EFTS Fixed Wing or Rotary

[FEBA]

Rumour has it that the doyens at the AAC have decided to ditch fixed wing ab-initio training and go straight to rotary.

Is this a good idea? Will the chop rate at EFTS level increase when students try to grapple with rotary? Will basic airmanship be compromised and above all when these guys quit the Army what will they do with their H only licence?

FEBA

[airborne_artist]

Part of the arguement in favour of FW EFTS wis that it is an easier environment to learn airmanship, as the stude is not having to deal with the complexities of simultaneously learning to fly rotary. Clearly airmanship can be learned in a rotary only environment, but my guess that the rotary course would need to be lengthened considerably. Possible that the chop rate will increase, but not certain .

Not sure about the H only aspect - plenty of ex RN rotary guys seem to be flying ATPL FW, and they would have had <100 FW in training.

[FEBA]

The Navy EFTS course is 20 hours longer than the Army, includes aerobatics and formation flying, all fixed wing. If you don't make FJ after the course then you go to Shawbury for H. This may have some baring on Civi conversion. I'm not convinced that going straight to H will be cost effective. I'd be interested in some opinions.

[MOSTAFA]

Perhaps they need the extra dosh to rent those expensive hangars from the Air Force

[Always_broken_in_wilts]

Mostafa,
Are we talking fish'eds or pongoe's ere :E

all spelling mistakes are "df" alcohol induced

[Dai Chopper]

How many times do lessons need to be relearnt? When I looked into this a few years ago ( and no doubt many others before and since ) - as DCI at EGOS and blunty at Innsworth - the costs were clearly cheaper to carry out at least some trg on FW. Add this to the course being relatively easier and the opportunity to be taught to fly twice - second time as one transfers to RW.:ugh:

[AllTrimDoubt]

...and just how well do the army fare @ Shawbury vs their RN counterparts after the Army "short course"?

[airborne_artist]

I did the RN EFTS at Leeming in the late 70s - and I really benefitted from the 80 hours, particularly the "recovery from unusual attitudes" that we did post aeros.

The AAC are already training for Apache, which is a very different proposition to Gazelle ops, although to a lesser extent Lynx, so I think they should be taking the FW EFTS up to the RN level, not removing it.

[Nearly Free]

When the decision is made, and I've heard it rumoured for some time now, it's going to be made by the bean-counters, so if it's cheaper it'll happen I guess. However, a recent counter-rumour was that Green FW training would return to MW along with grading.

[FEBA]

NF
That would involve a separate fleet of aircraft (hopefully not Grobs). I take it you support my views on the folly of EFTS straight to rotary.

[airborne_artist]

Would those bean-counters be in any way related to the ones whose planning for Apache introduction to the AAC was so inept that they are now spending a reported $9m putting freshly manufactured aircraft into storage, and won't be ready with the full fleet until 2007?

With skills like their's I'd feel less than full of confidence putting them in charge of flying training programme development.

[Leprechaun]

alltrimdoubt

I finished shawbury not so very long ago and the army pilots on course with me did as good as anyone else. It is true that RN pilots do a longer jefts and a longer shawbury course but this is because we don't have an intermediate course between EGOS and ACP.
The crabs do a course at shawbs on Griffin, the pongos do another Squirrel course at Wallop and the RN baby pilots just go straight to Lynx, Merlin or Junglie.
I think it's horses for courses really and I'm sure the output standard of pilots starting frontline tours is the same across all three services. (except for Crabs obviously, coz they're crap!:p )

[AllTrimDoubt]

Leprechaun

Thanks...interesting to get the perspective of someone just passing through the system. Any areas you think might have been improved upon with the benefit of hindsight?

[JNo]

The Navy are sticking a number of guys through Sixty to do the Griffen course at the moment. Dependant on thier later performance, it may be a course change for the RN.

[Leprechaun]

It's true that some of our guys are being offered a griffin course at the end of 705 SQN, instead of going on to holdover on a ship or be teaboy to an admiral whilst they wait for a course spot to become available. The Jury is still out on whether or not this is a good deal!

It means voluntarily doing ANOTHER ab initio (3 strikes and you're out) course, at the end of which you go to learn to fly Seaking J's which used to be pingers and are now utility only. There is no chance of any of these ab initios being trained up as SAR to join 771 because that is still a "grown ups" job in the RN so if they want to progress they'll have to apply later for a junglie, lynx or Merlin conversion course.
On the upside you keep flying! Shawbury is in a nice part of the World! I have it on good authority that the Griffin is fun to fly!

I reckon you're better off poking off on holdover for a year to wait for the course you initially wanted! (Like I did!) I'd welcome an alternative view!