Jayteeto
Sorry but couldnt disagree more chap. you say
If he busts controlled airspace or danger areas, guess who is at fault??
It doesnt matter whos fault it is if the result of the 'bust' is a mid-air or incursion of a danger zone that could result in the loss of an aircraft.
He is ASSISTED by the observers who should assume the tactical navigation for the sortie and police job at hand.
so the observer should assume tactical navigation and he should ASSIST the pilot, yet still to this point the observer is not given ANY form of crew status by the CAA and therefore should NOT assist the pilot, particularly with TAC nav near Controlled airspace.
These guys are not given the costed hours to develop, and in many cases not given the development by pilots in the air. The reason you 'developed' to an OK standard following difficulties on the JP was that you were given costed hours, you were both developed and you were treated as a crew member.
The observers should be given crew status (only a cost issue with the ASU's)by the CAA to make the set up as legal and as safe as possible. Then they would have to have costed hours training etc. You say this is not a safety issue well in my eyes in terms of operating the aircraft ( talking as a mil rotary pilot) and in terms of CRM it definitly is an issue. It is an accident waiting to happen.
The whole ASU business needs revamping on a national basis to get qualified , accredited, licensed coppers in the left hand seat.
Waldo this is the right forum for this subject.