What a waste, what a fool.

[air pig]

From the Daily Hate.

Sex boasts of RAF Special Forces pilot kicked out over cocaine binge on base during pre-Christmas party | Daily Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2867666/Sex-boasts-RAF-Special-Forces-pilot-kicked-cocaine-binge-base-pre-Christmas-party.html)

[Bob Viking]

It's odd in a situation like this when you know the guy. I for one will not pass judgment on here.
BV:oh:

[air pig]

BV, fair comment, you know the guy but the reputational damage to the RAF is immense.

[Bob Viking]

I disagree. An entire organisation can't be held responsible for the actions of one of it's employees.

Trying so hard not to get sucked into any forthcoming debate. I think I'll just keep schtum now.

BV:O

[Yozzer]

I disagree. An entire organisation can't be held responsible for the actions of one of it's employees.


That ideal world does not exist - ask any political leader. The public are now aware of JSFAW - 7 Sqn and RAF Odiham 'junkies' flying helicopters at low level day and night. The damage to reputation is massive and the corrosive effect worrying. Especially as the story suggests that this was not a solitary hidden secret but rebellious behavour that the individual sort to share with his peers. If you can call blunties peers. It will take some time for the dust to settle on this one, especially as targetted consequential CDT can be a very public affair.

[Whenurhappy]

Reputationally, this sad incident will not do the RAF any good; arguably more damage has been inflicted on us by the photograph of the chap carrying an M&S suit cover...the Army will have a field day!

[Yozzer]

"Failure is a stepping stone to success"

http://www.pprune.org/spectators-balcony-spotters-corner/59762-top-10-british-pilots.html

[PapaDolmio]

ISTR it's not the first time it's happened?

[Yozzer]

The story appears to be limited to the Daily Mail today. The others will probably jump on the bandwagon tomorrow but the 'news' will be lost in pages of shock, horror, we have had a storm. Mother Nature may provide damage limitation.

[The Old Fat One]

I'm going along with BV and stowing the judgement, irrespective of the fallout. But given that it all appears a little clear cut, black and white, perhaps it is worth noting that quite often we get reminded that we are not the paragons of virtue, we think we are and we portray ourselves as.

I'm damn sure all of us that served saw behavior from time to time that made us stop in our tracks and think WTF!!??

Spectacular way to screw up his flying career for ever...lessons learnt might be more useful that wrathful condemnation.

[Tiger_mate]

With the MoD anti-narcotic regime that is in place with the Armed Forces; specifically the Compulsory Drug Testing Team arriving on station without notice - locking down the unit - and randomly testing all ranks, he was dancing with the devil.

In nearly four decades of service, I have heard of the odd individual getting caught by CDT having used Marijuana but never any of the drugs more associated with guests of Jeremy Kyle on morning TV weekdays.

It is so irregular, that focus should be placed on why this situation developed to the point it has, setting individual personalities aside. It could as easy be symptomatic of one mans release from the stresses of a decade of warfare as it could the epitomy of individual arrogance. For sure it is better than suicide and if the story is accurately written (& I know how naive that sounds) it appears the individual was beyond caring.

[strake]

A man, who in other circumstances would be considered a credit to his country, has behaved badly He has been punished and his peers and superiors will no doubt also be in an uncomfortable position.
However, the situation is what it is and the RAF will continue to be the RAF. Talk of 'damage limitation' and worry about how the Army will view the RAF just legitimises the concern that there maybe something more to hide. Contrary to what may appear in the Daily Mail, the British public aren't stupid. They know that humans fail - there are plenty of examples at the moment in politics, banking and commerce - but they also realise that organisations overcome those failings and life goes on.

[P6 Driver]

"An entire organisation can't be held responsible for the actions of one of it's employees"


In the same way the CIA are having to combat adverse publicity right now I suppose. I would think that this chap wasn't really thinking about the potential wider implications for the reputation of the RAF, if caught.

[More lookout]

Whilst his act deserved punishment. I suspect there was a trail of signs leading to this outcome. His colleagues may of noticed a change in behaviour or appearance. I would suggest an intelligent man does not go from zero to taking coke in his room in one step. The question for the hierarchy is "why and could we have prevented this"

[dctyke]

Deserved everything he got. I'm amazed at some of the comments on the newspaper site condemning the young officer for reporting the incident. How long would it take before his actions started to put lives at risk.

[pr00ne]

FFS!


He took coke a few times, he is hardly a "junkie!!" and nowhere near an addict. Do you have any idea of just how wide spread the recreational use of this drug is?

It's like calling someone who has drunk a few glasses of whisky an alcoholic.

He was far more foolish in terms of blabbing about it and mentioning it in what seems to be a desire to impress, that, far more than anything else, would worry me about his judgement.

Change of behaviour, appearance? Oh please...............

You sound like you are discussing a heroin addict.

[oldpax]

sounds like you know a lot about cocaine!!Wonder if the groundcrew that service the aircraft this officer flies in take the same amount ?Mind you a hangover is probably no different than taking"coke"but I have never tried it .

[charliegolf]

Without checking, I know there have been recent-ish threads about an officer who 'bigged up' his bravery to gain medals; one who allegedly climbed in a window to force himself on a fellow officer; and movers using the coffins of heroes to smuggle stuff.

The armed forces seem to have survived these revelations, and seem able and willing to perpetrate acts of outstanding gallantry as regularly as if they were putting out the rubbish.

I actually feel sorry for the guy (after my initial WTF outrage bus moment subsided)- is he a 'stable extrovert' who has started to struggle?

Very quickly old news I suspect.

CG

[The Helpful Stacker]

pr00ne - Indeed. Sadly comments comparing him to being a 'junkie' or the type one might see on Jeremy Kyle are indicative of a forum where many of the users are either completely stuck in their "in the good old days" ways or are closed-minded to the realities of what goes on outside the wire.

In my day job I regularly meet functional recreational drug users and I'm sure the statistics would confirm that there is a high probability that a number of my colleagues are such individuals too. Just as many folk who work in high stress enviroments use alcohol to blow off steam so to do folk use illicit drugs recreationally. As 'pr00ne' alludes to, this doesn't make them junkies.

[MATELO]

Its hard to have any sympathy at all.

He broke the rules & got caught out.

[Fantome]

It could as easy be symptomatic of one mans release from the stresses of a decade of warfare as it could the epitomy of individual arrogance.

Tiger mate . .. . very well said mate

[Admin_Guru]

The ethos of an RAF Officer.

“The distinctive character, spirit and attitude of the RAF which together inspire our people to face challenge, and, on occasion, danger. It is underpinned by tradition, esprit de corps and a sense of belonging. It encompasses the will to contribute to the delivery of effective air power that arises from confidence in the chain of command, trust in colleagues and equipment, respect for individuality, sustainment of high professional standards and the courage to subordinate personal needs for the greater good.”

My highlight. He willingly entered into a career in which you agree to abide by the rules, however out of kilter with the rights of the citizens you defend those rules may be. I could not grow I goatie, wear an earing or travel to certain countries; so I didnt. I knew the fall-out from taking drugs, even weeks after a one-off 'experiment', so I never did 'experiment'.

To make comments that the Armed Forces should be permitted to take recreational drugs because society at large does really is the beginning of the end. Proone IMHO your attitude is one of a.... well lets just say the handle is appropriate.

If there is a medical aspect to this then he deserves support. If it is soley a criminal aspect then he should have gone to jail before dismisal. Few here will know which of these options is appropriate.

[pr00ne]

THS,

All true, this forum in general is becoming more like a combination of the Daily Mail readers comments and Jeremy Kyle by the day. Similar levels of outrage, ignorance and rushing to judgement and condemnation.

MATELO,

Can't argue with any of that.

Admin-Guru,

Meanwhile, back here in the real world...

I haven't seen ANYONE here suggest that the armed forces should be permitted to take recreational drugs.

A criminal aspect? Go to jail? Get real! So, you would be jailing members of the armed forces for drinking a glass of Whisky, a champagne cocktail, a pint of beer, a glass of wine? They are ALL recreational drugs.

[HTB]

You said it, buster - "and we do not know the full circumstances"; so let's keep our stones pocketed, lest the glass houses start to suffer.


Mister B

[ShotOne]

"we don't know the full circumstances.." Come on, then. In what circumstances would this have been ok with you?

From his own words it's clear this wasn't any one-off dabbling and I would be more inclined to sympathy if not for the fact that he strongly and repeatedly encouraged younger officers to join in with his "hobby"

[mad_jock]

The criminal record will also prevent him from becoming a commercial pilot.

It won't.

And he just needs to be clean for 2 years to get a medical.

[ShotOne]

Even if he were to get a medical there is zero chance of him landing a commercial flying job

On a positive note, I liked the bit about the "threesome". Mess parties have clearly improved since I left!

[NutLoose]

It won't.

And he just needs to be clean for 2 years to get a medical

Maybe not, but it sure will put a huge dent in his future employment opportunities if and when he gets his licence back.

I feel for his son, being divorced, no doubt he is possibly paying maintenance / child support based on his earnings etc.. a source of income that has just disappeared overnight.

Some of the comments on the newspaper thread really do rankle, and as a newspaper thread one does not believe half of the dross they put in them.. One hopes he can put this all behind him and move on.
I totally agree with Tiger Mates comments and rather bizarrely I find myself agreeing with some of Proones, but in the military there is no place for it ever..

[MATELO]

You said it, buster - "and we do not know the full circumstances"; so let's keep our stones pocketed, lest the glass houses start to suffer.


We do know the circumstances though, he was taking an illegal drug whilst serving in HM Forces.

[Skeleton]

A criminal aspect? Go to jail? Get real! So, you would be jailing members of the armed forces for drinking a glass of Whisky, a champagne cocktail, a pint of beer, a glass of wine? They are ALL recreational drugs.


I note Cocaine is not listed and good on you for not doing so. Its a Class A drug in the UK and illegal period, the list you quote is acceptable and lawful.

Nobody (I hope) is suggesting any form of drug taking in the Military.
is acceptable. The position has to now been perfectly clear, do drugs your history. I have no problem with that.

I am speaking in general and not about this particular case of which i know nothing.

[Clockwork Mouse]

Admin Guru is spot on. He was military. He was an officer. He was a pilot. He has let himself and his profession down. No sympathy from me.

[mad_jock]

As much as some would like to think if you have a skill set that is required operators will take you what ever stupidity you have done in the past.

Once past 5 years not living in the UK it won't surface in any checks.

[Exascot]

Obviously I do not condone this behaviour. But, if the Daily Rag is correct colleagues (in the plural) reported him. To whom is the question? If it was the RAF Police this was unforgivable. They are not exactly the sharpest box of pencils. They should have had a discrete word with his direct superior and it could have been dealt with in house. If he had a mental/addiction problem this could also have been addressed and if necessary a medical discharge. Now his life has become very difficult, OK his fault but his boss and the Stn Cdr are not exactly smelling of roses. Not their fault of course but we know how things pan out.

I was involved with a situation where a senior officer was drinking and flying. We are not talking drunk or even over the drink driving limit but still against regs. A junior officer had a discrete word with the boss saying that he was not happy and the boss had a descrete word with the perpetrator and it was sorted out. Not even the Stn Cdr knew about it. Or the Daily Mail :cool:

[NutLoose]

Problem being, there were more than one, one would imagine if a colleague reported it and you didn't, questions would be asked why not.

[Lonewolf_50]

Whilst his act deserved punishment. I suspect there was a trail of signs leading to this outcome. His colleagues may of noticed a change in behaviour or appearance. I would suggest an intelligent man does not go from zero to taking coke in his room in one step. The question for the hierarchy is "why and could we have prevented this" May have noticed ...

As to cocaine, one of my fellow flight students, back in the early 80's, got caught on a pee test for cocaine. Most of us were a little taken aback -- WTF were you thinking mate? - and of course he was tossed out on his ear.

Flash forward ten years. The training officer at our RAG (type training) has a young LTJG pop positive for cocaine after a standard Monday morning random urinalysis. Most people were very surprised. Then again, he had family up in the Los Angeles area, and lots friends from his younger days, none of whom had chosen the Navy as a profession. Training terminated.

I guess my point is: folks now and again make some stupid decisions. :uhoh:
EDIT:
I just noticed: age 43, divorced, career military officer. That fits the profile for a bit of "out of character" behavior ... well, at least in my experience. Sad, but not the first nor the last.

[Pontius Navigator]

A criminal aspect? Go to jail? Get real! So, you would be jailing members of the armed forces for drinking a glass of Whisky, a champagne cocktail, a pint of beer, a glass of wine? They are ALL recreational drugs.

Actually pr00ne, yes. In the real world many aircrew have been dragged out of the cockpit, tested, charged, sacked, sentenced and jailed.

In Service loyalty and 'there but for the grace of God' has kept incidents hidden. My skipper many years ago was carried by his crew when we should have abandoned out transatlantic flight.

Occasionally, modest class A drug use just does not happen; it is illegal.

[PapaDolmio]

[QUOTE=Exascot:8776928]Obviously I do not condone this behaviour. But, if the Daily Rag is correct colleagues (in the plural) reported him. To whom is the question? If it was the RAF Police this was unforgivable. They are not exactly the sharpest box of pencils. They should have had a discrete word with his direct superior and it could have been dealt with in house. If he had a mental/addiction problem this could also have been addressed and if necessary a medical discharge. Now his life has become very difficult, OK his fault but his boss and the Stn Cdr are not exactly smelling of roses. Not their fault of course but we know how things pan out.

Are you seriously suggesting this should have been dealt with 'in the mess' ?

[MPN11]

Whatever happened to the simple old days of excessive beer, and sex in the back of a car? :cool:

I regret I have no sympathy for the individual.

As to how/where it should be reported, I guess I would have informed his Boss [privately].

[Exascot]

Are you seriously suggesting this should have been dealt with 'in the mess' ?

Did I say that? Of course not in the CO's office :ugh:

[PapaDolmio]

Are you seriously suggesting this should have been dealt with 'in the mess' ?

Did I say that? Of course not in the CO's office :ugh:

Exactly the same as would happen if it had been an SAC?

[Roland Pulfrew]

So, you would be jailing members of the armed forces for drinking a glass of Whisky, a champagne cocktail, a pint of beer, a glass of wine? They are ALL recreational drugs.

In your profession pr00ne, I would hope you would know the difference!! Last time I looked use of one was illegal ,use of the other was not. And even that may not be true when you consider the Rail and Transport Safety Act.

[Selatar]

Very sad but we all know the rules. Given his length of service he must have been tested umpteen times and been very clear on the regs. Very much dancing with the devil as has been said. Equally, bragging about it in mess and tempting others to "use" hardly helpful. I'm afraid I would have reported him PDQ as well. I dont really see an alternative for overt class A drugs use especially on an op sqn.

[SHornet]

I won't comment on the individual or his actions, but I am incredibly disappointed that his work with 'them' has been put in the spotlight. He's ex-Special Forces, the tabloids should be more respectful of his security.

[Tankertrashnav]

Whatever happened to the simple old days of excessive beer, and sex in the back of a car?

I'm afraid these days in my case it would be one or the other :(

Or possibly neither :{

(In any case Mrs TTN would put a stop to any of that!)

[Pontius Navigator]

Papa, I was once summons, as SDO, as an independent witness at a drugs search.

It was unedifing.

We were concealed near the suspects barracks block. They gave him sufficient time to settle in and then raided him. There was no politeness that one would expect between superior and potential malefactor more like CIA hit squad. I was relieved when more heavies arrived.

As I was dismissed I chose to let the RAFP inform the CoC. I got a flea but WTH.

[Whenurhappy]

PN,

as the Adj of a well-known Salopian helicopter base, I was asked to witness a P&SS drugs-search of an off-base flat, normally occupied by an RAF Chef (remember them?). It was one of the more unpleasant tasks that I have ever been involved in. The place was a tip, and they went through everything to find evidence of drug-taking. All correspondence was read (days before the internet), they emptied his bins, sorted through his rank laundry (put me off eating in the Mess for a while), checked his bedding, porn stash, the works. Although it was professionally conducted, it made me feel pretty sick. Although drugs were not found, 'paraphernalia' was, as well as evidence of other criminal activity and there were also concerns about some of the (very) young women he was, ahem, entertaining. IIRC he was admin discharged from the Service.

Clearly, there is no comparison with the Sqn Ldr cited in the OP, but I do wonder what happened to the chef (it was over 20 years ago). I recall the P&SS people of the time commenting that the CVIPOL wouldn't have bothered searching a property for marijuana, and even then, possession of a spliff would result in little more than a caution (as would probably have been the situation if this Sqn Ldr had been a civilian). Yet in the Services we are bound by higher standards of ethics and behaviour (quite rightly, too) but the effect of compromising these higher standards can cast a shadow of the rest of one's life, long after leaving the Services, which I think is a tad unfair. :sad:

[Bob Viking]

Members of 7 Sqn are not themselves SF. They are part of JSFAW and provide support to SF units.

I do agree with your sentiment though, that it's a shame his name is all over the tabloids. He has been punished severely and now every time a future employer (it happens) Googles his name they will find this.

We all have views about these things but I find it slightly distasteful to air them in public when the guy has been named and shamed. It's very different to have an opinion when it is reported as 'an RAF pilot'.

As I said previously I am not expressing an opinion either way since I have worked with him previously but please spare me the holier than though comments.

We all make errors of judgment (some worse than others) and are hopefully sensible enough to learn from our errors. After all 'to err is human'.

BV:ooh:

[minigundiplomat]

Proone,

The facts are quite simple; the individual concerned freely admitted taking Class A drugs on repeated occasions, in contravention of both criminal law and aviation regulations.

Whilst the station, fleet and squadron will have suffered adverse publicity due to the actions of one individual, they have many years of great work to leverage against it - and as someone has pointed out, the media will have moved on in a day or so.

The real damage here is to the relationship between unit and their customer, who rely on crews to perform tasks where mistakes could quite easily be fatal.

I have no sympathy for the individual - and I am fairly shocked by the suggestion that this could have been solved quietly by a chat in the CO's office... not only is that unlikely to have happened had it been SAC Bloggs from MT, but to repair the relationship with the user unit, it is crucial that the matter is dealt with openly, and to the furthest and fullest extent of the law.

Other than the individuals lifestyle, the remainder of this sad and unedifying episode suggests that it has been handled correctly at all levels.

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

Given his length of service he must have been tested umpteen times


Perhaps this explains his choice of drug. I remember hearing some years back that, while marijuana would show up in urine tests for weeks after the event, cocaine taken on a Friday or Saturday would have vanished from the system by Monday morning. In fact, this revelation appeared after a techie at a flying station apparently wrote an open letter to the command chain to point out that CDT was useless at detecting anything other than hash, and that some of his peers were in the habit of using cocaine, safe in the knowledge that they were very unlikely to get caught.

Please note I am not condoning any form of drug use by any serving personnel. The way that the current case has been reported makes it sound like either breathtaking arrogance or a cry for help by the individual involved.

[Bob Viking]

I'm not sure it's quite as rigorous as some people seem to think. I've been in for over 15 years and have never been tested. I'm more than happy to pee in a bottle any time though.
BV

[163627]

Of course this individual was foolish but was it really so bad? Hands up all who have got very drunk and out of control and perhaps "borrowed" things that looked interesting at the time or drove a car when perhaps that was unwise? Oh of course that's okay as it was "Gentlemen's high spirits"! Let's remember that certain acts are always wrong and others only in the context of their time, the substance in question was available over the chemists counter in my Grandmother's day and probably will be again before too long.

[Alpha Whiskey]

2 clear aspects to this - technical and moral.


Technical - he was a pilot, responsible for the lives of all who flew with him. Furthermore, he was doing so in a very demanding and challenging environment. Anything which he knowingly did to inhibit his performance (notwithstanding his boasts on how certain things were enhanced) is just plain wrong and unacceptable.


Moral - he was an officer in HM Armed Forces. He has a duty and obligation to set and maintain the highest of standards and set the right example to his peers and juniors. Doing what he did shows an absolute lack of moral courage and furthermore, to compound the issue, it seems he encouraged others to engage in what he clearly knew to be illegal activity.


Finally, I find it astounding some on here feel it appropriate to advocate a 'one rule for officers, one rule for sailors/soldiers/airman' approach. HM Forces have very few absolute zero tolerance boundaries - drug taking is one of them and therefore should be treated accordingly in every circumstance, regardless of rank or rate.

[Hangarshuffle]

I put up with being tested upon at least 3 occasions as I recall, and also had to be piss sampler/logger bloke on 1 occasion as well. By accident or design mostly Junior Rates were sampled, cant ever recall a massive amount of aircrew going through-but then I think RN squadrons were locked down and done separately.
I could imagine a few in that time have beat the wrap, I never thought it was an entirely safe, ethical system.
There'll be a few still flying or operating that have indulged and haven't been caught, bound to be.
It always really gripped my **** that we were treated and tested like prisoners, whilst those that implemented the law (i.e. those that lurk in the House of Commons) are never ever tested, or held to account).
Taking cocaine isn't a hanging offence, never was anyway. Maybe he took it to ease his stress and strain in the same way loads of us used to drink very heavily, to just get high? Stressful enough job he was in anyway FFS, people should remember that as they put the boot in on him.
And the point I'm badly trying to make is, if...if we could ever bring it about to carry out random tests on MPs, House of Lords day sleepers, Barristers and QCs, Police Officers, CEO's, Managing Directors...you would all be amazed (or saddened by this country's lack of morality and high minded hypocrisy).

[tucumseh]

No comment on the pilot. As some have said, his offence wouldn't warrant much attention in civvy street. Rightly, others point to expected standards and duty of care as a pilot.

But what I find truly bizarre are the contradictions between what MoD thinks illegal/punishable and what happens in "civvy street".

Most of the public would be outraged at what is condoned in MoD. In my career I came across senior officers and civilians condoning, or not seeking to punish in any way whatsoever, fraud (the obvious one), serial sexual assault on a minor (under 10 yo and with rape charges held on file because the minor wasn't well enough to give evidence), arson (on an MoD base), wheel man in a robbery, common assault, GBH and more. Every one of them progressed beyond the grade/rank they held at the time of the "offence". Some, mainly the fraudsters, occupy high office.

Ask any reasonable person to place them in order of seriousness and the snorting Sqn Ldr would be well down the list. I just like to see consistency.

[MPN11]

We all make errors of judgment (some worse than others) and are hopefully sensible enough to learn from our errors. After all 'to err is human'.
I admit to numerous 'errors of judgement' under the 'affluence of inkahol', mainly due to the fact that Officers Mess sold the stuff. And we were all there in the Bar together doing it.

A subtle difference may be noticeable here ... the officer concerned actually went off-base [I hope] and bought an illegal substance for private consumption.

'Nuff said?

[BEagle]

If the facts turn out to be as reported in the Volkische Beobachter, then there is absolutely no excuse for this appalling event.

None.

Nada.

Zip.

Taking illegal drugs might perhaps appeal to certain ageing hippy champagne socialist lawyers, but it has no place in the UK Armed Forces. Whether chummy was an ACM or LAC makes no difference - the drugs policy is the same for all.

Re. the CDT, when they first bowled up at Brize to do their thing, a certain 'Kelvin Rucksack' was amongst the people they'd chosen at random. To which a Sqn Cdr remarked "Doesn't surprise me - everyone else has been taking the p*ss out of him for years!".

[ShyTorque]

Some seem to forget that he is a pilot.

When I was part of the recruiting system for the RAF, a number of "make or break" questions were asked of potential recruits. One of them involved the taking of drugs. A positive answer would disbar the application going any further. He knew exactly what the penalty would be for possession and taking of a Class A drug. As a senior officer he held a position of higher responsibility in any case and it appears that rather than discouraging the use of cocaine, he had condoned and even encouraged its use in those junior to him.

[goudie]

In the close confines of the Officer's Mess, Sqdn crewroom etc. this chap's personality and private life (divorcee, apparent womaniser, high social activity in the bar) must have been well known and gossiped about by his peers and senior officers. So what of his annual F1369 reports? Did they not indicate that he was perhaps drinking too much, a loose cannon maybe? Where were the checks and balances that keep a lookout for the odd maverick?
Or was he given enough rope....?

[Pontius Navigator]

Goldie, that was the old system. Now good eggs get at worst an anodyne report as it is open reporting. If you said someone was a piss artist or dope head you could be challenged to prove it.

Bit like usually honest or slightly pregnant.

[BEagle]

ShyTorque wrote: When I was part of the recruiting system for the RAF, a number of "make or break" questions were asked of potential recruits.

Indeed. At UAS recruiting we termed the 'big 3' questions 'pills, pigs and poofs' (this was 25 years ago, I hasten to add - long before 'Pink Wednesday'). In other words, "1. Have you ever been involved in drugs? 2. Have you ever been in trouble with Plod and 3. What are your attitudes towards homosexuality?"

An affirmative answer to Q1 would mean "***k off and don't ever darken our doors again!"

[Wrathmonk]

I just like to see consistency

If you look at the Courts Martial summary (available on the web) you will see a fair few charged with a similar offence (i.e drug possession) also got a military custodial sentence before dismissal from the Service (whilst others got a fine before 'soldiering on'). Not surprisingly they were all non-commissioned.....

[SHornet]

Bob,

I stand corrected, although surely, due to the very nature of his work, he would have a higher level of clearance than 'standard' RAF pilots? He was a Special Forces chauffeur, so that would be a bigger target on his back for evil-doers in this country.

Personally, I don't care that he snorted cocaine when he let his hair down a little too much. That's up to him and there's no evidence that it impaired his flying judgement. Taking those substances on to the base was very stupid, although it doesn't make him a bad guy. Trashing his career was a little harsh, IMHO.

Although we aren't in possession of all of the facts which is why I point-blank refuse to judge his character.

[Haraka]

If I may go back 45 years or so :
One University Air Squadron Act. Plt. Off. Drunk driving. Ended up as Gp Capt.,
Another University Air Squadron Act. Plt. Off. Possession of Marijuana. Ended up as a Wg. Cdr.
No, neither were on ULAS, although we jokingly criticized Plod for burning "Sub Standard" hash at a demo at 206 Brompton Road ( "Just so you know what it smells like, guys " ( :))
Had to laugh when my Hall of Residence ( in the Kings Road) was raided by London's finest in 1971...
The warden remonstrating that "In my day in 1922 it was OPIUM as gentlemans' choice for relaxation"
Actually the choice vehicle then was LSD - and no NO WAY was Haraka tempted - a flashback whilst flying.......!

[Pontius Navigator]

More recently, say 10 years, one-off usage of class C, provided it was confessed as not a show stopper as it was accepted that the majority of the population at large May well have sampled recreational drugs at sometime.

[mad_jock]

Pain killer abuse and to a certain extent steroids abuse was also pretty frequent in the more active parts of the army.

Pain killers to get them through courses.

And steroids to get the muscle bulk up quickly.

[MPN11]

Seventy bloody years on this Planet, and I've never even been tempted to try ... and that was growing up in Richmond, surrey, in the Swinging Sixties and knowing a few interesting Pop Stars of the time. Booze and tobacco was sufficient ... and the females.

What did I miss?

I avoided a criminal record :D

[jayteeto]

I don't give a damn about what the general population do, nor the fact he isn't a junkie, or that it probably didn't affect his flying, or even that he was combat stressed, divorce? so what, womanizer? big deal. None of it.

His behaviour in taking Class A drugs was simply unacceptable for a Royal Air Force Officer. The end.

[Basil]

MPN11, Concur.

Nevertheless, very disappointed by a top guy blowing it.
As an Australian CP of my acquaintance was wont to say at tea without biscuits; "What were you thinking of?!"

I do recollect, as a little Argosy co-jo, staying up VERY late with an 0400 call.
A couple of weeks later, nowt having been mentioned, I said to the captain: "Thanks for not reporting that flight back from Malta to the boss."
Capt: "What flight?" ;)

[The Helpful Stacker]

Pain killer abuse and to a certain extent steroids abuse was also pretty frequent in the more active parts of the army.

Pain killers to get them through courses.

And steroids to get the muscle bulk up quickly.

I've been involved with medivacing a number of squaddies from Afghanistan, guys who had seriously damaged their kidneys and/or liver ODing on legal drugs and supplements attempting 'Op Massive'. Guys hammering Creatine to help build muscle mass and downing NSAIDs like Skittles in order to deal with the pain caused by over-training.

At least one that I know of had irreparable damage to both kidneys (he was medivac'd on a filter). Of course the stuff he was taking was all legal which makes it 'good' drug abuse I guess.

[BEagle]

SHornet wrote:
Personally, I don't care that he snorted cocaine when he let his hair down a little too much. That's up to him and there's no evidence that it impaired his flying judgement.

You need to get rid of that attitude sharpish if you are ever to be accepted into the RAF. Let alone as a pilot.

Join our club? = Play by our rules.
Break our rules? = Get out of our club!

[mad_jock]

co-dynamol was called running candy and it certainly wasn't legal without a prescription.

Yellow eyes in mortar or fire support platoons wasn't uncommon.

The only unit that seem to have a serious issue with that sort thing was the royals. Which is from whom I found out about what the yellow eyes thing was all about.

[ShotOne]

IMHO the worst of this is not the drugs per se but the fact that this guy couldn't give two hoots about totally screwing -in every sense -his fellow officers. Had either of the young female officers accepted his kind offer, what did he intend to happen next? How many other young officers did he put in jeopardy, aside from his co-defendant whose career is in shreds. As people keep pointing out, we don't know the full facts. If we did I suspect it would be even worse!

[mad_jock]

If he had PVR'd how long would it have taken to get out?

And what would have been his work load in the last say 2 years?

And would he have any form of return of service hanging over him to prevent him getting out?

[Whenurhappy]

Yellow eyes in mortar or fire support platoons wasn't uncommon.

Jaundice due to liver failure?

[mad_jock]

Its something to do with that I think. Also changes the skin colour as well.

From a distant memory the Royals thought it was stupid for that and.

It gives a tendency for your Achilles tendon to snap.

And screws with your vision.

And screws with your pancreas

They could spot a user from 50 meters away.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/04/03/article-2595873-1CCAFF0500000578-987_634x417.jpg

[langleybaston]

changed his skin colour?

Like from what?

[mad_jock]

Well with none whites you can't see it.

But basically I think whites it gives you a yellow tinge.

I really don't know, I was more in the beer and kebab line of training regime for weight gain.

Which tended to only give you chilli sauce pigment colour changes.

[uncle peter]

Mad Jock;

Quote:
The criminal record will also prevent him from becoming a commercial pilot.
It won't.

And he just needs to be clean for 2 years to get a medical.


I'm afraid it will. A criminal conviction is an automatic bar to anyone wanting to be issued a civilian airside pass. Similarly, a criminal conviction will render it highly unlikely any visa application necessary for a job as civilian pilot will be granted. There are probably more reasons but those are sufficient.

[mad_jock]

There are plenty of jobs especially in the rotary world that don't require airside passes.

So I agree the north sea will be out. For the short term.

Anyway because he hasn't done any time it will be considered spent after two years. Or even 1 year if its consider a fine.

There are plenty of commercial pilots out there with time in prison and airside passes.

And places where his skill set will be at a premium all they will be interested in is hard currency for a visa.

If someone refuses to give him a job due to a spent conviction they are opening themselves up to discrimination charges.

It also depends on the charge the CM put him through on. If its a mil charge that doesn't mention drugs nobody will know what it is only that he was dishonourably discharged. So the visa thing might not be an issue depending on the charge sheet.

Either way by the time he completes the clean sheet for the class 1 medical it won't appear on a CRC.

If he was low houred unskilled pilot I would say he would be extremely unlikely to got a job as a commercial pilot. With his experience and skill set I suspect there will be certain company's and areas of operation he will be like gold dust. He could be a serial killer and rapist and they would take him on. If he has instructor experience even more so. Like it or not he has been chucked out on the street with a couple of million of well respected military training behind him and he has also put it to use.

[Flying Lawyer]

SHornetPersonally, I don't care that he snorted cocaine when he let his hair down a little too much. That's up to him and there's no evidence that it impaired his flying judgement.
Up to him, as a serving officer, whether he takes Class A drugs and commits a criminal/service offence by doing so?

In your opinion, is it only judgment when flying that matters?

From a post of yours a week ago: I'm not military (yet)Please forgive me for asking but, do you really think that with your attitudes you are suited to a service career?


BEagle
Were the 'big 3' questions during your QFI days on ULAS?
I vaguely remember being asked the Police question when we were students, but not the others.
Were there a 'PC approved' answer to Q3?

HarakaIf I may go back 45 years or so45 years! If you must remind us. :)
I was persuaded to go for a quick nightcap at 206 Brompton Road a couple of weeks ago (I'm easily led) and ended up leaving at something past 2 am. Some things never change - thankfully. I'm going back for the final party soon. Sad to see the old place go. We had a lot of fun there.

[Kengineer-130]

Sad to see, no doubt there are underlying problems that have caused this guy to go a bit wild, and the Forces should do all they can to help him.

However, would any of you really be happy to get into the back of an aircraft that is being flown by someone who has openly bragged about taking class A drugs (or any drugs for that matter, inc booze if it is still in your system), possibly at low level & possibly in a combat zone?

As members of the forces, and involved in aviation, we have a duty to each other to be at the top of out game, certainly as a maintainer & licenced engineer I would not be willing to jeopardise an aircraft through impairment of substance abuse, or tolerate colleagues who would. Military aviation is dangerous enough without avoidable dangers, we all know the rules when we sign on the dotted line.

[VinRouge]

I cant think of a better way of avoiding a 12 month PVR time than publicly doing coke, especially with a frigid blunty audience! Not saying its right however, if you wanted to get out in less than three months (fitness test fails), no better way than publicly doing what he did.

Perhaps given a job he wasnt happy with?

Personally would go as a concientious objector, rather than destroying career.

[mad_jock]

That thought had entered my head as well that he just wanted out.

I have seen it before as a civi and I was none to happy with the way the guy did it.

He was all set up for a top telecoms job and it was to start in 3 months.

He was a sigs scaley with some special training in packet switching and some special system which was the reason he was hired.

He put in to get out but because he was one of the few that had been through the course for it and he had a return of service they were saying 18months plus.

So he beat the crap out of a blanket stacker WO1.

Took a month to process, one month in colchester and then out the door to start his 100k a year job via 2 weeks in Cyprus

My main beef was that he did the guy some serious damage with a detached retina, and if he had any balls he should have gone and smacked one of the infantry WO1's or Engineer ASM's.

I did say that we shouldn't take him but was overruled because he had a rocking horse poo skill set.

[jonw66]

Just out of interest does he lose his pension, I think we had this before but cannot remember the answer.
I had an acquaintance who was CID with quite a few years in,(like 20 odd) he was a bit over friendly with a traffic officers wife.
They got him for drink driving and from what I remember he lost everything.
Interesting thought that he may have wanted to bang out in this case but surely not if he loses the pension

[SHornet]

BEags, Flying Lawyer......

The article posted is from The Daily Fail. They are known for sensationalism and changing what people have said to them in interviews, completely.

If this guy took drugs and drank excessive amounts of alcohol, and got in the cockpit the very next day (or even the same day), I will have a very different opinion as not only is he putting himself at risk, he's risking his crew and those on the ground. From what I can see, he is a party animal who took his excessive partying in to the work place, got caught, and lost everything for it. He was stupid, not necessarily a bad person. We don't even know if he did all of this "on a school night", he might have had a couple of days off.

Personally, I don't entertain drugs. I don't like them, I like to be in complete control of myself and the situation around me, I don't even like being drunk. Although I am not about to go around judging those who do use these substances when it might not be harming anybody else.

I think that's the last I'll say on the matter to avoid a conflict of interests.

[NutLoose]

Sad to see, no doubt there are underlying problems that have caused this guy to go a bit wild, and the Forces should do all they can to help him.

May well have been the issue, though at the end of the day only one person knows why he did it and regardless of that fact, I wish him well in his future, he has at least earned that and my respect for his service up to this sad incident.



Personally never tried any drugs and never wanted too, my life satisfies me as it is without any chemical assistance, well bar the odd wine and beer.

[jonw66]

SHornet I have outed you as Typhoon 93.
Nutty your last sentence is the one that counts.

[VinRouge]

Jonw,
I think once past ipp what you earn you keep. I don't think you can have your pension penalised for indiscretion past the point at which end a defined contribution is earned.

[jonw66]

Yes thanks Vin rouge do you think it would be the same in the police force.
I am sure he lost everything for being a 'keen gentleman' with somebodies wife.
Plus obviously the drink driving bit which he had asked for to a degree.
Cheers
Jon

[NutLoose]

I know of a policeman who was about 4 years short of his pension, he had a heavy session the night before and as he had tons of paperwork to catch up on, so was doing that, his inspector ordered him out in a car, followed him and breathalysed him, he lost the lot. Personally as you pay into a pension fund, the portion you pay in should be returned to you as it is your money, not theirs.



..

[jonw66]

Yeah I agree with you Nutty however you f up in your later years to me it is money earned not something to punish you with.
In a long serving police officers position you are talking a lot of money.
The guy I am talking about his oppo retired with about £150k, plus the monthly couple of grand at fifty then carried on working doing the same job.
Anyway sod coppers I'm off to bed.

[Flying Lawyer]

mad_jock

There may well be some countries and areas of operation where, as you say, pilots of this man's considerable skill and experience will be like gold dust etc and his conviction will make no difference.

Elsewhere, the conviction may cause him more problems than you believe.

It is true that, in most circumstances, the spent conviction provisions of the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act apply. NB: Only in the UK.
Removal from the service (whether dismissal with disgrace or simple dismissal) is subject to a rehabilitation period of 1 year beginning on the date of conviction.

However, there are exceptions to the usual provisions which recognise that there are certain activities for which fuller disclosure of a someone’s criminal record history is relevant. Those exceptions include occupations (and some hobbies) for which a licence is required.

Where an exception exists, applicants are not entitled to rely upon the spent conviction provisions and an employer or licensing body will be eligible for a disclosure certificate from the Disclosure and Barring Service (formerly the Criminal Records Bureau) containing details of all unprotected cautions and convictions. (Certain old and minor cautions and spent convictions are protected from disclosure.)
I have not checked but, given that licensed taxi drivers are not entitled to rely upon the spent conviction provisions, I'd be surprised if professional pilots are.

Visa requirements (questions asked) re travel to another country are a matter for the country concerned. They are not bound by the UK's spent convictions provisions.

I hope the pilot concerned will be flying again in due course. It would be very sad if his entire career was permanently ruined.

SHornet The article posted is from The Daily Fail.If he wasn't discharged from the service and/or was not in unlawful possession of Class A drugs then much of what has been posted in this thread is irrelevant and he would have a strong case for substantial damages against the newspaper.
In the meantime ....

No-one has said he is a "bad person". That is not the issue.
We don't even know if he did all of this "on a school night", he might have had a couple of days off.One would be more serious conduct than the other in a service context, but both would be criminal/service offences.
You are entitled to your view about people taking illegal drugs. It is not a view taken by any of our three services in relation to service personnel.
My previous query still stands.

[BEagle]

FL asked: Were there a 'PC approved' answer to Q3?

Not really. Due to changes in society's tolerance of homosexuality, which at that time did not include the Armed Forces, applicants were reminded of this and it was their reaction to this position which was required. Some answers would have shocked Himmler, but more often it was "I'm not interested in what they do, but it's not for me". Although one wag did actually say "I don't mind lesbians, provided I can watch!" - no doubt having been briefed by existing ULAS students.......

It wasn't really a problem, but it was a mandatory interview question during my QFI time. All changed on 'Pink Wednesday' though.

'Trouble with Plod' was more a case of assessing honesty - unless chummy had really been up to no good in his/her earlier days.

[The Old Fat One]

Final word from me...

His pension should be secure - he will be eventually admin discharged and that carries the same pension abatement as a PVR. [disclaimer, that was the case 10 years ago anyway]. I believe the plods have different rules - but I'm nae certain.

And armed with that information, uncertain job prospects at least in the short term and probably the need to unwind, if you are reading this matey, I suggest a lengthy holiday cum early retirement in somewhere warm & friendly. Maybe Pattaya?

[mad_jock]

FL I can only comment from what I have seen working as a pilot and also having to deal with this for a group of pilots.

Obviously I will bow to your legal expertise.

But...

There is only a requirement for a basic disclosure for a pilot, no requirement for any enhanced which would disclose any spent convictions.

Taxi drivers I believe require a enhanced because it involves them transporting children and vulnerable adults in an unsupervised environment. Pilots its is very rare they are in that position. It does happen very occasionally with umins but it may never happen to some and those of us in regional ops it may happen but it will be years between it happening.

Also the statement that having a criminal record will immediately mean that you won't get an airside pass is also untrue in the UK at least.

Apparently you can shag a sheep get caught do some prison time and the next day your out you can get a airside pass.

I have worked as a pilot with people that have done time. Varying crimes

Some motoring offenses and getting caught with the wife taking the points right the way through to GBH of a burglar caught in the act. To contempt of court.

The asking questions about a spent criminal record is in the same league as asking a woman about if she is going to get pregnant in the next couple of years. Unless you are in one of the occupations that are listed as being required to have an enhanced disclosure your on dangerous expensive ground.

But to be honest all but one pilot had actually disclosed to the employer anyway that they had been inside. And they have all been good employees and actually I would say above average pilots.

I am not saying that it will be plain sailing for the person but it won't be the huge show stopper that some would like to think will happen.

When working outside the UK in Europe you are required to give a standard 5 year employment history and a basic CRC check as you are in the UK.

Outside that things vary. He more than likely though will never be able to go to the US ever which may give problems training.

Again this all depends what they have put it through as. If the charges don't mention drugs and he has been done on a mil only sounding offense they may ignore it.

I know this won't sit well with some but its the fact of it.

I wouldn't be surprised if in 6 months time if he is training Arabs earning double what he did in the RAF.

[barnstormer1968]

Typhoon 93 said silly things until they were banned.
SHornet said more rediculous things and got banned.

I'm going to keep my eye out for a new poster called 'Antonov An24'






See what I did there :)

[mad_jock]

To be honest there is a sizable amount of the population with a criminal record.

The rest of us probably should have one for something.

I know I can't put my hand on my heart and say I shouldn't have a criminal record.

But should I really be prevented from working for having say changed an electrical socket in a kitchen?

Because in theory getting done for that and getting fined would bar me from getting an airside pass in the UK. But shagging a sheep wouldn't.

[OvertHawk]

Forgive me if this has already been mentioned - i've not read all the posts.

If this guy was to consider a civvie career, then criminal record checks etc would not be his only hurdle.

He'd have to convince medical branch that he was fit to be issued a medical certificate. Not unheard of for someone with a "history" but certainly not a straightforward task.

[Al R]

I have an enhanced disclosure because of my working role, but I was surprised to see the list's parameters in respect of airline flying etc.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/349126/DBS_guide_to_eligibility_v6.pdf

[Pontius Navigator]

I cant think of a better way of avoiding a 12 month PVR time than publicly doing coke,

Didn't work though did it? Been a year since he was caught.

Regarding the issue of low use in a social environment etc, the charge and CM will only cover what can be proven. If there had been any friendly, non-documented, interviews without coffee then that would never be admitted.

A friend was CMd for flying indiscipline. The charge stated a speed of approximately 349kts. Above 350 would have been a further offence but was not provable. See the point? We only know what came out in the DM or CM if you looked.

[mad_jock]

Psychiatry Guidance Material | Medical | Personal Licences and Training (http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?catid=2499&pagetype=90&pageid=13853#AlcSub)

http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/2499/Alcohol%20and%20Substance%20Misuse%20FC.pdf

There is the medical requirements on the subject for a class 1

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/relevant-offences-list-for-england-and-wales/relevant-offences-list-for-england-and-wales

Looks like I am ok with my changing my kitchen socket.

There are positions in the airlines which require an enhanced but a normal pilot doesn't

[Unixman]

Why on earth aren't regular hair tests performed in the military, especially for those who are in positions of very high responsibility? Cocaine (and its metabolites) will show up in the hair long after the drug itself has been removed from the body. I recently had to have a hair test for an organisation where there is a zero-tolerance to drugs.

[Basil]

I cant think of a better way of avoiding a 12 month PVR time than publicly doing coke
Oh, I can think of a couple; esp when I was in - which wouldn't have concerned the CAA at all :E

[mad_jock]

Basil thought about shagging a sheep!!!!

[Basil]

Basil thought about shagging a sheep!!!!
Ah, but whilst, no doubt, a common pastime on a Port Ellen nightstop, that's a criminal offence :)
Having an affair with a service wife (bit naff because it wrecks someone else's life) or 'coming out'* to the boss (who, knowing of complaints re Bas 'entertaining' in his mess room, probably would have smelt a scam) would be less civil career limiting ploys.

* 60s/70s

[mad_jock]

Its actually listed as a acceptable criminal offence for obtaining an airport airside pass.

When the new rules came out it was of great amusement with certain security chimps of the ex scots/welsh guards regiments that their hobby wouldn't be a career limitation.

[Union Jack]

Basil thought about shagging a sheep!!!! - Mad Jock

Ah, but whilst, no doubt, a common pastime on a Port Ellen nightstop, that's a criminal offence. Having an affair with a service wife (bit naff because it wrecks someone else's life) - Basil

You Gourock boys can be very, very naughty with your juxtapositioning, vide

Prince gives up flying royal aircraft after Hebrides crash - News - The Independent (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/prince-gives-up-flying-royal-aircraft-after-hebrides-crash-1592247.html) :eek:

[Union Jack]

Basil thought about shagging a sheep!!!! - Mad Jock

Ah, but whilst, no doubt, a common pastime on a Port Ellen nightstop, that's a criminal offence. Having an affair with a service wife (bit naff because it wrecks someone else's life) - Basil

You Gourock boys can be very, very naughty with your juxtapositioning, vide

Prince gives up flying royal aircraft after Hebrides crash - News - The Independent (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/prince-gives-up-flying-royal-aircraft-after-hebrides-crash-1592247.html) :eek:

[Basil]

You Gourock boys
Thank you for the promotion in social class.
Bas - actually from next door ;)

I did feel for the captain who, wise after the event, probably spends the rest of his life thinking he should have said: "I'd better do this one."

As for the other: he should have married her first time round.

[mad_jock]

Port Glasgow?

Surprised they didn't throw you out for pooing out the window during the night.

[Basil]

Port Glasgow?
Steady on; not that bad :}

[5 Forward 6 Back]

While I fall into the camp who believe he deserves to be thrown out, I'm surprised by some of the reactions, especially all those saying that they couldn't trust him in an aircraft and how he might have put lives in danger.

I like beer (in fact, I'm having one now). Sometimes I drink a lot of it until I fall over. Never, at any point in my career, have I been tempted to drink heavily then go flying viciously hungover, or to fly when directly under the influence. I know where the line is and I stick to it; and had I ever crossed it and been caught, I would expect the appropriate punishment.

This guy likes (liked?) cocaine. He used it of an evening, at least once and bragged about other occasions. Why does that suddenly mean he was likely to be flying while affected by it or the after effects of it?

Liking a glass of wine doesn't make you an alcoholic who's unable to work. Similarly, using drugs, even class A ones, doesn't make you an addict who needs it to get going in the morning.

It does make you someone perhaps prone to reckless or stupid decisions, it does cast aspersions on your character, and it does make you incompatible with service and holding a commission. None of that's in doubt. I can't make the connection though, that using a socially-unacceptable drug (at least a socially unacceptable in the military one) means you can't control your intake or use of it.

[Lonewolf_50]

5 Forward:
your points on pints are noted and agreed.

Where the matter of trust arises, consider the following character trait in a fella who is a career man in a position of responsibility and who by his job position has to now and again pass judgment on his subordinates ... regarding adherence to or breach of rules/ regs / laws.

Let's examine his view of the regulations he is to uphold and enforce by the actions he took: "That rule and those laws on cocaine are a load of bollocks and I don't feel bound by them."

Apply this to an SOP: "That SOP and those flight regs are for all the other pilots in the company, but not me. :p"

I am not saying that was his attitude -- pilots often compartmentalize well between on duty and off duty issues.

But given how many pilots/officers don't take that attitude on the cocaine, the parallel penchant for such an attitude cross over might be hiding in there based on his decision regarding said rules and laws regarding cocaine.

This is something for a future employer to ponder before hiring, and possibly a topic of interest during an interview for an open position.

It may be that after a fall from grace a vital lesson is learned, permanently. One certainly hopes so.

[5 Forward 6 Back]

Lonewolf, I agree; when I said "prone to reckless or stupid decisions," that's precisely what I was thinking. While some people are able to draw a line between their personal and professional lives, it's easy to make the sensible assumption that breaking the rules in one arena might show a risk-taking personality who'd break the rules in the other.

There's plenty of precedent for that. It was just the people saying they could control their drinking, but assuming he couldn't control his drug use that surprised me.

[Courtney Mil]

All the opinions you like to post here count for nought. The rules are very clear. Caught doing drugs, get discharged. The policy is zero tolerance. Everyone knows so no excuses. Fine to discuss the pros and cons here, but that won't change the rules.

There have to be clearly defined rules, without room for doubt. Rules open to interpretation lead to injustice. A bit like one person here discussing the rationale behind the rules and still being a member whilst another expresses a view and gets banned.

[NutLoose]

As Courtney says, it has to be clear cut, you cannot have double standards.

[Lonewolf_50]

Thanks for the reply 5 Forward.

I suppose I was looking at what informs a decision, be it reckless or otherwise, rather than the decisions. That would be of interest in trying to determine what's behind this bad judgment: is it a mid life crisis sort of thing -- which is a known behavioral phenomenon for some men in their 40's -- or something else?

Full Disclosure: I recently read an article about mid life crises, and how men in the 50's tend to have fewer of them than men in their 40's (there is some sociological study on a "U" curve that's so soft that I can't consider it science). That recent line of thinking probably triggered me applying that model of analysis to this case.

Odds are that when one puts his whole record in the balance, he's probably got more to recommend him than not.
Must one aawww **** void all attaboys?

Chester Nimitz ran a ship aground. He ended up our Fleet Commander and a darned good one.
At one point did zero defects become the standard?

[barnstormer1968]

5 forward.
The main body of your post sums up why this chap had to go IMHO, and there is no need to debate whether he could control his intake, or whether he was an addict. The military are a bit touchy about people doing things secretly in contravention of rules, and with just cause usually.
I felt the need to just say that as I sometimes get the idea that the word 'addict' is very often wrongly used.
The military is full of addicts. There are still quite a lot of smokers in the military and many if them are addicted to smoking.
There are fitness addicts too.
If we turn things round a bit a smoker who is addicted to cigarettes is still an addict even if he or she hasn't smoked for twenty years!
Similarly a drug addict (illegal or prescription) can still join the military as long as they are clean and have been for a period of time.......but are still an addict.
An addict can use their drug all day long or once a week, it's the need that makes the addiction not the amount.

Sorry to bite about the word addict, but junkie was also used in this thread. Having worked in a rehab centre it was always amusing that a very high percentage of new customers assumed that the other customers were the tramps they had seen on park benches or down and outs in shop doorways and they they would be the only 'normal' person there. It was a shock for them to find out that the other addicts were shop workers, care workers, GPs, doctors, teacher and accountants..........and just normal looking people.

As is mentioned above this chap had to go as he broke the club rules.

[Mechta]

One factor that seems to be overlooked is that as Class A drugs are illegal, by using Class A drugs one is, without exception, trading with a criminal. That leaves one open to blackmail from the criminal or others in the know.

[OvertHawk]

Lonewolf

I take your point, and would not say that one "awwww ****" should undermine all the "aaataboys".

But this was not an "awww ****". This was a "f@£k you!"

Chester Nimitz did indeed run a ship aground and that's a CM offence. However, i imagine he did not do it intentionally with the full understanding of the fact that it would end his career.

This guy was dumb enough to 1) do it in the first place (knowing that if he was caught then he'd be sacked) and; 2) Brag about it and show off. He deserves to be sacked for stupidity alone.

[NutLoose]

OH, it may well have been a cry for help.

[Pontius Navigator]

One factor that seems to be overlooked is that as Class A drugs are illegal, by using Class A drugs one is, without exception, trading with a criminal. That leaves one open to blackmail from the criminal or others in the know.

IIRC, we were told that one could not be Courts Marshalled if previously tried by a civil (Crown) court but that this did not apply the other way.

Has the law changed with the changes to the CM system or could he now face civil charges?

If one was so charged, having been dismissed the Service, I would imagine anyone in the CoC who had been award of previous transgressions would be called to attest the triviality or otherwise of previous transgressions.

[Lonewolf_50]

Overthawk, no serious dispute on any points you made in re current position as squadron commander and officer in HM's forces.

My thought has been moving toward future employment, an issue which some had raised in discussion here.

As before: not the first to step on a land mine, or manage a self inflicted wound after a solid career as a high performer.

Nor the last.

[Wander00]

OH, it may well have been a cry for help.


Then surely that argument would have formed part of a plea in mitigation at his CM, as would any claim of combat stress, overwork or whatever. I am sad for the guy, but on what we have seen IMHO a "no brainer"

[mad_jock]

its a no brainer that has lost the British tax payer over 2 million in my estimation.

And if its been dragging on for a year some poor sod has been covering for his work load.

[BEagle]

mad_jock, Are you inferring that a bottle of scotch and the Mess Webley would have been quicker and cheaper?

It astonishes me that anyone could find any mitigation for this event. As a senior officer, he knew perfectly well what he was doing was totally against military and civil law.

Full marks to whoever reported him. This was not 'grassing up a mate', it was the act of someone with the moral strength to ensure that the RAF was rid of a senior officer openly contemptuous of the RAF's firm policy concerning illegal drugs, for whom there is absolutely no place in the Armed Forces of the Crown.

[Flap62]

BEags,

For once I am 100% with you on this. I am simply astonished that standards have changed so much in the relatively short time since I left that any aspect of this sorid episode could be seen as "letting off steam" or something that could be dealt with with a quick word on Monday morning.

Personal weakness to take the drugs in the first place is one (albeit serious) matter, persuading other, more junior officers, to join him is beyond contempt.

[Al R]

I think everyone knows that, least of all the person involved. We all have feet of clay (well, most of us it seems) and I'm sure he will have found out who his real mates are, I'm sure he has learned a sharp lesson from it and I'm sure that doing drugs didn't in isolation, make him a great bloke or a pratt. I certainly did when I went through my 4/5 years or so or rehab, consequently, I became far less judgemental. I called in to the Royal College of Defence Medicine this week whilst at QE2 hospital in Brum and never fail to be invigourated by the positivity and.. 'good' shown by people.

Loyalty shouldn't be misplaced, and I agree that he probably showed not a lot. And I'm glad for him, his mates, his pax and the Service that he got caught. I'm also sure that he of all knows it more than anyone. But this Christmas, lets spare a thought for his future and his circumstances, and especially those of his lad. I suspect his forthcoming battle will prove a far more reliable indicator of his mettle and his character than that seemingly demonstrated by him doing coke at some Xmas bash, trying to impress.

I first heard about this a few days after it happened and my initial, instinctive thoughts were vented against the person who (scuttlebutt) was alleged to have introduced the substance.. to my simple mind, that smacked (sorry :E) of premeditated intent to undermine the ethos, all he wanted to do, from the sounds of it, wanted to impress after a few drinks too many. I have seen too much evidence of coke impact at different stages of the impact cycle at Canary Wharf and Shaftesbury Avenue to be outraged but I know (and the lives of Pax are to important to be trusted to my anecdotal evidence, sure) who operate for years with no discernible drop off in performance.

That is not me justifying it. I'm not condoning what he did at all, not at all.. I wouldn't want to fly with him for quite a few years. But would I completely shed any faith I had in him? No, because life isn't binary, it isn't black and white. The older I get, the harder I have to try to resist falling into the trap of viewing life through age induced polarising filters (all I have to work on now, is long, pompous posts). He screwed up, he will know that. Let's show some of the qualities of loyalty and esprit de corps that admittedly, he failed to, by making sure that even after screwing up, this guy has a track record of doing the biz and when all is said and done, is still one of us.

If you didn't like him before, you won't now. If you liked him before, you probably won't now. But it's more a measure of us about how we react and act. Good luck to him, I hope he turns it around.

[941]

One of our boys is down. Years of loyal service wasted.
A disaster, a career ruined, a family in crisis, everything lost. No winners here.
But "Judge not yet you too be judged"

[Courtney Mil]

mad_jock, Are you inferring that a bottle of scotch and the Mess Webley would have been quicker and cheaper?


No, Mate. You inferred that, he just implied it.

[Thelma Viaduct]

He'll be better off in the long run, obviously you can't misuse in service life. I'm sure he'll have plenty of work earning much more than he was on, with half the risk. Just hope the bloke can see the long term bigger picture, rather than his immediate 'bleak' future. Good luck.

[NutLoose]

One of our boys is down. Years of loyal service wasted.
A disaster, a career ruined, a family in crisis, everything lost. No winners here.
But "Judge not yet you too be judged"


Short, Sweet and accurate..... that'll never do on here

[mad_jock]

I wasn't actually meaning that option.

Its just I can't believe this has been a long term feature of his life and career in the RAF to get to his position.

Something has led to this and at some point he must have been putting out indicators that he wasn't dealing with life very well.

If these indicators were ignored just to get a backside in a seat then the organisation is just as much a failure as the person in this situation.

I have seen a couple of people gone down a spiral different ways of self harm to themselves and others. One was a similar aged bloke with a 19 year old girl and the other alcohol. And it was pretty obvious what was going on for a year before the inevitable blow up. And one took the car exhaust get out option which failed but does stop you flying.

I am not saying he is blameless by any stretch. Just that a system which uses people with their consent the way the mil does needs to look after expensive resource's.

I also feel that people in the armed forces of today are under completely different work and stress loads than in my day.

So as such it was more a negative comment towards the organisation than anything else for poor man management and backup.

In my day if someone came back on camp after a divorce etc they were watched and it wasn't unusual for them to disappear for a bit on some adventure training to get them away from bars and the weekend lash ups.

I suspect this guy was just deployed and nobody had a clue and or had bigger worry's on their minds than this chap was having to deal with divorce proceedings via email.

[mad_jock]

maybe I am to much of an engineer and react to a human failure with the same process as I would with an equipment failure.

If a high capital piece of equipment fails you would have a look at its use and maintenance.

Has its use exceeded its design.

Has the maintenance been lacking or out of schedule.

If a parameter has been exceeded suitable remedial maintenance will be performed and then the unit put back into service with increased monitoring to prevent failure again.

Quite often you find that it becomes the most dependable bit of plant in the factory.

[teeteringhead]

mad-jock What an excellent metaphor!!*:ok:

[goudie]

What an excellent metaphor

This metaphor was used on a SNCO management course back in the '70's
Shown a picture of a very complicated piece of new machinery, that had just been placed on our charge, we were asked to write down all the questions we would need answers to before using it.
Everything from safety instructions, power requirements, operating instructions, manpower requirements etc. was listed.
We were then shown another picture of a very 'complicated piece of equipment' ie a Playboy centrefold pin-up!
We were then asked to read out some of our questions we'd written down. A hilarious 10 minutes ensued as our questions were then read out and related to the pin-up. My favourites were ' would it have to be bolted to the floor prior to use?' and 'would I need any special tools to service it?'

When the laughter had died down we were then show a picture of
AC1 Bloggs, who has just arrived on the Sqdn fresh from training.
The point being made that young Bloggs is extremely complicated and valuable but would we enquire as deeply about what made him tick, as we would the piece of machinery?
I used it to good effect when training IT engineers with regard to their dealing with our customers.

[mad_jock]

Seems to me you need to fcuk the fighter jocks out of the management team and promote engineers into running the show.

Just saying like.

So to be honest the title of this thread should be "what a waste, what a BUNCH OF FOOLS "

[Courtney Mil]

What? What the hell is that all about?

[mad_jock]

that fact that engineers SNCO's I might add seem to have more of clue about how much a person is worth and can add to the team.

[kintyred]

If you've managed to wade through all this Mike, I wish you all the very best for the future.

[Cows getting bigger]

A few thoughts.

Chap is/was a sqn ldr. So he's either had a good career to-date or managed to blag it for some time; I would guess the former.

Having kicked-around SH for some time (albeit a decade or so ago), the force is very hard-working, very hard-playing. I can't think of many who didn't over-step the 'mark' at least once (I'm not talking class A drugs here).

Cocaine - when CGB joined-up such activity was a non-starter. I think it is right that this should still be the the case.

If one was to believe the newspaper, I'm astounded at the naivety of the individual in openly flaunting his cocaine activity in the Mess. Some pages back it was hinted that this may be the manifestation of an underlying issue but no sane senior officer would openly pass the powder without knowing the consequences. His actions were almost the equivalent of the Mess Webley.

His compatriots did exactly the right thing. This was not a "CO's office, hat no sherry" event.

I feel sorry for the man, he has clearly gone off the rails as far as the Service is concerned and the reasons for this need to be ascertained and addressed.

[Yozzer]

Linkedin

Summary
Professional and dependable aviator with over 25 years flying experience including training, managerial and specialist role activity. Highly motivated with a calm, confident and approachable demeanor who works well in a team environment.
Looking for employment from mid to late 2014.

Experience
Pilot
Royal Air Force
January 1990 – Present (25 years)RAF Odiham
Chinook Wing, RAF Odiham May 11 – Present

Chinook Pilot specialized in various insertion and extraction techniques around the world. Squadron Operations & Training Officer responsible for delivering and managing timely training for the Squadron’s operational pilots.

Rotary Flying Training Sep 09 – May 11

Rotary Flying training on Squirrel, Bell 412 and Boeing Chinook helicopters. Winner of best overall student for both Basic and Advanced Rotary Courses.

Tactics & Training – Air to Ground Weapons Nov 05 – Sep 09

Responsible for all aspects of employment and training in both current and future weapons for the RAF. Trial Management Leader for Precision Guided Bomb project, the latest RAF guided weapon.

Flight Commander/Flying Instructor Jun 98 – Nov 05

Responsible for the operational training and leading of a squadron of up to 15 pilots and the professional career management, assessment and report writing for 8 pilots. Developed, improved and delivered training packages for student and instructor pilots. RAF Jaguar Display Pilot for 2002 - 2003; led display team of 22 engineers and ground crew and organised participation in over 100 air displays. Led the squadron on numerous training exercises in Oman, Poland and the United States. Rated “exceptional as pilot and instructor” in reports for 2000-2005.

[ShotOne]

When was that posted, yozzer? Whether it was written before, or as a result of the case would show things in a very different light.

[jayteeto]

So he was a Jag mate..................................................

[Shaft109]

Apologies for stepping into a Mil thread as personally never served but having recently read the "Darker shade of blue"? report after the Bud Holland B52 crash I can see some parallels as the human machine starts to fail in subtle ways first.

[Vitesse]

I'm not sure BH compares although it's a while since I read his story. As I remember he was known to be pushing the limits but no one was prepared to confront the issue. High turn over of staff allowed his behavior to be swept under the carpet and by the end only senior aircrew would fly with him (protecting the junior aircrew?).

Is there any suggestion the RAF chap was going the same way? I'm sure there may have been instances in the past of BH type antics/personalities in the RAF albeit without the tragic ending.

[Pontius Navigator]

Vitessse, I can see where he is going but there is no evidence of parallels as there has been no evidence here that the CoC had any prior knowledge or given any counselling.

I think we can assume the prior supervision aspects will have been put under a microscope. To say what they might have been would be pure speculation.

[avmasterdave]

I agree, you and only you are responsible for your actions.

[Yozzer]

Would anybody have necessarily noticed:

http://www.narconon.org/drug-abuse/cocaine/cocaine-abuse-symptoms-infographic.jpg

[Vitesse]

PN, That's how I see things based on the story and info given.

To say what they might have been would be pure speculation.Exactly. There are people who know more but they probably won't post much here!

[Party Animal]

So he was a Jag mate..................................................


Much better doing drugs than the alternative Jag lifestyle!

[Wander00]

Always difficult working out how to support guys, and girls, in difficulty. As a scribbly it was pretty useful in many ways having a budgie on my jumper, as it gave some understanding of the bigger picture. On one occasion I became aware of a pilot, going through a marriage break-up, who clearly was not coping too well on the ground so might also have had challenges in the air as a fighter pilot. I spoke to my OC Admin who suggested that if I was really concerned, I should speak to the Staish, which I did. Guy was handled sensitively, put on a ground task for a while and a few weeks later was back flying. I like to think I may have contributed to saving a life by speaking out, but it is not easy unless you trust those above you.

[Basil]

Wander00, Top result!
I guess it's easy to forget that, sometimes, our seniors are absorbed by their own professional tasks and private concerns and miss the sort of thing which a peer can clearly see.

[Wander00]

Basil - oh, thanks, W

[Union Jack]

BZ Wander00 - Only wish you had been around when......:O

Jack

[Phil_R]

Reputationally, this sad incident will not do the RAF any good

Quite the opposite. People reported the problem and it was dealt with. In many other walks of life, colleagues would have frowned, gossiped, and done nothing about it, and anyone who did try to take action would been the unpopular one.

I'm honestly quite surprised he was grassed up even in the military, to be honest. Good grief, if you lot were any straighter...

P

[Jayand]

Yozzer, whlst the story is in the public interest and public domain I think you're out of order posting his Linkedin profile.

The profile is available freely for people to view but copying it and posting it here is below the belt IMO.

[dervish]

Surely not the same "tourist" we all know and love? IIRC you stuck the boot into the RN pilots on the ASaC collision, making a series of claims such as them having full radar coverage.

[NutLoose]

Much better doing drugs than the alternative Jag lifestyle!

The only white stuff I saw involving one of our Jag pilots was the contents of the used condom found under the seat.

[ShotOne]

The incident is hardly secret, tourist. Full details made the national press. And most posters probably aren't crabs.

[Tourist]

dervish

No, not me.

Edit to say:- Even if I had, which I hadn't, would me being a disloyal tw@t make it ok for others?!

I'd hire him, but I wouldn't hire the rest of you.

[kintyred]

Steady on Tourist.....

Sorry, just realised I can't be bothered to put you straight.

[SirPeterHardingsLovechild]

At a secret airbase in Wilts, we found out that one of our guys was a serious cocaine user rather late in the day (when it came to crisis point)

It was a bit startling to find out that he was being treated - the Med Centre was fully aware of his problems, but it was treated as 'Medical in Confidence.' So he was still working on aircraft for a considerable period right up to when he was arrested.

'Medical in Confidence' apparently trumped letting his management know.

[MPN11]

That is really rather scary, and tends to indicate a severe disconnect between RAF Med staffs and the Service they work for.

However, what do I know about Med in Conf?

[4everAD]

Senior officer who happens to be a pilot caught using cocaine, why should we have any more sympathy for him than for other military personnel booted out for failing a drugs test? It may have cost a lot more to train him, but it doesn't make him above the law!

[Pontius Navigator]

Sir Peter, I am surprised. I am as surprised as I was when I first learnt that the SMO confers with OCAW, [Base Spt].

We once had a person posted to us with no Admin history. We soon experienced problems and our MO was quite open and read out the previous consultant' s report. Sadly it was too late to take effective remedial action. Had we known at the outset then things could have been handled differently.

Ps, ah Sir P, that could explain it.

[SirPeterHardingsLovechild]

PN. I believe this was a civilian locum (ex-RAF) doctor who kept it all to himself

[BEagle]

4everAD, good post!

One sincerely hopes that Tourist won't be involved in any pilot hiring, if he'd be happy to employ someone who wilfully disregarded the UK Armed Forces' clear policy on illegal use of drugs - and flagrantly did so in front of subordinates.

[Tourist]

I'd treat him the same as I'd treat the abuser of any other drug like alcohol.

He got caught.
I would have dobbed him in myself if I had seen it. Not because I believe myself that there is any difference between drugs and alcohol, but because thats the rules.
He has paid the price for his disregarding the HM Forces drug policy.

That does not mean the rest of his life should be ruined and cheered along by his ex mates.

Did the crime and done the time.
Now why not let him get back to doing what his career suggests he does well?

[Yozzer]

Now why not let him get back to doing what his career suggests he does well?

When Junior Ranks lose at least a year of their life in the Military Correction Centre for committing exactly the same offence. Officers committing such offences should be tried by Civil Court which would permit a custodial sentence. If there is not a medical get-out clause then he does not deserve to be in a position of dust yourself down and move on.

Caveat:- it remains unknown if there is a mental breakdown mitigation present.

[BEagle]

Tourist wrote:I'd treat him the same as I'd treat the abuser of any other drug like alcohol.

If you cannot understand the difference, you must either be an illegal drug user yourself, or extremely naïve....:rolleyes:

[Wrathmonk]

Officers committing such offences should be tried by Civil Court which would permit a custodial sentence.

A Courts Martial can sentence an officer to a custodial sentence. However, an officer cannot (AFAIK) be a guest at MCTC but must serve their time in a civilian prison.

Furthermore, had he been tried in a civilian court, and given he was "only" convicted of possession, his previous good character may have meant he would not have been given a custodial sentence but more likely a fine (click here (http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/s_to_u/sentencing_manual/possession_class_a_drug/)).

[MPN11]

I was asked to take on an airman on to my sqn who had been in MTC for a month ... he'd been mixing with the wrong crowd, so he said. In his words, "Seeing people shaving their blankets to get something to smoke was a real wake-up call'. He was nervous at first, tiptoeing on broken glass. He became one of my best SACs, and when I left he got a High Recc for promotion. Indeed, we exchanged emails only a year or so ago!

So ... yes, people can turn their lives around. But it's the starting point that, IMO of course, shades the issue. None of these things are simple.

Referring one of my JOs to the Stn Cdr for Court Martial for bonking a brother officer's wife wasn't a pleasant experience, but straightforward. Nor was it pleasant when I had to start the process to Admin Discharge one of my airmen, but he was utterly useless in every respect. ISTR I had to dob an SNCO heavily as well, although my memory fades on the detail. All in one Tour.

If we don't have fundamental standards, that we are all expected to adhere to, where are we?

[Tashengurt]

Custodial sentence? For possession? First offence? Not going to happen. Ever. Never ever.


Posted from Pprune.org App for Android

[Admin_Guru]

I think that is the point being made. A (Military) custodial sentence can and does get 'awarded' to Junior Ranks.

[Mr C Hinecap]

A (Military) custodial sentence can and does get 'awarded' to Junior Ranks.

If you want to back up a broad, sweeping statement with an equally vague and pointless statement, then you may as well go and work the Daily Mail military news desk.

Admin Discharge statistics for failing the Compulsory Drug Test:
Armed Forces: Drugs: 25 Apr 2013: Hansard Written Answers - TheyWorkForYou (http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2013-04-25d.128433.h)

Court Martial results from the military court centres for the last 5 years:
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/387408/20141215-Court_Martial_Results_2010_to_2014_MCSOM-O.csv/preview

I'll save you some work. Of the 2620 court martial cases, there were 73 involving drugs. There were 4 x Officers in there and one of them was found not guilty.
Of the 73 drug cases, 28 resulted in detention, be that MCTC or prison (it doesn't differentiate). One of those with 120 days was a RN wife. 10 of those detentions did not result in dismissal from HM Service.

The simplicity of the charges presented against the severity of the punishment shows that 'it isn't that simple'. For example, an Army Private was charged with '1 x Possessing a controlled drug with intent to supply' and was imprisoned for 7 years and dismissed. I'd guess that he had done substantially more than just being caught with drugs.

So if you want to keep making broad and sweeping statements, crack on.

[Pontius Navigator]

I'd guess that he had done substantially more than just being caught with drugs.

I was going to say nothing to do with the OP but who knows.

Often a CM is the one chosen or provable event amongst others but there is no way guilt or punishment can be linked to any thing except the charges under consideration.

[Chris Kebab]

Court Martial list is quite interesting, especially the Gp Capt fined £1500 for "Negligently performing a duty" - Que??

[Pontius Navigator]

And the number of women guilty of battery suggests they could indeed hold their place in the front line.

[Wander00]

And the colonel fined £1500 for "disobedience to standing orders", probably his!

[MPN11]

Fascinating reading.

This WO2 had been busy!

Warrant Officer Class 2, Army, Bulford, 17-May-10, 3 x Theft, 7 x Fraud. Guilty, 12 months imprisonment, reduced to the ranks, dismissed from Her Majesty's Service, £28,918.01 Service Compensation Order

[Skeleton]

The worrying thing about those Court Martial statistics to me is the number that were taken to trial and then found not guilty. One hopes given the wonderful track record of the SIB those verdicts were not the result of a technicality.

[Pontius Navigator]

Skelton, who knows. There was a time when "March in the guilty b@st@rd" was more true than a joke.

One of our flt cdrs became a standing President and said that because of the system generally only the guilty, especially in the RAF, came to courts martial.

OTOH you could argue that many in civil courts also get off on technicality.

[Al R]

On one occasion, I was about to have a charge read. It was the Friday before a long weekend and I really wanted to go to Ayia Napa with the boys - jankers would have scuppered that and wreaked havoc with my social diary which, at the time, was revolving around a particular PMRAFNS who had just got posted into TPMH. The flt sgt told me not to leave the sqn compound and wait around for the flt cdr to hear the charge. Luckily, the sqn bar was in the compound and when we were eventually stood down, I calculated I could discretely join the flt in the bar for a few Keos whilst not falling foul of his order.

The delicious nectar was about to pass my lips and with it, I started to compose a plausible case for a stay of justice as I felt I would be incapable of defending myself due to the undoubted effects of akhol ("Would you like to make a statement, you gopping airman?" "Yesh shirr, I like peas and gravy"). As the bottle passed the horizontal, a beefy hand snatched it from me. Scuppered! By the man who told me I was too ugly for QCS, he actually put that on my assessments - these days, I could probably sue him. He also arranged for me to get an extra few days sweeping the road from sqn compound to the picquet post in body armour and tin helmet.

Second best Flt Sgt I had!