Squadron's worth of night currency? Assume 15 crews (give or take) @ 4.5 hours per 3 months = 67.5 hours. Even if some of that is done on task that is still extra flying on a desperately stretched fleet. Apart from the b*****ation factor on the air and groundcrew, it is still the prime user - the troops on the ground - who wonder where or when 'their' lift will appear, and as usual blame the very people who want to get the job done.

Once again it strikes of people with little or no modern rotary experience (a la 38 Gp pre 80's) imposing a rigid 'peacetime' mentality on an extremely hard working and flexible fleet (and I mean the whole JHC fleet).


PS Wait till the new non single pilot-nav trained pilots arrive - I wonder what the training bill will be then?

[serf]

Do you still have to sign for Royal flights? - must be a currency requirement somewhere for that.

[wokkawokka]

A good and timely thread made irrelevant at times by some very immature and niave comments.

Whatever the perceptions are in Single Service ivory towers, Jointery is alive and well on the shop floor - where it really counts - on operations. I have recently returned from Afghanistan where Joint RAF CH47 and Army AH missions were led and flown by more than capable RN WAFUs in each type, with rounds going both way target end. From that perspective I genuinely believe that JHC has managed to produce a far more joined up rotary community than was ever experienced with Gutersloh back in the late 80's where Army and RAF very rarely met - and the RN only occasionally in Norway.

However, I do echo many of the sentiments contained in this thread - and if we ask the question we are to blame - too busy back biting or sniping to unite and be a true force to be reckoned with. Too busy with inter service rivalry that we eat ourselves up - if our lords and masters took the plunge then we would get heard in town and receive more resources as it is now widely recognised that although Air Manoeuvre is a lovely concept it is just too expensive - but air mobility is still essential in all operations (not just Iraq/Afghanistan).

Currently JHC is toothless as it has to pander to Fleet, Gavan (I like it!) and Strike and therefore can't really do any command. It is also not deployable - so again the word 'command' is a misnomer. Also, all of its rules and regulations - who is really policing, enforcing, standardising and checking them - again JHC does not have the resources to do that. So it is in effect a mail box, a sorting office, a J1-J9 building, a Joint Helicopter Management location - not a Joint Helicopter Command.

What I am trying to say is that the youth/operators of the community genuinely want 'best practice' and now that AH has proven itself on Ops, then I beleive that the other 2 Services are willing for a little bit of pain to allow the wheezy boy at the back (the AAC) some time and resources to catch up in order to improve the helicopter capability in the whole and not bespoke little fleets.

Afghanistan has shown me that our current capabilities are superb (AH/CH47 mix - very effective and we have done things that previously would never have been contemplated) and with the right commanders (3 Para CO at Bastion really did embrace Avn, unlike melchett and his team of powerpoint gurus at Kandahar that struggled to bring aviation into any sentence).

So lets take it forward - lets really go Joint - who cares what it is called, which uniform (and I genuinely believe that we on the shop floor dont care) and lets provide a strong coherent and worthwhile command that produces the goods to the customer - who whether we like it or not, is the Army.

Then we will get the recognition from said customer (as 3 Para have done) which will mean that we will get listened to in town, which will mean funding, resources, proper exercises, flying hours and a proper JHF/JHC Command and not a haphazard (no lessons brought forward from Bosnia or Iraq) - oooh, its Odihams turn, or go on Pongos, you have go. We all know that the moment the Army boys leave we (the light blue) will make some significant changes to the HQ. Now wouldn't it be nice if JHC could provide a trained, correctly manned and resourced deployable HQ (or at least the important players) to plug andf play where the need arises around the world?

Now is the time to change, but sadly I think that those people who can really effect change are too busy watching their next job, or career to make such a bold step forward and we will just muddle along in a way that is working, but not as we all know, not as operationally efficient as we all know it could be.

[whinetyler]

I say wokka old man, there's no place for sensible debate in this thread!!;)

[WIWOWessex]

Now is the time to change, but sadly I think that those people who can really effect change are too busy watching their next job, or career to make such a bold step forward and we will just muddle along in a way that is working, but not as we all know, not as operationally efficient as we all know it could be.

wokkawokka, hear hear.

As you said, the main problem is that the people in the position to make the change won't do because by rocking the already unsteady boat, they will get their feet wet and will not feel the steel of Her Majesty's sword on their shoulders.

[Dundiggin']

Blimey!
I am delighted that the services are beginning to gel effectively in some theatres (well done AH and RN WAFUs). :ok:
However given the increased frequency of these ops and the very real possibility of wearing lead, it's only going to take one Melchett to order an aircraft captain into the air cos he thinks it's a 4-tonner, the captain to exercise his right as captain to say 'NO' and before you know it we'll all be shot at dawn with a less than evens chance of being pardoned 100 yrs later........I am still deeply suspicious. :hmm:
Until the RAF has some seriously powerful backing with an equal voice in the right places we will be rail roaded again - it must not happen! :=

[serf]

and under what circumstances would said aircraft captain say no?

[Jeep]

Wokka,

Well said. Bring on the Royal Flying Corps.

Jeep

[Dundiggin']

I wouldn't want to elaborate as it would probably start another p1ssing contest..........
...just...if he says...'No' for good 'captain' reasons and there could be many of those......

[right chopper]

Heaven forbid that one day a desk-jockey tells a helo captain that 'he is lacking in moral fibre' :ugh: oh, too late....

[Capt Chaos]

As one of those Pongo 'chinless wonders' (negative mustard chords, black lab, half of Yorkshire) I thought that I would add to some of the posts on this thread.

Wokkawokka - you are spot on and I totally agree.

Right Chopper, Dundiggin et al - from my experiences I have seen the CH47 crews been placed in some pretty tight situations, but when they say yes or no to a mission - then their advice is taken. Again from experience, the refreshing thing is that regularly the RAF boys do say no or tooooo risky - but they always come back with, 'how about this instead', or 'we could try it this way' - which goes down a real treat.

Wokkawokka has obviously been there, read the book, got the T-Shirt (and new underpants from all accounts) and I would be interested if at any stage his advice was ever roughshod by the Pongo commanders?

As to NCO aircrew. Why doesn't the other 2 Services go for NCO only aircrew. The answer is that the NCO aircrew are superb pilots, as they are allowed the time and career profile to hone their skills to perfection (providing servoceability/availibility of aircraft allows!). However, there are not many NCO flight commanders, tactics instructors, Ops Officers etc as the recruiting of officers (by its very nature) requires greater intelligence (academic results), mental dexterity (RCB) and staff and leadership training (Sandhurst, Shrivenham,MK etc). Therefore, NCO aircrew maybe cheaper, but the 'bang for buck' is less.

I can fly and I have also been trained in all of the tactics, command and staff - so I can do both. I am not saying for one moment get rid of the NCOs - far from it, you need that continuity and expertise - but you also need the officers.

What amazes me is that in the AAC career profile why can't I become a Regtl QHI, or HWI or remain in flying duties. Why is the Corps run at Regtl level by so many ex SNCO QHIs that have so much influence over the CO's and OC's that haven't seen a cockpit for up to 8 years and feel out of place in a cockpit and hardly ever fly?

Why not balance it - provide AAC Capts with a dual career path - one Command and Staff and the other a mix of flying and staff - with individuals making a choice at around the 30 year point as by then they have a pretty good idea of where their career is going. On the current plan I am leaving (as our many of my colleagues) because we cannot pursue a flying career (SO2 Bogs and Drains, DLO or DPA is no way to keep those with a passion for flying in the Service).

And when people say cost - and look at the US model of Commissioned Warrants, they miss the point - the Captains are leaving anyway, the Crown has just spent millions training them and then is happy to see them leave rather than opt for the specialist flying career (not in RAF Spec aircrew terms, but more like RN flying job, staff job rotation). This is not new and you only has to look at the other 2 Services that have gained from the AAC's inability to retain its aviation focussed young officers as many transfer out of the AAC to remain flying or very close to it).

This would also provide those career orientated OC's and CO's with a balance in a Regt of Direct Entry and Late Entry QHIs/Weapon Instructors/EWIs/Tactics etc - rather than pure NCOs/LE aircrew that may have had years of pure flying experience but have not benefitted from the many young officer tactics, command and non-flying related courses, training that provide a truly rounded and military broadened aviator. There is also something to be said for youth - wouldn't Standards Branch/673 Sqn benefit from a young, DE QHI fresh from operations.

Therefore, if I were allowed to continue with a flying orientated career then I believe that I would bring more to the Regt than just years of flying (but with time, that would increase on a par to the LEs) and what makes me employable is that I can also dip into to the 'not so popular/ career enhancing' SO3/SO2 Avn jobs when required.

So I like Wokkawokkas suggestion as I would like to have a Joint career profile like the RAF's or RN's and just stay flying a bit longer, and then bounce between flying and staff jobs. If not, then I am outta here - not to daddies estate or company, but to the Rigs, PAS or some other avenue where I will be allowed to continue my enthusiasm for aviation.

[TBSG]

Blimey!
I am delighted that the services are beginning to gel effectively in some theatres (well done AH and RN WAFUs). :ok:
However given the increased frequency of these ops and the very real possibility of wearing lead, it's only going to take one Melchett to order an aircraft captain into the air cos he thinks it's a 4-tonner, the captain to exercise his right as captain to say 'NO' and before you know it we'll all be shot at dawn with a less than evens chance of being pardoned 100 yrs later........I am still deeply suspicious. :hmm:
Until the RAF has some seriously powerful backing with an equal voice in the right places we will be rail roaded again - it must not happen! :=

Dundiggin',

Do you believe that the Aircraft Captain has the right to decline a tactical mission just because he thinks it may be dangerous?

What about the Infantry commander who knows that he is taking his boys into danger every time they leave the camp on patrol. Does he have the right to refuse an order just because he thinks he or one of his boys may lose their life?

The responsibility of the Aircraft Commander is to ensure that the aircraft is flown safely, tactically, and within the Rules of the Air. The Commander will make the decision to send the aircraft on a mission having balanced risk against benefit of success. Your predecessors who flew in the Battle of Britain knew that the risk was high, but the risk of not doing something was even worse. So, a "Melchett" is entitled to order an aircraft on a mission, and the Ac Comd is there to make sure that the mission is flown as successfully as possible.

You seem to have a chip on your shoulder about the AAC - if you really knew much about the JHC you would realise that its staff are from all services and jointly contribute to its decision making process. Then again, if you are a Puma crewman I would not expect much more. You seem to think that the only requirement for an Army commission is a title and some land. Tosser.

Wokkawokka - well said.

[Two's in]

Wokkawokka - You are clearly a man amongst ankle-biters. Top post and congrats for raising this urine tossing thread back to real issues that should be addressed.

[EODFelix]

Check out Page 24 regarding the debate on Officer/NCO Airecrew from the NAO's Report on Battlefield Helicopters laid before Parliament in 2004. Exact Para Numbers are 3.28 to 3.32. Also a bit about command levels - Paras 3.33 to 3.35. Did many get to see or hear of this review??

http://www.nao.org.uk/publications/nao_reports/03-04/0304486.pdf

[owe ver chute]

I think that people are missing one big point regarding who has the final say about a mission going ahead or not. Surely it's the authorising officer! He has a vote, and lets face it, if it is a risky mission, then it should be the Squadron boss who puts his signature to the mission, though only after a full risk assessment has taken place. Cos lets face it, to lose a CH47 full of soft pink fleshy things would not go down well in anybodies books.:rolleyes:

[R 21]

Right chumsI may have had a few too much red wines but I thought this thread was about JHC not how great teeny weeny airways was not about currency issues. Itr may have been started by a Plastic Puma Puke but lets not deviate.JHC is more expensive than a single service option, it is non deployable ( left to JHFHQ) and run by a bunch of chinless wonders not in touch with the shop floor!!!Heads down in coming!!Fly Friendly

[eagle 86]

Onto this thread late - perhaps the RAF should do what the RAAF did many years ago - hand over the helos to the Service that can best manage them from a C and C perspective.
GAGS E86

[Thud_and_Blunder]

Wokka's comments made it a pleasure to return to reading this thread. Lovely to see that not everyone is fixated on single-service solutions, and that the people who're delivering the goods at the sharp end can see things from a perspective apparently denied to those closer to Whitehall/ HQs various. Particularly good to see Capt Chaos able to differentiate between Crab mates saying "no simply 'cos it's too dangerous" and "no, but with our knowledge and experience perhaps this is a better suggestion". Having seen highly qualified ground commanders willing to sacrifice rare-and-valuable air assets during GW1 simply so their own unit could get a slice of the action/glory/medals, I think it essential that people with the right skills and knowledge get to help commanders make their decisions.

Eagle 86: assuming you're not suggesting that the RAF's helicopters are handed to the Australian Army, what is it about the Oz perspective that makes it such a good idea? After all, the Rhodesians (remember them?) - who probably had more airmobile warfare experience than any operator anywhere in the world these days - used to have their Fire Force ops run by Air Force junior officers. Wearing light-blue doesn't make you unaware of the realities/requirements of life on the battlefield; equally, wearing DPM/Auscam doesn't have to blinker you to the extra abilities and limitations of working with aircraft.

Oh, and Chaos - the PAS water's lovely! Wake up every day looking forward to the next shift; no secondary duties; company offers to buy back leave if the manning plot doesn't work - it doesn't get much better. Lovely modern aircraft, good people to work with and (esp in HEMS) a real purpose to every trip. Pity the pay's crap, but there's more to life than money.