Originally Posted by
ShotOne
"High turnover of young servicemen murderously expensive.."?? really?.. Why is it cheaper to train someone "old and bold" to fly a P8 or Voyager when a bright-eyed youngster could sit in the seat on less than half the pay? Not saying this is the right thing, JTO but can you justify your statement on financial grounds?
I don't have the figures to hand but they have been prepped and scrutinised many times over and there are multiple threads to the calculations. But to give a rough order of magnitude to meet a requirement to fill one cockpit seat for 28 years:
Option 1: Fill requirement with pilots serving for no longer than 10 years.
- Allow for 3 years in training / non-productive
- Expect 7 years productive per pilot = 4 pilots required
- 4 pilots at £4M each (not an accurate figure) = £16M training bill
Option 2: Fill requirement and retain pilot for 31 years.
- Allow for 3 years in training / non-productive
- Expect 28 years productive = 1 pilot required.
- 1 pilot at £4M each (as above) = £4M training bill
1 pilot option 'saves' £12M over 28 years.
Or put another way, you could pay that pilot £428,571.42 a year and still save a few pence, even if the other 4 pilots were willing to work 10 years for free.
An extreme example no doubt, but high churn is resource and cash intensive.