Shortage of Navs
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: on track, on speed, on time
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I will try not to give too much away. I have served as NCA and as an officer flying a number of aircraft. There is a load of s#### being spouted by people who have no idea. It is all about the professional and personal qualities irrespective of rank. If you have those qualities and are given the appropriate level of training, then there is a good chance you will get the highly skilled operator you require.
So can WSOps or pilots occupy the 'boot' of the mighty Fin?
Of course they can as long as one heeds the advice in my first paragraph.
Good luck to all and yes I am glad the 'war is over' for me!
// track
So can WSOps or pilots occupy the 'boot' of the mighty Fin?
Of course they can as long as one heeds the advice in my first paragraph.
Good luck to all and yes I am glad the 'war is over' for me!
// track
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: ice station kilo
Posts: 200
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tourist,
I'm very surprised someone as apparently well informed as you didn't know WSOs were still being commissioned and I'm sure that you know all rear crew training is now the responsibility of 45(R) Sqn. With, in the future, big help from 750 NAS for WSOp sensor.
But that's not the point your trying to make is it, your point is the RAF has no way of training WSOs from civvy Street. My point is it doesn't have to.
I'm very surprised someone as apparently well informed as you didn't know WSOs were still being commissioned and I'm sure that you know all rear crew training is now the responsibility of 45(R) Sqn. With, in the future, big help from 750 NAS for WSOp sensor.
But that's not the point your trying to make is it, your point is the RAF has no way of training WSOs from civvy Street. My point is it doesn't have to.
This thread originally started out discussing the shortage of Navs, apparently mainly on the Tornado fleet.
What's the solution? Simple, work the few you have left harder, make them do back to back detachments, stop them PVRing (already being done), don't allow them any time off for personal or professional development, AT, etc....
Finally, when the Tornado fleet does start to fold and you don't need them any more, make them redundant under the rules introduced by the NEM as thanks for their efforts.
Isn't that what the RAF (sorry, didn't mean to be biased), no MOD, normally do in this sort of situation?
As an aside, I don't care if it's WSOps who can wlak on water becoming WSOs, or recruiting WSOs off the high street for the RN to train, you aren't going to put anyone without prior experience into the back seat of a GR4 to go on operations very quickly. Best hope the SDSR solves the problem for you - it normally does......
What's the solution? Simple, work the few you have left harder, make them do back to back detachments, stop them PVRing (already being done), don't allow them any time off for personal or professional development, AT, etc....
Finally, when the Tornado fleet does start to fold and you don't need them any more, make them redundant under the rules introduced by the NEM as thanks for their efforts.
Isn't that what the RAF (sorry, didn't mean to be biased), no MOD, normally do in this sort of situation?
As an aside, I don't care if it's WSOps who can wlak on water becoming WSOs, or recruiting WSOs off the high street for the RN to train, you aren't going to put anyone without prior experience into the back seat of a GR4 to go on operations very quickly. Best hope the SDSR solves the problem for you - it normally does......
CM,
Nope - just realism, pragmatism, and having watched something similar happen with another trade a few years ago....
Anyway, at least it might stop the O's and NCO's from telling each other how good they are for a while. But don't bet on it!!
Nope - just realism, pragmatism, and having watched something similar happen with another trade a few years ago....
Anyway, at least it might stop the O's and NCO's from telling each other how good they are for a while. But don't bet on it!!
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
I was pilloried some years ago when I mentioned airman tendencies in officer candidates. I think this thread epitomizes that. While some NCA have all the attributes for commissioned service (I know one AEOp who made Air Cdre) there are many that do not but may think they do. Remember many were rejected at OASC and offered NCA.
Staff work was mentioned, your lowliest JO is exposed to different and varied staff work by means of jobs pushed their way. Responsibilities are different and officers often have to act on their own when NCA, in the broader sphere do not.
I served with many superb NCA some of whom could have been commissioned and some, despite their own assessment never, Wenselydale may know of whom I am thinking.
Mention of officer and NCA in WW2 is a red herring as societal norms played a large part in initial appointments with commissioning quickly following upon performance.
Staff work was mentioned, your lowliest JO is exposed to different and varied staff work by means of jobs pushed their way. Responsibilities are different and officers often have to act on their own when NCA, in the broader sphere do not.
I served with many superb NCA some of whom could have been commissioned and some, despite their own assessment never, Wenselydale may know of whom I am thinking.
Mention of officer and NCA in WW2 is a red herring as societal norms played a large part in initial appointments with commissioning quickly following upon performance.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
^^
I knew quite a few NCA that would have been unsuitable for a commission.
I knew way more officers that would have been unsuitable for NCA.
You're a bit out of touch there PN - that changed a great deal 10-15 years ago.
I knew quite a few NCA that would have been unsuitable for a commission.
I knew way more officers that would have been unsuitable for NCA.
Responsibilities are different and officers often have to act on their own when NCA, in the broader sphere do not.
You're a bit out of touch there PN - that changed a great deal 10-15 years ago.
One only has to look at the number of FS who regularly stand in for Sqn Ldrs at short notice without batting an eyelid.
One also has to look at the number of NCA who, although sailing through OASC, are unsuccessful or unsuitable for pilot. Most have been or were offered Commissions in another branch. Almost all refuse and opt for NCA.
Of those who later re-apply for a Commission, I am yet to meet one who is unsuccessful.
I did hear a story of one particular ex-NCA Officer Candidate who was backsquadded due to having too many SNCO qualities. Said person's ex colleagues remarked that it was a shame that the individual chose ITC to display previously unseen qualities!
Last edited by Toadstool; 10th Jun 2015 at 19:47.
This thread has slightly lost its way. The RAF is running short of Navs for the Tornado fleet. The sausage factory was closed too early and that was very short-sighted, especially with the threat of extending yet another airframe. There are a lot of guys there with masses of experience, many of whom are content to serve out their days in the cockpit. Beyond that, Manning has a problem.
The other side of the coin is the multi-engine/helo world where WSOps, in their various guises are still being trained. That will, with any luck, soon include P-8. In that area, the RAF is not short of WSOps, has a supply line and, recruiting permitting, would be able cover the required 'footprint'.
So, to go back to the OP, yep, short of navs. Navs only required now for Tornado. Tornado's days may well be in the balance. The Chancellor may have noticed that his shiny Typhoon jets are getting pretty good at air-to-ground. That's a worrying thought.
P-8 potential buy (God, I hope so), WSOps required, 45 Sqn doing the training and a good number of guys in "seed corn" posts in the States, where the UK's LRMPA expertise currently rests.
So, is there a problem? Yes, for the Tornado. For helo and multi WSOps, No.
The other side of the coin is the multi-engine/helo world where WSOps, in their various guises are still being trained. That will, with any luck, soon include P-8. In that area, the RAF is not short of WSOps, has a supply line and, recruiting permitting, would be able cover the required 'footprint'.
So, to go back to the OP, yep, short of navs. Navs only required now for Tornado. Tornado's days may well be in the balance. The Chancellor may have noticed that his shiny Typhoon jets are getting pretty good at air-to-ground. That's a worrying thought.
P-8 potential buy (God, I hope so), WSOps required, 45 Sqn doing the training and a good number of guys in "seed corn" posts in the States, where the UK's LRMPA expertise currently rests.
So, is there a problem? Yes, for the Tornado. For helo and multi WSOps, No.
Toadstool, sorry, my point was not aimed at you. But I'm glad you posted because it highlights the two, distinct discussions here.
Your post was a good response to the NCA/Officer Aircrew debate. My post is about rear crew manning in RAF fleets in the coming years. Both worthwhile discussion and, hey, thread drift in PPRuNe leads to some of the best discussions.
Your post was a good response to the NCA/Officer Aircrew debate. My post is about rear crew manning in RAF fleets in the coming years. Both worthwhile discussion and, hey, thread drift in PPRuNe leads to some of the best discussions.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
TOFO, Despite my age I am not that far out of touch having only retired 5 years ago.
TS, I can't disagree, certainly FS and MACR can certainly do the roles, but not all.
My last FS was very professional but lacking in other ways. His predecessor should have been an officer but was happy where he was and didn't want a warrant.
Now a previous FS, also TG9, was brilliant as a Sim Controller but I don't think he would have been happy with a commission.
I guess the bottom line is do those NCA, suitable for a commission, actually want a commission? Even if commissioned, or not, could they be retrained in a wholly different role?
TS, I can't disagree, certainly FS and MACR can certainly do the roles, but not all.
My last FS was very professional but lacking in other ways. His predecessor should have been an officer but was happy where he was and didn't want a warrant.
Now a previous FS, also TG9, was brilliant as a Sim Controller but I don't think he would have been happy with a commission.
I guess the bottom line is do those NCA, suitable for a commission, actually want a commission? Even if commissioned, or not, could they be retrained in a wholly different role?
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: 4 Civvy Street. Nowhere-near-a-base. The Shires.
Posts: 559
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Again, the RAF is not flush with WSOPs. Too many were redunded, recruiting is slow, and the sensor pipeline is only now sputtering into life for the first time since I and others closed it down in 2010. Even if another ISR fleet is chopped through SDSR, it will still be a stretch to man 5? 8? 12? P-8 (according to various rumours here)
That aircraft needs 4 WSOp (and a WSO bien sur) per crew. Sentinel Shadow or Reaper need 1 each. Maybe if all 3 fleets go, we could man the P-8.
That aircraft needs 4 WSOp (and a WSO bien sur) per crew. Sentinel Shadow or Reaper need 1 each. Maybe if all 3 fleets go, we could man the P-8.
Last edited by camelspyyder; 10th Jun 2015 at 21:25.
Camel,
The purchase of P-8 will take time. Plenty of time to ramp up to meet the demand. The RAF training pipeline has a reputation for being hard to manage. I'm know, I used to be SO1 Trg at HQ 1Gp. That reputation came from the difficult days of the PILOT pipeline that fell victim to an unprecedented series of cuts and other external factors - I'm not trying to defend it, I didn't run it.
The WSOp training "pipeline" is nowhere near as complicated and nowhere near as long. Therefore it can react far more quickly to demand. Remember, the P-8 purchase is still a rumour. Would you imagine that the MoD et al aren't, right now, trying to work out what they are going to do and what they might lose in SDSR should this be a viable project?
Just because you and others closed it down at a time when there was a lower demand, doesn't mean it can't be ramped up now. Actually, it already is, as you stated. Maybe you didn't shut it down properly.
Again, I suggest you read my posts #8 and #17. Look at the bit about RAF folk doing this job in the US of A.
The purchase of P-8 will take time. Plenty of time to ramp up to meet the demand. The RAF training pipeline has a reputation for being hard to manage. I'm know, I used to be SO1 Trg at HQ 1Gp. That reputation came from the difficult days of the PILOT pipeline that fell victim to an unprecedented series of cuts and other external factors - I'm not trying to defend it, I didn't run it.
The WSOp training "pipeline" is nowhere near as complicated and nowhere near as long. Therefore it can react far more quickly to demand. Remember, the P-8 purchase is still a rumour. Would you imagine that the MoD et al aren't, right now, trying to work out what they are going to do and what they might lose in SDSR should this be a viable project?
Just because you and others closed it down at a time when there was a lower demand, doesn't mean it can't be ramped up now. Actually, it already is, as you stated. Maybe you didn't shut it down properly.
Again, I suggest you read my posts #8 and #17. Look at the bit about RAF folk doing this job in the US of A.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: 4 Civvy Street. Nowhere-near-a-base. The Shires.
Posts: 559
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I too hope training can be ramped up quickly, but I dont think the projected 4 Sensor operators through training this FY are going to make much difference. Also the 2 crews worth in the US would make a great start to the fleet - IF they all come back. Instructors in the US are being poached by contractors for megabucks wages - 2,3,4 times military salaries. I wouldn't look such a gift horse in the mouth, and I know at least 1 seed-corn flyer who went to the States with the express long-term intent on moving on into industry over there.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Except it WAS shut down, and all equipment scrapped. Gone. No more.
The training being done now is being outsourced.
You want to renew the mpa fleet? Then it is going to cost. The RAF has lost its WSOp training capability. There will be no "ramping up". The current output will barely support the current under manned fleets. Be under no illusion, the 55 Sqn output standard of old is going to be a challenge to renew, without significant investment. However, there are good guys on 45 trying their best with what they have.
Having said that, if p8 is an option then the full support package will of course be taken into account. I hope!
The training being done now is being outsourced.
You want to renew the mpa fleet? Then it is going to cost. The RAF has lost its WSOp training capability. There will be no "ramping up". The current output will barely support the current under manned fleets. Be under no illusion, the 55 Sqn output standard of old is going to be a challenge to renew, without significant investment. However, there are good guys on 45 trying their best with what they have.
Having said that, if p8 is an option then the full support package will of course be taken into account. I hope!
Courtney Mil,
Ref your post #70, you are absolutely right.
Everyone at the coalface advised some years ago against shutting down the nav training line based on the then projected squadron numbers/aircraft OSDs, as historically things tend to "run on".
Funny old thing, we now have an "extra" GR4 squadron running on and, surprise, surprise, the RAF is now short of FJ navs, never mind trying to crew a possible(?) P8 fleet.
The Marham GR4 squadrons are so depleted of navs compared to pilots, that the most common cause of sim slots being cancelled is - no nav available.
It will only get worse - I am so glad I am now an observer from the outside!
Ref your post #70, you are absolutely right.
Everyone at the coalface advised some years ago against shutting down the nav training line based on the then projected squadron numbers/aircraft OSDs, as historically things tend to "run on".
Funny old thing, we now have an "extra" GR4 squadron running on and, surprise, surprise, the RAF is now short of FJ navs, never mind trying to crew a possible(?) P8 fleet.
The Marham GR4 squadrons are so depleted of navs compared to pilots, that the most common cause of sim slots being cancelled is - no nav available.
It will only get worse - I am so glad I am now an observer from the outside!