Air forces Monthly Oct issue

[gar170]

The Oct issue of Air forces Monthly is carrying a article titled "Is the RAF Broken".
Interesting article high lighting the fact that the PVR rate for multi-engine pilots now stands at 24 for the year, 7 sqn commanders have PVRd and a couple of Stn Commanders and 87% of sqn Ldr pilots are leaving at their 38/16 point.

Also claims over stretched bad leadership crap procurement contracts lack of helicopters.
Also mentions that EADS has delayed the first flight of the A400M till the summer 2008.:rolleyes:

worth a read

[BEagle]

Quite a few people jumping off Loader's 'train', by the sound of it....:hmm:

[abbotyobs]

did he not say, if you want to leave, then leave!

I guess he's right then.

[BluntM8]

Just picked the magazine up and I haven't had a chance to read it yet, but I suspect it will put across a partictular viewpoint rather than a balanced view. That being said, Jon Lake the author of the piece seems IMO to be one of the more balance corespondents on the AFM team.

I've been an avid reader of AFM for some time now, I like the style and general reporting, but it seems to me that they tend to publish quite biased articles - the one recently about the great victories Argentinian crews scored against the RN in the Falklands stuck in the throat somewhat. That being said, it's their trainset...


(Paused to let the mess catch fire! Gave me a chance to read the article...)

Thoughts on the article:

"Fighting the crocodile nearest the canoe". Agree - but with little money you can only address one problem at a time. Furthermore, some of the problems we are encountering don't have instant solutions, such as procurement programmes, manning and recruitment.

"Crippling of Defence Medical Services". This is something which worries me. On the occasions I have been given a forum to talk to senior management I have asked if any checks-and-balances have been put in place to protect our quality of life against the high value aquisition projects. I don't think I have ever been given a convincing answer.

(Regarding centralising AT assets) "lack the capacity to allow unrestricted operations". To me that is an unquantified statement - unrestricted can mean infinite numbers of ops. A finite number of aircraft will have a finite capacity.

There are many more examples of the article taking a certain point of view on current affairs. I think the general point it makes is valid, but over dramaitised. Would it make such an atractive headline if it read "RAF: not that bad, really!" ?

:}

Blunty

[PMA's Toy]

Quite a few people jumping off Loader's 'train', by the sound of it....

I was thinking about this the other day. Did he really say it? If so, as a Glasweigan, I could feasibly find that a teeny bit racist. Who would I complain to?

[Fg Off Max Stout]

I haven't read RAF News since they got rid of the weekly senior officer's 17 year old daughter feature.

As for AFM, perhaps it's a good thing that the public are told that all is not peachy in the RAF, rather than listening to the govt propaganda: "Stretched but not overstretched". Yeah right.

[Safety_Helmut]

As for AFM, perhaps it's a good thing that the public are told that all is not peachy in the RAF
Yeah, that'll tell the general public, get it in Air Forces Monthly, that should do it !

S_H :ok:

[Fg Off Max Stout]

Good point SH. Better put it in Defence Recognition Journal instead.

[Ewan Whosearmy]

SH

It is the likes of AFM that the wider media reads to get gouge on goings on. It doesn't have the ABC figures of Flight, granted, but it's still a useful platform from which to get the message across to a much wider audience.

Oh, and how nice to see a thread where specialist journos are not getting it in the neck and where there is (almost) some appreciation for what the likes of Jon Lake and others can do.

[Farfrompuken]

Quite a few people jumping off Loader's 'train', by the sound of it

I was ovbiously asleep as I passed through the last stop, and it looks like it's THREE years before my train will reach Glasgow:{

[BluntM8]

For the most part I find AFM a good read. Even better is that I never have to look for it in another family members possession! :} As I mentioned earlier sometimes some of the articles fall a little wide of the mark for me but in general, tick VG. I've also found a regular flick through the pictures can seriously ease the pain of snap recce tests!

Is the Jon Lake who wrote the article this month the same Jon Lake who co-wrote the excellent book "Tornado - Multi Role Combat Aircraft"?

[Wrathmonk]

Haven't had chance to read the article as yet but the figures make alarming reading - assuming the sqn cdrs are all from front line sqns plus OCUs thats a fair old percentage considering the "hoops" those individuals will generally have gone through to be where they are.

It is those leaving at a natural break point (38/16 or 44/22) that aren't being captured and again, those stats are frightening- however, you can always promote from below to fill the gaps when, ultimately, you only need to be at the top of the pile to move up. Seems like more and more GD are doing barely two tours before promotion to sqn ldr. The true indication of the state of the front line will be the dilution rate (or perhaps even the average number of total hours (given that some new FJ flt cdrs may have less than 600hrs on type:eek:). At least the one good thing about having younger and younger flt cdrs / sqn cdrs / stn cdrs is that they can't be accused of being out of touch with the "yoof" because that's exactly what they are!

But don't worry. I'm sure the re-incarnated PMA are on top of the problem. Apparantly they are recommending that the Defence Budget (or at least what's left of it) be moved to Northern Rock for safe keeping :ok:

[StopStart]

Some interesting points raised in the article however it gains real credibility by having a huuuge double-spread picture of me flying through the Lakes to accompany it...

:cool:

[BluntM8]

Some interesting points raised in the article however it gains real credibility by having a huuuge double-spread picture of me flying through the Lakes to accompany it...

How can it? You're 38 and - according the article itself - will have already have left in a blur of PVR paperwork. :E

Unless you're the one bloke who they forecast will be here forever...:}

[BluntM8]

Touche!

Although I strongly dispute the inky part - I'm still not allowed anything more dangerous than potato printing! :}

Blunty

[nigegilb]

You need to get the alleged quote right.

When Loader visited recently his pep talk to troops in Basra was that being in RAF these days was like being on the train to glasgow. Its a bit rough and if they dont like it they can just get off the train!

The figure of 24 could be out of date,

ME poster has had 24 PVRs this year up until july. Previous record for whole year was 16 !!

I also hear that Ts and Cs have been retrospectively changed to prevent JPs from PVRing before graduation day. Lots of stick but where is the carrot?

Further point on the retention figures. I understand that they are so bad, the RAF becomes unsustainable if it continues. I suspect some tasty retention packages are being formulated as we speak.

[Melchett01]

Interesting article high lighting the fact that the PVR rate for multi-engine pilots now stands at 24 for the year, 7 sqn commanders have PVRd and a couple of Stn Commanders and 87% of sqn Ldr pilots are leaving at their 38/16 point.

Sounds about right - unsustantiated storied from the AFPRB lot that came to out neck of the woods, lots of multi-drivers are looking at PVRing this year.

Also claims over stretched bad leadership crap procurement contracts lack of helicopters

The last bit especially - but then again, X hundreds of millions on 6 new Merlins is better headlines than X millions on spares for the existing fleet to get them working properly.

"Fighting the crocodile nearest the canoe". Agree - but with little money you can only address one problem at a time. Furthermore, some of the problems we are encountering don't have instant solutions, such as procurement programmes, manning and recruitment.


Yes they do - shoot the accountants. They are the crocodiles!]

When Loader visited recently his pep talk to troops in Basra was that being in RAF these days was like being on the train to glasgow. Its a bit rough and if they dont like it they can just get off the train!


Very little to do with the destinatioan, just don't think much of the driver's agricultural handling.

Of course, given the recent rule changes, I couldn't really comment. Only being a mate of someone currently serving of course. :}

[Wrathmonk]

Nige

Nice as it may sound I don't think there is any intention to develop any tasty retention packages. The 100K pre-tax for sqn ldr pilots has obviously not had much success if the 87% figure is genuine. At the end of the day you can always promote to fill the gaps and ignore the reduction in experience. Recruitment doesn't seem a problem so provided the sausage machine keeps producing keen youngsters to man the front line .... And of course the retention problem is not just seen as an aircrew problem.

As unlikely as it may seem to some there will always be those who wish to stay in for a full career - as long as that is enough to fufill the sqn cdr and stn cdr appointments, regardless (dare I suggest) of the quality then robert is your mothers brother. By then, hopefully in the MODs view, the boarding school "handcuffs" will kick in and the problem goes away. Now if boarding school allowance/CEA was to be removed in the next few years ....

Failing that perhaps a reduction in the front line to meet the real world availability of aircrew may be in the pipeline.:E

Personally I don't think it will be long before we routinely see non-aircrew stn cdrs at flying units and AOC 1 Gp / ACAS / CAS et al having nothing but medals above their left breast! Whether that is a good thing or a bad thing ...

[StopStart]

BluntM8, tis true I am he....the only one (ish) who signed on for extra nonsense with Queen Betty. Grrrrrrrreat.

[Union Jack]

" .... a couple of Stn Commanders and 87% of sqn Ldr pilots are leaving at their 38/16 point ...."

And just how many Stn Commanders are currently under 38, please?

Jack

[FFP]

I think the phrase is in two parts Jack.
1) Stn Commanders.
2) 87% of Sqn Ldr's approaching their 16/38 point.
Unless you meant to be witty and were playing on the quote ;)

[Brain Potter]

StopStart,

Shouldn't you be up a mountain?

[StopStart]

Been up it yer big ponce. Piece of old ease.

Oh and just to keep it on topic, the state of the air force is terrible etc etc.

:suspect:

[South Bound]

The thing that makes me worry about all of this is that no-one actually seems to mind that people are PVR'ing or leaving in droves at their ORD. I am not expecting anyone to ask me to stay, or even to care about my motivation to go (or lack of motivation to stay), but by losing the experience that we are and solving the problem by promoting early we are putting less experienced personnel into key appointments.

Not saying they are less capable or not ready, just that they are less ready than they used to be. Controversial view (and the RAF would argue that the standard is acceptable or that they are recognising potential earlier), but in my view this must lead to a less experienced RAF, one less well prepared for what HMG might throw at it.

[Regie Mental]

So Jackonicko, what are your thoughts on the article? :cool:

[Eye off the ball]

Well, I PVRed at 29 a couple of years ago having been offered promotion and sending back the "regrettably I feel unable to accept" reply to the blue letter. I don't regret it for a minute; my life is immeasurably better now than it would have been in the RAF and, by the sounds of it, PVR is an even more compelling choice now than it was a couple of years ago.
What struck me when I jacked it in though was how disinterested PMA was in addressing some issues I had with staying in. In all likelihood I'd have left anyway but there was no effort made whatsoever to discuss alternatives to the distant tour I'd been offered only 2 months after getting married. My lovely wife has her own career but I was told that sorting that out was my problem.
I was told of my posting which, though a great career move, didn't suit me at that point in my life. When I asked what alternatives were available, I was told it was a good offer and I should accept it. This was closely followed by an OOA in Acting Rank which must have done little to serve Air Force interests but did much to reinforce my long considered decision to leave. Months after PVRing, some geographically more attractive, flying jobs miraculously materialised but I had psychologically 'moved on' and airline jobs were looking increasingly attractive.
I completely understand why so many are choosing to move on as I did, but it still amazes me that the RAF, and perhaps the military in general, make so little effort to hang to those in whom they've invested large amounts of money.

[South Bound]

EOTB

'...but it still amazes me that the RAF, and perhaps the military in general, make so little effort to hang to those in whom they've invested large amounts of money.'

Totally agree - I am not an aircrew groupie by any stretch of the imagination, but it makes me weep to see all that investment walking out of the Service. As a taxpayer I want the maximum return of service from everyone - letting people leave without trying to motivate them to stay is just barking.

Got offered a job yesterday out of the blue. Without any negotiation £12k a year more than I am on now, with pension to top it up to something comfortable, stable family life and good golf all around. This is the second time that the civilian world has taken an interest in where I am going to be in a couple of years - shame the RAF is unable to do the same thing! Wrong timing for me, but made me smile!

[XV277]

So Jackonicko, what are your thoughts on the article? :cool:

I think he'll quite like it.......:p:ok:

[Regie Mental]

Do you think so? Now that DOES make a change!

[dallas]

Well, I PVRed at 29 a couple of years ago having been offered promotion and sending back the "regrettably I feel unable to accept" reply to the blue letter. I don't regret it for a minute; my life is immeasurably better now than it would have been in the RAF and, by the sounds of it, PVR is an even more compelling choice now than it was a couple of years ago.
What struck me when I jacked it in though was how disinterested PMA was in addressing some issues I had with staying in. In all likelihood I'd have left anyway but there was no effort made whatsoever to discuss alternatives to the distant tour I'd been offered only 2 months after getting married. My lovely wife has her own career but I was told that sorting that out was my problem.
I was told of my posting which, though a great career move, didn't suit me at that point in my life. When I asked what alternatives were available, I was told it was a good offer and I should accept it. This was closely followed by an OOA in Acting Rank which must have done little to serve Air Force interests but did much to reinforce my long considered decision to leave. Months after PVRing, some geographically more attractive, flying jobs miraculously materialised but I had psychologically 'moved on' and airline jobs were looking increasingly attractive.
I completely understand why so many are choosing to move on as I did, but it still amazes me that the RAF, and perhaps the military in general, make so little effort to hang to those in whom they've invested large amounts of money.
I'm sure this is reflective of many people's experiences. Personally, I find PMA too big and faceless - nobody is seemingly accountable for their screw ups and their management of people too often seems to be last minute and haphazard. Of course JPA hasn't helped whatsoever.

Several people in and around my office have recently been pinged for OOA dets with less than 3 weeks notice - not including courses; these are not new posts! When lead-in times are routinely busted I think we should have a system in place where the person doing the dicking is obliged to explain why they had to do it, to a gp captain or higher, who must then write personally to the individual and explain. It won't fix it, but it will highlight it and has got to be better than the current response of 'not my fcuking problem'.

Also, if PMA are going to 'open doors', why not make information more accessible: publish board results and overseas lists online. On the subject of overseas drafting, we've got to sort out the system so it's not dependent on happening to see a trawl by chance - something old fashioned like 'a list' tends to work when it comes to people planning their lives. We still haven't twigged that some people have commitments outside the Service and perhaps need more than 20mins to decide on a 4yr overseas tour. By all means manage the applicants once you've got them, but don't depend on people checking trawls every day! I even heard some people are busy at work and dread to think what the cumulative effect is of everyone in the RAF theoretically checking publicity bulletins for overseas volunteers every day! Work-time study anyone?

Many of our woes are resultant of unimaginative policies, compounded by thousands of deskbound officers who lack meaningful vision to improve the way we do business. We have created an environment that encourages superficial change and makes sustainable progress TFD, where feedback opportunities are rare, so we don't even know what we think as a force or what we could learn. Bureaucracy is rarely challenged as this is the trade of 'trouble makers', so instead those manning the pumps are regularly subjected to new initiatives that hinder, not help. Most significantly of all however, I feel our contribution to the battlefield - flying - has slipped several places down our priority list.

[Pontius Navigator]

Many of our woes are resultant of unimaginative policies, compounded by thousands of deskbound officers who lack meaningful vision to improve the way we do business. We have created an environment that encourages superficial change and makes sustainable progress TFD, where feedback opportunities are rare, so we don't even know what we think as a force or what we could learn. Bureaucracy is rarely challenged as this is the trade of 'trouble makers', so instead those manning the pumps are regularly subjected to new initiatives that hinder, not help. Most significantly of all however, I feel our contribution to the battlefield - flying - has slipped several places down our priority list.

Of course you know that thousands is a gross exageration but I would suggest that may be it is the other way around, not enough of them. Also not enough bodies available on the rosters either. When there were even 10000 more the pain would have been a lot less.

With the small numbers available now, when you take out the sick, lame, lazy, special cases such as the staff courses etc etc the pot is pretty empty.

There must be a system though.

How about, as you say, advertise the jobs and you never know, they might even get a number of careerists volunteering.

[insty66]

"...Everywhere I have been during the preparation of this book I have noticed that, although the surroundings do not look too dissimilar, the atmosphere is very different compared with how it used to be..."

"...If the status quo is maintained it will once more be the serving officers and men who have to pay with their lives for the parsimony of the tax paying public, as they had to in 1940. Must the lessons of history be re-learned yet again?"

These words were written not in the last year or so but in the introduction to a book (Encyclopaedia of the Modern Royal Air Force.) by Tony Gander in 1984.

Overstretch is also mentioned then! I wonder what he would write today:eek:

[Roland Pulfrew]

Notwithstanding the Sqn Cdrs and the Stn Cdrs (and Dep Cmdt Cranwell), when an Air Officer Commanding PVRs you can guarantee that the writing is on the wall. One wonders how the AFB can still stick to the line "that the Air Force isn't broken"? Are they naive, or stupid, or just ignoring blind fact!!:ugh::ugh:

[Roland Pulfrew]

Good use of "notwithstanding" there Roland. Maybe we could have a sentence with "overarching" next time.

Actually I think you will find that my argument was underpinning the debate. I wan't trying to think out of the box on this one. There was no blue sky thinking just a statement of fact AOC XX Gp has PVRd. I apologise for the the use of notwithstanding it isn't in my Dictionary of Buzzword Bingo. Perhaps you could offer an alternative for "notwithstanding" - w:mad:r!!

[Roland Pulfrew]

To every one else - Sorry!!

To 1.4 - good use of the Shift F7 key but I would argue that none of the alternatives that you offer actually replaces my use of notwithstanding - in this case. And it's wcensoredr;)

[adminblunty]

3 AVM have PVR'd at a Buckinghamshire base this year so far, plus a number of Air Commodores. From what I've seen Loader/Dalton are well aware of the issues, however the RAF is broke and they can't fix the problems without funding. If you think its bad now wait until you see the results of PR08. Ask your Stn Cdr what was said at the Stn Cdrs PR08 brief on 10 Sep 07.

As for PMA, why oh why do we have aircrew as aircrew desk officers at PMA? We've spent a fortune training these guys, why put them behind a desk at PMA? Give the desk officer jobs to HR specialists who know how to manage, develop, nuture and retain personnel. Oh and while we're at it, get rid of the Gp Capts in PMA who've been there for years making a hash of managing the place. Can someone tell me why we have a pilot as Air Secretary? What professional HR qualifications/experience does he have? Would you put a supply officer in charge of a Squadron? No wonder PMA is a shambles.

As for non-aircrew CAS, AOCs ACAS, why not? How many MDs of airlines are pilots? Virgin? Easy Jet Ryan Air? Which is more successfully run Virgin, Easy Jet, Ryan Air or the RAF? Which are growing, which is shrinking?

[adminblunty]

AIDU,
I didn't mention blunties in handbrake house. However, they couldn't do a worse job than the incomptents doing the job at PMA at the moment judging by some of the comments on this site and thread could they? Want to try answering the rest of the questions?

Adminblunty

[[email protected]]

1.4 - so little G yet already on the buffet:)

[dallas]

Want to try answering the rest of the questions?
I refer the honourable gentleman to my previous post re: unimaginative policies. I am also convinced that funding is only half the problem - we need a fundamental review of how we operate; we need to empower people to feel more like shareholders by doing way more than issuing velcro patches for their [often short notice] OOA dets; we need to vastly improve internal communication so the RAF News isn't the primary means of questioning policy - if we can communicate flight safety, we can do it elsewhere; we need to stop generating guff in place of proper policy and decide on fundamental issues such as whether the RAF's primary role is to provide officers with numerous interesting tours to build their experience, or whether they just might be better employed for longer than 2 years as experts in something rather than nothing!

I have a dream...? :hmm:

Notwithstanding 1.4G, I also use the word and I'm certainly not invited to meetings where management speak is used. Probably wisely - I tend to get to the point and use English words, so I wouldn't fit in.

[South Bound]

Adminblunty

you are kidding about giving the deskie jobs to adminers, right? Maybe suitably qualified civilians or Retired Officers who can provide continuity in post and considerable experience of what they are asking people to go and do, but please don't force another adminer in to 'manage' my career. I know it is a bind finding developmental jobs for Admin officers (and how else would one grow the skills needed for cushy overseas embassy jobs?), but with the limited deployable role the admin trade has we should be looking to reduce their numbers, not create new empires for them.

As for non-aircrew in key appointments,I suppose the difference is that Richard Branson does not make decisions about putting his crews into life or death situations and it always helps to have some concept of what that feels like if you are going to expect others to follow your direction. Your point about Air Sec is nonsence, you are now suggesting a whole section of the RAF that should be reserved for admin only (as HR professionals :yuk:). While this would create the air rank your trade so desparately craves, you are completely missing the point - if I want an HR professional I do not need him/her to be wearing a blue suit!!!! If I want someone that understands what it means to do the job I need someone with some operational credibility, and there are few of those around sat behind desks in handbrake house...

Mmmmmeeeeeeeooooooooowwwwwwwww

SB

[Pontius Navigator]

Can someone tell me why we have a pilot as Air Secretary?

I was chatting with a previous Air Sec fairly recently. He said it was the best job he had ever had. He really felt that he was doing something worthwhile and effective.

Some years earlier another Air Sec stunned his audience when he said that he was reducing the RAF Front Line to 1000 FJ aircrew (P & N). That was when the RAF was 57,000 and before flt ops was invented.

On flt ops, much as nonaircrew handling aircrew careers, I hear there are discussions about returning aircrew to ops.

[dallas]

On flt ops, much as nonaircrew handling aircrew careers, I hear there are discussions about returning aircrew to ops.
'They' have been rumouring that since the flt ops branch was created in the 90s, and while several in the branch live up to their clueless reputation, others have found their niche - the biggest problem the branch has is its 'failed everything else' reputation, compounded by a course that isn't difficult or highly-acclaimed. Perhaps another thing we need to include in the desperately needed review of the RAF is a means to get rid of individuals who evaded the quality controllers during the selection process, or who 'malfunction' thereafter - we all know them.

Ultimately the Service won't replace even half-capable flt ops officers while they remain cheaper than aircrew; they'll do what they always do and continue to carry those who wouldn't know mustard, let alone how to cut it.

[TheSmiter]

the RAF is broke and they can't fix the problems without funding. If you think its bad now wait until you see the results of PR08. Ask your Stn Cdr what was said at the Stn Cdrs PR08 brief on 10 Sep 07.



Some hard decisions lie ahead Ladies and Gentlemen. In fact, the overarching phrase underpinning the 2008 edition of Bingo Buzzword is: Capability Holiday
Quite a few of you will be having one and it won't be all-inclusive. Enjoy.

You couldn't make it up! :\

[Pontius Navigator]

Some hard decisions lie ahead Ladies and Gentlemen. In fact, the overarching phrase underpinning the 2008 edition of Bingo Buzzword is: Capability Holiday
Quite a few of you will be having one and it won't be all-inclusive. Enjoy.

You couldn't make it up! :\

Nah, that is solast year.

First heard from either CAS or ex-OC Khandahar EAW, can't remember which, back in January.

Capability Gap - we can't do it, we haven't got the kit, we can't get the money for the kit, we either do without or get someone else to do it.

Capability Holiday - we can't do it, we haven't got the kit, we can't get the money for the kit now, we either do without now or get someone else to do it. We hope to get the kit later.

Like Jaguar, SHAR and no doubt others.

[Archimedes]

I believe I can trump last January. In an overarching discussion that oulined the challenges underpinning current operations outwith the constraints of attempting to solutioneer [HOUSE!] the ISTAR piece in financially constrained times, I heard the phrase 'capability holiday' employed shortly after the decision to finally retire the PR9 was made.

To be fair to the 1* in question, what he actually said was 'Bit of b*gger to lose the PR9, really, since we need someone to spot we need the capability rather than try to con us with this "capability holiday" b*ll*cks'.

Obviously, I won't say which 1*, since the thought police will send him on an intensive management speak programme to be assimilated...

[dallas]

Capability Gap - we can't do it, we haven't got the kit, we can't get the money for the kit, we either do without or get someone else to do it.

Capability Holiday - we can't do it, we haven't got the kit, we can't get the money for the kit now, we either do without now or get someone else to do it. We hope to get the kit later.
When everyone leaves, is that a Capability Gap, Capability Holiday - or my suggestion - a Capability Abyss(TM) ?