I feel that this thread has now passed me by in that it has reached a level of discussion well beyond my ken, and that is as how it should be, gathering more and more evidence and piling on the pressure. That pressure should be renewed now that M. Lancaster, TD, MP is now the relevant minister. It is of interest that part of his portfolio is as the minister responsible for the Armed Forces Covenant. As the majority of posters on this thread appear to be both serving and retired members of Her Majesties Armed Forces I would suggest that we are entitled to a much greater level of information with regard to everything in this thread than we are currently receiving.
Might I suggest that
ALL of you are who are flying or flew, or flew in, in what can now be described as Non-Airworthy military aircraft, ask the minister as to why your life is being or has been put at risk above and beyond the normally accepted risks of flight in a military aircraft.
Now that we have a new minister I have copied a couple of eMails to the previous minister via my quietly effective MP lady sylvia Hermon and the replies fro J Brazier, TD MP. I'll start with parts of my email asking questions in relation to the written ministerial statement to the house of commons and the reply to my MP. I might add that I also wrote a separate email to the Office of The First Minister/ Deputy First Minister at Stormont, cc'd to the First Ministers for Scotland and Wales. I also wrote an email to the chair of the Public Accounts Committee at Westminster. To date I have received NO replies from these four.
"As stated, and to re-iterate:
• Has the Minister been asked as to why this fiasco has come about?
• Is he aware that up to 146 aircraft document sets (ADS) are missing, most likely illegally destroyed.
• What were the RAF officers who held the SO1 and SO2 posts doing whilst their apparent incompetence allowed a private company to charge for work that was not done, work that was done without being asked for and in a manner that left aircraft in an un-airworthy state, signed entires in official documents (the aircraft Form 700 series, comprising part of the ADS) as having overseen work that was neither done nor overseen?
• Has he been asked as to why it has taken so long to get such a limited number of aircraft back to an airworthy state?
• Why were the Vigilant aircraft engines not replaced/refurbished at 2000 hrs which is their designed life between overhauls.
• Why, indeed, were the aircraft allowed to fly with engines past their “Life-ex” number of hours
• The reason for there only being 15 Vigilant aircraft available to 2019 is that someone found 15 replacement engines in boxes in the 2 FTS engineering facility.
• Whilst travel, accommodation and messing on residential courses is free, cadets will, of course, require “pocket money” for the week. The parents of some cadets may find it difficult to fund their offspring with such.
There are many more questions that need asking and many many anomalies to the plans drawn up by 2FTS and as presented to the minister who has, I believe, been treated to a smoke and mirrors job that in no way reflects the reality of the current situation.
Lastly, does Lady Sylvia not think that charging the MoD for work that was not done, work that left aircraft in a dangerous state and the illegal destruction of official (and possibly incriminating) documents are crime in themselves, and furthermore, the apparent lack of any form of official investigation into this possibly criminal fiasco?
My reply to the above.
ear Lady Sylvia,
Very many thanks for sending me copies of the letters to you from the minister for reserves, J Brazier TD MP. I have already part written a reply to his first letter dated 03/05/16. Personal circumstances have precluded me from finishing it until now. I will add my comments in relation to todays reply (26/05/16).
First of all let me start by saying that I mean no disrespect to Mr. Brazier whatsoever. I save that for the very senior officers in both the ACO and the RAF who have, to my mind, fed the minister a diet of bovine faeces.
I am afraid that he has been poorly and incorrectly briefed. His letter is full of inaccuracies, in places totally wrong and certain conclusions are not fact but, to my mind, terminological inexactitudes, uttered to support 2FTS’s discrimination towards Self Launching Motor Gliders and civilian volunteer instructors in that neither hold no place in glider training to solo for the Air Cadet Organisation. I will, if I may, address each paragraph in turn.
Paragraph 1.
“ Northern Ireland will be losing its gliding squadron but gaining (for the first time) powered air experience flying for cadets in the Province”
This is factually wrong. 13 Air Experience Flight (AEF) has been flying as part of Queens University Air Squadron (QUAS) since the 1950s until the closure of QUAS in 1996. Indeed my first ever powered aircraft flight was with 13 AEF in 1964, in a Chipmunk aircraft, flying out of RAF Aldergrove. That was my first ever time upside down and pulling “G”. I have been doing just that for most of my life ever since.
Paragraph 2.
“Our aim is that a new Air Experience Flight (AEF) will be created at Aldergrove with three Grob Tutor aircraft. There are currently 427 RAF cadets in the Northern Ireland Wing, meaning there should be approximately one aircraft per 140 cadets. This compares very favourably with the cadet to aircraft ratios found in similar sized Air Experience Flights in mainland United Kingdom.”
The above are admirable aims. However, the Grob 105 tutor is only being released for AEF duties as they are no longer required for Ab-Initio RAF flying training. These aircraft as explained in paragraph 7 are owned and maintained by the M.o.D. contractor Babcock. under this contract each flight is costed at circa £500/hour. The contract with Babcock finishes in 2019. Therefore, the aim to have all cadets having three flights per year from 2018 will only last for one year. Will the Babcock contract be extended or renewed and, either way, will the contract cost then come from the ACO budget?
Notwithstanding the above, in order to maintain the aircraft Babcock will either have to employ suitably licensed A & C aircraft engineers locally or have the AEF staff trained in pre & post flight servicing of the aircraft, (an aircraft which is somewhat more complex than the Vigilant) and have the aircraft flown to a maintenance facility across the Irish Sea. There is a third possibility in that a local company may be sub-contracted to perform the maintenance and ground handling. this though will put the ACO back to the same situation they were in with SERCO and Soaring Oxford.
Paragraph 3.
“The part task trainer (simulator) which is currently located at Newtownards will also be relocated to Aldergrove, with the aim that it will be fully operational there by the end of 2016. Cadets currently have access to the part task trainer at Newtownards as and when the Volunteer Gliding Squadron (VGS) staff are available. A new training syllabus for the part task trainer is being finalised and our instructors will be retrained throughout the summer to deliver this new training at Aldergrove.”
The so called “simulator” or part task trainer is a form of PC simulator game called X-Plane. I have this on my iMac at home and, like its competitor Microsoft Flight Simulator X, shows that I have safely landed a Boeing 747 at KaiTak International Airport in Hong Kong (Where my family and I lived for two years). Any one who believes that is probably living in Cloud Cuckoo Land. It bears no resemblance to real flight and can lead to the introduction of bad habits, which can lead to problems for cadets when being instructed for real. There is also a question hanging over the purchase of these so called “Part Task Trainers. Was there a proper tender process or was it, as has been suggested in some quarters based on a friend or family member of someone employed at 2FTS “knew someone in a computer company and could get a good deal”? As for the purchase of an end user licence for each computer, was this the standard Program Licence and EULA or was it the “X-Plane for Professional Use” with the appropriate hardware and software as mandated by the FAA?
With the closure of 664 VGS, who is going to be retrained to be a game instructor? I very much doubt that any of the instructors at Newtownards would wish to sit in a replica cockpit and never get off the ground. I know that of the 4 staff who could possibly convert to the Grob 115 Tutor, One is now too old and another is unlikely to be considered for reasons of past ill health. Of those instructors left three are hoping to gain places on the staff of Kirknewton VGS but I suspect that the attendance requirements will negate these desires. Who then, as asked, will give up their weekends to play computer games? If not these, will ATC squadron personnel be required to attend a course at 2FTS to 1. Be taught to fly and 2. Taught to instruct?
Paragraph 4.
The reformation of 502 Sqn. R.Aux. A.F. is a red herring. It has absolutely nothing to do 664 VGS (Which will soon be no more)
Paragraph 5.
Whoever wrote this letter for the ministers signature cannot even get their facts right. 664 VGS is based at Newtownards airfield, Co. Down. NOT at RAF Kirknewton.
Paragraph 6.
As Paragraph 5. Totally wrong in that cadets have NEVER had to pay the Cadet Contribution to Messing when attending flying training and gliding induction. There is no facility for providing messing in any shape or form at 664 VGS other than a ‘fridge and an electric kettle for staff tea and coffee. Cadets were advised to bring their own packed lunch or use a local fast food outlet.
Paragraph6.
The time scale to resurrect 12/13 AEF and bring the AEF flying program on stream is probably circa 2018. As stated earlier, the Babcock Tutor contract expires in 2019. So, at present this looks like only a years air experience flying in the province. As for the value of second hand Grob 109s, I suggest the minister should look again. A good condition G109 with a low hours engine is going for around £40K.
Paragraph 7.
The summary is, just as the rest of this letter is, plain wrong. As I said in my reply to Paragraph 1 the “new” AEF will not allow cadets powered flying opportunities for the first time. It was being done for many many years by 13 AEF before it was closed down as part of the closure of QUAS in 1996. The hope of getting gliders available in quantity by 2018 is not, on current releases back to service likely by 2018. I suspect that Kirknewton being the only non English squadron will be the last to be outfitted.
As for the letter forwarded to me today, I can only agree that the safety, not only of Air Cadets, but also of the volunteer gliding staff, who fly many hours per year to provide such training for the ACO, is paramount.
With regard to Mr. Braziers statement “I accept that, except for the Air Cadets themselves, every element of the Air Cadet gliding operations and support organisation over a long period of time shared some responsibility for the erosion of confidence in the airworthiness of MOD gliders which led to the pause” I take exception to the above in that I do not believe that those at the coal face of squadron level engineering part of Air Cadet gliding operations were part of the problem. I suspect that after the privatisation of ACO gliding engineering at the then CGS/3FTS, the only place where aircraft servicing requirements were meticulously carried out was in fact at squadron level. I can tell you that if I am going to fly in an aircraft I will ensure that at squadron level everything is done properly and by the book. No shortcuts. Never. Not if my cadets are going to fly in one of our aeroplanes. However the way in which the people who actually run the Volunteer Gliding Squadrons, and who have given given freely of their time and effort, have been treated by the ACO and 2 FTS in particular was, and is, totally abysmal.
Furthermore, that it is taking the might of the Royal Air Force, (in which I served for twenty two years) and MoDUK (AiR) up to FOUR YEARS to recover a small fleet of the simplest of aircraft to an airworthy state is totally shameful! To my mind an awful lot of posteriors are being covered.
In relation to the CAMO and MAA, I would suggest that the minister pay heed to the “Air Cadets Grounded” thread in the Military Aviation Forum on the Professional Pilots Rumour Network, PPrune.org. There has been a lot of discussion by both serving and retired persons, who hold, or have held very senior positions, on the efficacy, or lack thereof, of the MAA.
I would be obliged if you would forward this email to the minister in it’s entirety. I do not need a reply. Nothing that I, or any other, can say or do will change the direction that one man has decided is the future way. The damage has been done. and in the recovery, the ACO and 2FTS have destroyed something that not only worked but worked well. The Air Cadet Gliding organisation will never be as good as it was and in the destruction a lot of goodwill and effort has been destroyed.
As for those staff cadets who have had the good fortune to have had the fires of their aviation ambitions fanned by 664 VGS, I wish them well for they are the last in Northern Ireland. There will be no more now that 664 VGS is no more.
As for those responsible for this debacle, shame on them.
With thanks for your continued interest I remain,
Yours Sincerely
X X Xxxxxx
Cadet Sergeant, 2178 (Holywood) Squadron, Air Training Corps
Corporal, Assistant Air Traffic Controller, Royal Air Force
Adult Warrant Officer and Officer Commanding (pro tem) 2178 (Holywood) Squadron, Air Training Corps
Civilian Gliding Instructor, 664 Volunteer Gliding Squadron
Squadron Flight Safety Officer, 664 Volunteer Gliding Squadron
And the final reply,
I haven't bothered to reply to the above. Obviously the person who drafts these things, ready for the bosses signature, aren't aware that the majority of us know about composite repairs. As for "..that Northern Ireland cadets will in future have the same opportunities as cadets throughout the country to undertake wings course and experience flight up to solo standard" That I think is a load of bollows. Some cadets may get a course, but attend for six or eight week-ends on the trot?
Parents driving up to 2 hours to BFS or BHD on a Friday evening for the squeezy to EDI and the same again on a Sunday. And what about when the squeezy goes "tech" at EDI and is cancelled. Who's there to look after wee John or Janet. And, of course, what about the FSCs from NI, Wales and those in Scotland well above the central belt? they,ve had their lot. No going on to advanced, G2 and G1 etc. The same road that one of our FSCs took and is now on his first tour on Typhoons.
Apologies for the lengthy post but do compare Mr Braziers replies to me with the ones you have received - a carbon copy with only the names changed to protect the guilty mayhaps ? For those of you who haven't yet written to the minister now is a good time to do so in order to welcome him to his new job
A342