"When I see an AAC or RN 'crewman' with an ounce of the skillset of his/her RAF counterpart"
Unchecked - I take it by such a statement you have served with all types? If not then you are basing your opinion on assumption.
The issue is that all 3 breeds carry out different roles - you are comparing apples & oranges. Junglie crewies are trained to navigate and are more involved in flight planning than their light blue counterparts. RAF crewmen are more involved in flight servicing compared to their junglie counterparts. Army crewmen/ gunners operate in small aircraft with a much more limited but valuable role they dont need to know how to operate a ramp in a similiar way that Ramp up (i assume he does down too) needs to "open a wildcat door and learn to operate lots of weapons" (god forbid anything military come onto the equation). All carry value within their own organisation & it seems to work just fine.
As for comparisons to instructional capability - again this is based on hearsay and assumption. That's fact - as no RAF crewman has carried out an exchange with CHF and therefore no one can make an unbiased assessment of the training pipeline. On the other hand several CHF crewmen have carried out loan exchanges to the light blue and can therefore make a judgement as they have seen both systems in action. Generally the feedback is that both systems fulfill their forces requirement - which as I said before are very different.
Several years back CHF tried 60 as an experiment but it was deemed excessively long with an end product short of entry standard for OCU, no gain but lots of pain with regard to time.