BEags,
The UK-based HQs have indeed been downsizing over the past few years. The made-up staff posts can be found in the various Expeditionary Air Wings and Group (nothing like writing useless service papers in a dusty office in the desert to enhance your promotion prospects!). And the reason why we keep needing new pilots to be trained is that we post guys away from the front line after only 2.5 to 3 years - generally to be QFIs! Self-licking lollipop is a phrase that springs to mind.
davejb,
I fully acknowledge the role played by NCO aircrew as members of the airborne team, especially in the maritime role. However you would (rightly) expect the officers to carry the can if you (for example) torpedoed the wrong submarine. You can educate me here - were there ever any situations where you could have released a weapon without the consent of one of the officers on board?
My point was that assets as "strategic" as aircraft should be held accountable at least the same rank level as an army platoon, which means being under the command of an officer. By "strategic" here I mean scarce, wide-ranging and high-impact. In the days of the NCO pilot, aircraft were not scarce in the modern sense, and individual airframes had nothing like the destructive or intelligence-gathering powers of today's platforms.
And finally, with tongue firmly in cheek, if pilots could be NCOs, why couldn't rearcrew be SACs? There are plenty of SACs out there with highly specialised technical training, after all!
Last edited by Easy Street; 6th Nov 2010 at 23:33.