Originally Posted by
Typhoondriver
Is it fake news that the system at Valley have introduced a process which has colloquially become known as 'zero'ing'? My understanding is that 'zero'ing' allows MFTS to continue to graduate courses on time, in order to get paid. The fact that these courses, I am told, have 'zero' students on them, yet the company still gets paid, is quite frankly astonishing.
Is it fake news that the syllabus at Valley cannot be changed by the military staff, since the 'courseware' is 'owned' by the company? Meaning, hypothetically of course, that should one of the Frontline OCUs request a minor Hawk syllabus change iot better prepare students for the demands of their FL conversion, that it can be denied on commercial grounds?
Is it fake news that students who are assessed not to have met Valley 'end of course' standard by their experienced military IPs, can no longer be chopped due to the small print in the commercial contract? Has the military lost control of it's flying training standards, resulting in individuals arriving on the FL OCUs being well below the desired course entry standard?
I would add to that list of questions:
How many actual (real people) student pilots (not QFIs for internal 4FTS/Ascent use0 have graduated from Valley since this contract began? How many were supposed to have graduated in that timeframe?
Since we are dealing with a civvy business, lets use their terminology. This is about making Widgets, not making desks for Widget makers to sit at, not making tools for Widget making.
How many students have they sent to Coningsby, and how many should they have?
Zero Loaded courses sounds like the operation was a success, but the patient died anyway.