As - probably - the most recent UAS stude here there are certainly aspects of the article I can identify with. However, I'd have had slightly more sympathy for the guys involved if they'd stayed less than a year before deciding it wasn't for them. The article states they were disillusioned after a year and a half of empty promises? Tough. If things aren't being organised, then you take over and organise them yourself. Yes there are less staff about - perhaps 2 full time RAF personnel per sqn (one as OC, one GTI) and one or two RAFR as instructing pilots - but if you went to them and asked for assistance to organise an event, they'd drop almost everything and help out implicitly. If the guys in the article didn't have the presence of mind to do that, then the UAS was better off without, to be honest.
Of course, every UAS is different and some will be better than others - and students are still students - but whining because something isn't going your way when you have power to change it is absurd.
The UAS' are obviously doing something right, the most recent IOT course to start has about 60 cdts all hailing from an UAS, with every single one represented by at least one cdt, some with 5 or 6.
Those who want to can still get something out of the system, so it's not something to write off yet.