My experience is solely within the SH Force and I feel that on the larger helos that the RAF utilise, whilst airborne the only interface between the front-enders and the user unit is the crewman. I feel the SH Force is better served by having SNCO crewmen as that interface than "just" Cpls; surely, your average Joe army bod would take more notice of a Sgt than a Cpl - even an officer? In my experience, with the rank comes some credibilty and assumption that he/she knows what they are doing better than a Cpl. Certainly within the Infantry units, Sgts are higly regarded and it's important (as the infantry are our major customers) to tap into that mindset.
The JNCO/SNCO argument has several facets. Pay is certainly one of them, but IMHO the authority issue of Sgt vs Cpl is an important one.
The AAC has had JNCO door gunners for years, but they have a very different role to that of the RAF and RN/RM (Air)Crewmen, and so the former and latter should be debated separately and not compared.
Nobody (I think) would deny that the job can't be done by JNCOs (the FAA have done it for some time), but the SH Force is better served by having it's crewmen as SNCOs.
The question of authority is valid and you only need to look at the AAC to see it. Until relatively recently, they employed JNCO pilots, but then changed policy to reflect that all OR pilots would be SNCOs (they train as Cpls and then stripe-up on graduation from the APC). I expect to be corrected if wrong, but JNCO vs SNCO authority was a certainly a factor.
The 4 Services will always have their single service needs and requirements, but with jointery the boundaries become blurred and single service values are eroded. The RAF should not be brow-beaten into having JNCO aircrew if it doesn't feel it to be appropriate to fulfil it's role.
PS
South Bound
The RM Cpls at the SANS are Royal Marines, NOT Army Cpls... Just want to save you from having to sleep with one eye open...
"And all real emergencies will be preceded by "Was that you?""