New Forum?

[jindabyne]

Is anyone interested (Mods) in making Mil Aircrew into a private forum?

Aside from threads such as Chinook and one or two other well-discussed topics, the forum of late seems to be, IMHO, becoming somewhat indistiguishable from that of Jet Blast.

Or am I too old and should consigne myself to Av & Nost?

Feel free to lambast me ----

[Safety_Helmut]

So, based on your profile, is that a forum for retired "professionals who fly the non-civilian hardware, and the backroom boys and girls without whom nothing would leave the ground. Army, Navy and Airforces of the World, all equally welcome here." you're proposing then ?

S_H

[soddim]

If I was a mod I would agree.

This forum is becoming less interesting as it is increasingly populated by the less professional both ex and present.

[Jackonicko]

Ask people to prove who they are and many of the real current aircrew might think twice before posting here.

And which retirees qualify, and which ones don't?

Anyway, shall I let Spruce Moose and others like him know that they're not welcome here before or after I get my own coat, Jindy?

[Safeware]

I think this has been done enough times.

1. Why is it needed - if you wanted to make it current mil aircrew, there probably wouldn't be anything interesting to talk about :) ..... I mean issues of security preventing much more than 'bar chat' which is what goes on here anyway.

2. There is much more to military aviation than just aircrew, and much more value added (whether or not you agree with it) by those who can talk about 'the good old days' or bring differing viewpoints.

However, there are a number of threads that I think would be better moved elsewhere, but that's not my job. If you don't have an interest in the thread - don't read it, it's that easy.

sw

[Rakshasa]

*Pictures a gate plod asking for mil ID before being allowed in the forum.*

[ExRAFRadar]

Jind how about a non-aircrew and an aircrew, divided into Pilots and everyone else, sub divided into serving, non-serving, further divided into commissioned, and non-commissioned, sub divided into those with something I agree with and those that....... 'forum'

But you get the picture.

Consider yourself 'lambasted'

Edited to add :-

This is not the mess old bean. If you want to swap war stories, swing that lantern and pull up a sandbag then appreciate that everyone might want to hear the banter, not just retired pilot types who's only joy comes from sitting in the corner at the local village pub lamenting the day that 617 stopped using derogatory names as a callsign. And being called Wingco.

[Wholigan]

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=38883&highlight=private+military+forum

[airborne_artist]

To be certain that everyone knows their place, ExRAFRadar's proposed forums should be then divided down by Service, educational attainment, UK region and what your father did for a living.

Only then would it accurately reflect all possible predjuces, and ensure that no-one was remotely offended (or interested) in the content.

Just for fun Jindabyne, have a guess at my last substantive rank in HM Forces, and the first HM forces training course that I passed out from :E

[Twinact]

Surely the forums available to our civilian counterparts in 'Airline Specific Private Forums' are all that is being asked for here? Is there any reason why the moderators cannot allow us the equivalent status? Or are military aircrew less worthy.

RAF, AAC and FAA forums would seem to be the natural breakdown.

[Pontius Navigator]

As we go purple surely we should be looking to cross-fertilise? As more light blue fly from dark blue bases, as all helicopters look the same :} etc, then separate forums would make it more difficult to find relevant topics.

Would JPA have been a light blue non-aircrew thread or an aircrew only thread denied professional input?

One question I answered was from deep field and totally non-aircrew however I did have expertise in that area and was able to answer. The thread had precisely 3 messages, question, answer and thank you. Without this polyglot forum it would never have seen the light of day.

returning to the purple bit, it is also good to have the colonial inputs too albeit the forum does seem to be UKAir biased.

[Whirlygig]

Well, I think it would be shame if only military and ex-military were allowed to partake in threads such as "Chinook - hitting back". I take a great interest in that thread as well as Caption Competition (or is that the sort of thing that is being criticized as being only fit for Jet Blast?).

Occassionally there are threads here to which non-military people can make a valid contribution (in my case anything about tax!!!) so why should you wish to close yourself off from the "outside world" and not allow the "outside world" to comment?

Cheers

Whirls

[Now a 'J' Bloke!!]

Still wouldn't get rid of Southside!!!

More LAter;
'J' Bloke!!:rolleyes:

[Safeware]

Twinact - 'RAF, AAC and FAA forums would seem to be the natural breakdown.' - now you are proposing not only that it is military aircrew, but only UK. nb the 'of the World' bit in the forum descriptor.

And as for access, I think it must be easier to regulate the airline forums, if only by staff number and posing some questions that only an insider could know, but how would this be done for a worldwide, military aircrew only forum?
sw

[Twinact]

Safeware,

Yes, I am. If you would like a worldwide one, propose that as well. As for the UK only forums, service numbers are unique to individuals and would be a secure entry system.

Don't close down the Mil Aircrew thread, as Whirlygig says, many threads have interest to mil and civvy.

There is a place for a private forum for the military; as I said before the airline types are given that privilege on this site, so wouldn't it be appropriate for mil types to be afforded the same.

[Safeware]

Twinact, although service numbers are unique, how would you propose 'control of entry'?

sw

[Twinact]

Most current serving people have mil e-mail addresses, plus moderators. PPrune are the experts in controlling their website, I'm sure they would be able to propose a system that would ensure proper useage.

[airborne_artist]

Twinact, although service numbers are unique, how would you propose 'control of entry'?

Could you check the validity of a service no.? I don't think so. Anyway, I've got two :ok:

[Safeware]

Twinact - most, but not all. But if you think it would work and you can get the support, go for it, free speech and all that.

sw

[Twinact]

Could you check the validity of a service no.? I don't think so. Anyway, I've got two :ok:

How do the civvy private forums manage? I assumed they used their company numbers.

[jimgriff]

There are those of us who are not in the mil or ever have been in the mil who do and can offer good (IMHO) opinion into this thread. Leave it as it is please.

[Safeware]

A_A,

You can check the validity - there is a 'checksum' built in. But I can't see the powers that be giving it out to pprune.

sw

[sirsaltyhelmet]

Could always start your own bulletin board Twinact and call it something really apporopriate...

How about a great name like Elitist or something??

You will be after the closure of mixed rank bars and a ban on chip butties next :ok:

[jindabyne]

At a particularly splendid session in th'pub last evening, several fellow PPRuNers were bemoaning their perceptions that the forum was, with obvious exceptions, increasingly boring with a noticeable rise in whinging, mindless mud-slinging and purile posting. In general agreement, and fuelled with not an inconsiderable volume of incahol, I staggered home and set about thrashing the PC.

In the bright and painful light of this morning I'm grateful to Wholi for reminding me of previous debate, and to others for taking up my offer and lambasting me with wet lettuce; to them I apologise and humbly withdraw my ill-thought suggestion. To those who supported my notion, I apologise for my apparent U-turn - sobriety can be cruel.

Still, my gut feeling is that the forum HAS deteriorated in 'quality' over many months, but then I guess that is the price of Mil Aircrew rightly remaining OPEN; the richness of debate, informed argument and humour of many colours is too good to miss - and IMV outweighs the knobhead input (just). Must tell myself to make more use of the ignore option, and stop being a prat.

Jacko - thanks for your offer, maybe I should give Smartypants a shake?

ExRAFRadar - was that you earwhigging at the bar yesterday??

What shall I tell them in th'pub tonight??

[Twinact]

SSH,

Wow, that's quite a chip you've got there. I don't see you abusing those who run the civvy private forums on this site and labelling them elitist. Presumably, in your eyes, mil aircrew are fair game for abuse and of lesser stature. I was responding to a suggestion made by Jindabyne and others.

I don't recall proposing closing the forum to all ranks, leave this forum as is but provide a private forum for each of the services. Why does it have to be a bulletin board, why not within the excellent environment of PPrune?

[Rakshasa]

Deteriorated? Yeah a little, but I've seen it happen on other forums. Sometimes they go into a slump where nothing interesting (to me) is posted and I find myself asking, Why do I still read this drivle? Then the slump ends I go though another rash of posting and forget it ever entered my head to stop going there.

So before we start rocking the boat, just remember, in 6 months time we could be stratching our heads over why this ever came up.

[sirsaltyhelmet]

Twinact,

I dont have a chip on my shoulder, far from it. I have a lot of friends who are aircrew. If I wanted to have a pop at any of them I would abuse them as they walked past the desk. As for them being lesser than me nope, I appreciate what they do and how they do it. I had my chance at being aircrew and didnt take it, such is life.

I cant see the probelm about how the forum is running now as its open, those outside of the military can contribute easily. People can ask questions about the forces etc so whats the problem? Another example is the Buccaneer thread, full of humour so why should Joe Public not get to see how Military guys think and laugh?

I cant see the need for individual forums thats all, the Army have their aviation one on Arrse but they dont lock it out.

[Onan the Clumsy]

If you didn't let me in, then I wouldn't be able to win the caption competition for you all.




JetBlast fluctuates. So if you find MIL boring now, it won't be in a few months.

Personally, I find it very interesting here and I try to behave like a guest in someone else's house, mostly successfully (hopefully).

[ExRAFRadar]

Jind, alas no. Had I been earwhigging I would have found a way to get in on the conversation and then after much sponging of drinks off of former aircrew, regaling them with tales of 'How I talked down a flight of Lightning's in bad wx whilst at the same time diddling the pretty WRAF assistant' (patently untrue) I would have, in the words of a News of the World journalist, made my excuses and left.

Let me digress.

I never forget the words of an eye specialist doc in London.

I had applied for aircrew, failed, but marked down as 'If we are desperate use him'. Consequently I found myself at a tender age of 20 being driven down by OC Ops to see the Station Commander to be told that I had a place in aircrew training. This was in the days when Biggin Hill was more than a rich man's airfield.

My eyesight was borderline and I had to go to the place near the Post Office tower, (Where I had joined up) for an eyesight test.

After many hours of looking down tubes, reading charts, reading numbers from simulated flight instruments and for some strange reason being asked to perform press up's in my underpants (maybe that was just the doc's way of passing time) he gave this quite brilliant assessment.

"Lad, you would be lucky to find the aircraft let alone fly it."

My point ?

I love hearing and reading stories about the Military flying community. I never made it but once it is in the blood it is there for life. I am sad that I did not make it but temper that with that the fact that it was never meant to be.

Does not stop me picturing myself up there in my F4 over the North Sea doing QRA on a Red Bear coming down the gap, or dodging the same F4 in my Jag low level over Scotland.

I want to read the stories about how the Meteor Mark <Whatever> was a pig to fly in a engine failure. And all the other threads that take me back to a time when I was young and foolish enough to want to strap a FJ on and leap skywards.

So keep the forum 'All Ranks' please, if only for the sake of the youngster's who might pop in and see a thread titled " Low Level Omani Jags (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=81053)" or Buccaneer Tales :)
(http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=48127)

[cazatou]

jindabyne,

It is a common fallacy, I feel, that the KOS like myself (and those I served with) have nothing to offer from our experiences that would be of any use to those serving in "Today's RAF".

I posted the following tale some years ago; I feel, however, that it bears repetition: if you disagree then I apologise.

In the late 1960's No 46 Sqn had on its strength on MAQM Don Hayward. Mr Hayward was approaching retirement and did just enough flying to maintain currency; his normal role was to run the Sqn Ops desk which he did with style. He did, however, have to be re-categorised each year.

Now it so happened that the new ALM Examiner from 38 Group EU was a totally abhored gentleman who would try every means at his disposal to denigrate those whom it was his job to examine.

During Don's "ground cat" on Combat Survival the examiner asked what Don would in a certain situation. The reply was short and to the point; Quote "The first thing I would do is throw that ******* book out the window."Unquote. The examiner "grounded Mr H and awarded him an 'E' category. Returning to 38 Gp he sent off the paperwork and looked for another target.

The examiner was somewhat surprised to find the paperwork returned to him a few days later with a polite note suggesting that he had, perhaps, made a mistake. Now a wise person may have had second thoughts (and perhaps made a few enquiries); but our man was made of sterner stuff. He sent off the paperwork again with a note stating that there was no mistake and Mr H had indeed failed at combat survival!!

A few days later the Flt Sgt received a telephone call from someone who was entitled to show lots of stars on a plate on his car. This Gentleman started by saying that had no wish to try to persuade the Flt Sgt to change his mind; rather he merely wished to point out some facts regarding Mr H that the Flt Sgt appeared to be in ignorance of.

The Gentleman then pointed out that Mr H had been his Air Gunner during WW2 and had, in fact, been shot down TWICE over German occupied territory and had got back to the Allied Lines both times. On the second occasion he had fought with the Maquis for several months until they were overrun by the Allies advance.

The Flt Sgt was posted to Singapore where he was only allowed on 52 Sqn if he was actually conducting a examination.

[jindabyne]

cazatou

No disagreement old chap - and an apposite recollection.

[Twinact]

SSH,

I cant see the need for individual forums thats all
Do you object to the civilian airline private forums here on PPrune? I suspect not because, like me, we're not civvy aircrew and don't interest us.

Therefore, why should you object if military aircrew wish to have a similar private forum where we can discuss relevant topics, just like the civvies? I said I supported continuing this open forum, so where's the problem? Why should mil aircrew be discriminated against?

[adr]

If military aircrew wish to have a similar private forum where we can discuss relevant topics, just like the civvies[...] where's the problem?
Cui bono?

The civ forums allow people working in the same company to discuss in-house matters away from the gaze of people outside their company. Fair enough; the security may be adequate for that purpose (but don't count on it), and any likely harm from Ryanair (say) picking up (say) bmibaby's gossip would be limited.

Different resources are employed by those wishing to eavesdrop on "in-house" discussions among mil aircrew, and the consequences more serious. A closed forum presents two challenges: False sense of security. The "private" nature of the forum might encourage some people to discuss stuff they'd not discuss in earshot of others at the Rat and Parrot.
Redundancy. If everyone rightly treats the private forum as if it were public, for security reasons, then what's the point? The public mil forum might wither if all the discussions end up on the private one, and that'd be a loss to those contemplating a career in military aviation, as well as to civilians who are well-disposed to military aviation (whom God preserve).

adr

[Twinact]

Adr,

Thanks for the info and insight into the civvy forum. Should PPrune grant us (mil aircrew) a private forum, I'm sure those using it would be mindful of the security of the site. You would hope mil ppl would be aware!

As to the withering effect of a private forum, I'm sure both would co-exist. It would be a common ground for the 3 services, if we were allowed separate service forums, and so anyone could contribute. Is airline recruiting affected by the privacy of their forums?

[Genghis Couldn't]

There are many private forums (non pprune) that work extremely well and don't suffer from the problems that some seem to be worried about here - for example 'CF Pilots Lounge'.

[SirToppamHat]

I am in the military.
I am commissioned, but not aircrew.
This thread works best when it has input from all sides - some of it well-informed, some not (this is usually put right by those in the know).
The site works best when we share information between us, shining light where there is darkness and providing different perspectives for those who are often employed in quite narrow fields within the military.
As for non-service personnel having access, all grist to the mill I say - and with the current bunch of mostly narcissistic politicians (of all parties), we need all the understanding we can get.
If I may, I would point to one area where I think we would all benefit and that is the way we deal with Trolls. (Troll = someone who comes into an established community such as an online discussion forum, and posts inflammatory, rude or offensive messages designed to annoy and antagonize the existing members or disrupt the flow of discussion (Wikipedia)). These a:mad:holes survive by eliciting a response (any response, good, bad, ridicule). They die without attention, and I say we need to make more effort to ignore them completely.

[VH-GRUMPY]

No this is not the palce for private forums.
I have views about lots of things aviation and politics involving aviation and I want to mix with all views - those that agree and those that oppose. I also come from an military family but have some very firm views concerning Australia's involvement in Vietnam and now in Iraq.
Cheers:)

[Twinact]

No-one is suggesting closing this forum down!!!!

Its an appeal to have a private forum for mil aircrew similar to civvy aircrews.:rolleyes:

[Two's in]

Without diversity there is a real danger of starting to believe your own publicity. Can't beat a bit of critical banter from others in the "team" (whatever shade of purple that might be) to get things in perspective. Of course, those who can't handle their status being questioned by others might be a bit sensitive to some of the responses.

[alisoncc]

Surely the sole criteria should be whether you eat and breath aeroplanes. As to where individuals fit in - well.

Ex-RAF Air Radio Fitter on Vulcans and Lightnings, ARB qualified Avionics Eng. Flew with PanAm when operating IGS into Berlin - late sixties doing in-flight weather radar fixes. Then stint flying BN2A Islanders into non-existent strips in New Guinea. Non-existent ? You had to do a reccie before even thinking of putting down.

Then ran a maintenance facility at Rand A/P, Jo'burg with regular circuits and bumps at some of the more exotic mining camps around Southern Africa. All of this undertaken well before the norm became - sit in sharp end, switch on and settle back with coffee. <grin>
:ok:

[GengisKhant]

Do away with this forum...., what a sad day that would be. I have watched this forum develop over the last few years, and while there are clearly good, and not so good points with all forums of this nature, I believe that in general, this particular forum draws many excellent contributions from both past and present military pilots and military ground personnel world-wide...., and not only from the Royal Air Force. In addition, there are many civilian pilots, (and others, perhaps not so welcome seekers of information), that are entertained by the banter that passes between different branches and different Services.

I say retain the forum as is. There is sufficient policing available as was aptly demonstrated by the suspension of the 'Scottish Officer' string last month.

With the inclusion of both flying and non-flying contributions, the forum offers an interesting diversity of views and is in general, quite informative and entertaining. In addition, it has a serious and necessary side, (as with the on-going Chinook string), as it gives us all (aircrew and non-aircrew alike), an opportunity to redress the balance of the voice of the 'military' as practiced by Government..., by allowing the voice of the 'military' as practiced by the people...., to be heard.

GengisK :ok: