So the "AEFs will pick up the slack for the loss of VGS" has not delivered then as promised earlier this year when the VGSs were culled? From the note at the above link there were 400 less AEF sorties since last year. The excuse about the lack of fire engines is laughable - the Grob Tutor is a light aircraft, so why the hell do they insist on Crash Cat 2? I can fly the very same aircraft, a Grob 115 with a G-Reg, with no crash-cat whatsoever at a farm strip or even if I'm doing flying training then Crash Cat "Special" is more than sufficient (this was what the Vigilant used to use). Also, if I owmed 4x Grob 115s then I would expect there to be 4x Grob 115s on the line each morning, however, when it becomes a Grob Tutor then why is it OK to have at best a couple on the line? It would be a different matter if the Grob 115s had a mahoosive accident rate, but they don't, they are broadly the same as the Tutor.
We are all collectively to blame for letting our Cadets down due to ridiculous 'gold plating' of our regulations and airworthiness requirements for these simple light aircraft. Just when the CAA/EASA are stripping out 'red tape' then the MoD/MAA are tying the military up in it...
We need to embrace cheap and safe air experience flying for our Cadets quickly, or we run the risk of losing a complete generation of youths. A really quick fix would be to release public funding for Service Flying/Gliding Clubs to give 'introductory filghts' (as per CAA/EASA rules). The Halton Aero Club flew over 100 children in one afternoon using their own money -
YOUNG EAGLES TAKE TO THE SKIES . Providing flights at cost with volunteer pilots under ACTO35 could see thousands of extra Cadets flying each year at a fraction of the cost of the uber-expensive Tutor. A flight in a Tutor (including the ridiculous Air Traffic Control and Fire Cover requirements) amounts to ~£400/hr, whereas a civvy reg aircraft can operate at less than a quarter of that cost.
We have got this so badly wrong. Shameless...