Pobjoy
Yes, it was me that announced a new Sheriff. He made absolutely the right decision at the time - grounding the fleet for inspection and auditing the VGS's processes was the correct thing to do. However, like the B Word's post above illustrates, the outcome is sub-optimal in my opinion. Just how much of this is the Sheriff's wishes I do not know, but if I were the Sheriff then I would have probably come up with a different solution:
1. As soon as I had a view on the state of the Vigilant fleet, I would have asked to take the money for re-engining the aircraft (believed to be an eye watering £60k per airframe over a 5 year period) and started placing orders for ASK-21s (calling them the extant Vanguard TX1 name). Within the 2 year pause I would have hoped to have at least a dozen or more, with at least another dozen coming off the production line during the Viking recovery. Let's say there were 30x Vanguards in the end - enough for 5x VGS to remain open and some at Syerston for trg and maintenance.
2. Sorted out my new Skylaunch winches ASAP to ensure there were clearnces to use Vikings and Vanguards.
3. Scrapped the Vigilant and told the instructors to start flying conventional gliders at RAFGSA clubs (giving them a small £500 grant to help them do so). When ready, the formal instructor categorisation could occur at Syerston.
4. This latest announcement could have read 17x VGS to remain open instead of 12. All with these low-fidelity simulators for poor weather day trg/experience - not a direct replacement to flying but better than nothing at all. 17 spread accross the could have seen a further 1 in Scotland, 1 in NI and 1 in Wales plus a further 2 in the South East to take up the strain of nearly 1/4 of the Air Cadet numbers.
5. Don't forget, that with these new Vanguards the Cadets could be flying them NOW!!
I'm sure there are other things that could have been done better. I can't help feeling that stopping in Apr 14 was the right thing to do, I just wish that the outcome could have been better!!
LJ