Reservists

[JAJM]

Surely it would be better if HM Forces also employed reservist Aircrew from the very start of their 'career' on all aircraft? There is absolutely nothing wrong with a Current licensed pilot flying reserve hours for the RAF/RN/Army (delete as apt) (who wasn't previously a Regular or has thousands of hours in the left-seat of a Commercial civvy a/c, like the Voyager fleet). Obviously, they would need to work a lot more than 19 days a year, but, if they really want it, then they will do it. Nothing worth doing is easy.

It might also inspire the MOD to make the investment for the number of aircraft that all respectable Air Forces should have in respect to the size of their country and the amount of interests they have to protect, which in the case of the UK, is quite a lot!

[Stuff]

I did say "from the start" meaning that is how long it takes if they need to be trained in everything. Also if you read my post you'll see I advocate training in specific roles, ideally ones the applicant already has skills in.

[air pig]

Forces would not be able to go on a big deployment without reservist medics.

[JAJM]

In fairness, the Forces can't go on any deployment without reservist anything. There's not enough regulars to fill in the gaps both at home and overseas. You'd think that with a £38bn annual spending budget, there would be. Perhaps there might be if the last government wasn't obsessed with expensive, unsustainable contracts and a poor strategy to stop civilian contractors taking the proverbial piss at the taxpayer's expense.

[hunterboy]

At the risk of getting flamed.....it does seem a shame that more "interesting " jobs aren't available in the Reserves. As it stands it's hardly going to attract a wider range of recruit( No disrespect to those that do the jobs).
Is there really a shortage of loaders/movers and gunners? Wouldn't it be better to perhaps attract some more civilian pilots (as per AirTanker) or maybe IT professionals that know their way around the 7 layers of the OSI model.
If the shortage is really people that are required to pull a trigger, then why are we reducing the numbers in our armed forces?
Just seems typical of the short term thinking that blights the U.K

[Stuff]

We are already advertising heavily for TG4 IT professionals. There's even a £2000 golden hello if you join before the end of 2016.

TG4 made a bit of a land-grab for the iHub roles - I'm not sure what the thinking beind that was - those roles don't really need the level of expertise that TG4 possess and have spread themselves thin as a result.

[Flugplatz]

Hunterboy

My thoughts exactly. The 'trades' on offer are mainly 'warm-body' type jobs (unskilled or at best semi-skilled). Only medics/lawyers/media/IT types are deemed to have equivalent or better skills to their regular counterparts.

Of course this is a function of the 27 day minimum training committment, but I have to wonder why it appears impossible for experienced aircraft engineers to be reservists working on military aircraft? I shouldn't wonder that these very same people may well work on military aircraft in deep maintenance that the RAF has now contracted out. Civ engineers have very good core skills and converting to a new type is an established process in the civvy world (think Bristow engineers going from EC225 to S92)

To my mind the whole setup reeks of cheap-as-possible, hence no possibility of 'short' type courses to allow civvy qualified engineers to get up to speed with service aircraft. I know the USAF don't take a similar attitude and offer a much wider variety of training, so that their reservists are far more directly comparable with the same regular trades.

If the percentage of reservist is to get up to the planned levels, then I can foresee a situation that unskilled/semi-skilled work will become the province of reservists and only the skilled trades will be regular. I suppose the RAF are hoping that what will actually happen is that they will be able to recruit into the reserves as many ex-regular Engineers etc as unskilled civvies.

Does seem to be a waste of some great talent out in civvy street who have directly applicable skills. If the RAF can deploy someone for 6-9 months (work-up etc), surely they can run trade courses of the same length to get well qualified people up to speed?

[rolling20]

I remember an SAC ground crew on the UAS not saluting a VR Flight Lieutenant. When I asked him why, he declared that he never saluted a VR unless a Squadron Leader or above. I never saw such a rank ( I guess they must have existed?) and he continued his VR saluting ban. Odd thing was, none of the VR Officers ever pulled him up on it.

[Pontius Navigator]

Rolling, VR(T) certainly made sqn ldr. Both our' s at school got their scrapers, not sure the criteria.

[downsizer]

Aren't most VR(T) Flt Lts, Sqn Ldrs, Wing Cos, etc all acting?

[ACW418]

Yes the highest substantive officer rank in the RAF VR(T) is Flying Officer. Some are granted paid acting rank above that depending on role. In certain circumstances you can get acting (unpaid) Flt Lt, usually time served is the criteria for this.

Strangely as an acting (paid) Sqn Ldr when I retired I was allowed to retain the rank. Don't quite know what that means! When you retire it is over, forget it and get on with life.

ACW