WSOp Streaming

[Jizman]

Hi all, I have made my application for OASC and have been given my selection date. My chosen route is into WSOp and I have recently been to the NC-Aircrew briefing at Cranwell but one thing that was kind of misted over was how much choice in which way you get streamed?! I understand that Linguist get streamed straight away but can anyone help explain what happens to the rest of aircrew?
Thanks :bored:

[ProfessionalStudent]

Having spoken to one if the instructors on 55(R) Sqn recently, apparently 75% of studes get their first choice of streaming.

[Jizman]

Thanks, do you know of any other RAF forums that I can get on?

[wokkameister]

In the old days, you were streamed on the strength of your performance at OASC/personality type(Myers Briggs etc ie: ESTJ for ALM) and other psychological factors. This meant that on the whole, those with a flair for languages went linguist, the introverted reflectors went AEOp, the technologically advanced went Air Eng and the gobby pragmatists went ALM, the really gobby Rotary.

Now it is very much a lottery based on vacancies and the observations made by training staff at Cranwitz.

Before anyone straps on the gloves for a bit of sparring, I will qualify that by having witnessed the process from most angles.

Anyway, you have to be in it to win it.

[BEagle]

"In the old days, you were streamed on the strength of your performance at OASC"

True - the cream became pilots, the rest didn't.....

[Pontius Navigator]

the really gobby Rotary and that is what got one of my SAC promoted to Cpl with a High rec for NCA :)

[Pontius Navigator]

BEagle,
In my day the wanabees got chopped. The really good ones got what they wanted. I wanted to navigate.
I was trained in all the arts to fly to Berlin and back, without landing. Thereafter I never really pushed a pencil in anger.

[wokkameister]

Beagle,

True, the cream become pilots. It's the milk that stop them doing stupid things from time to time.

Ring any bells from the distant past?

[charliegolf]

Wokka me old meister, you must be naught but a lad. In the old old days, you were streamed F/W or R at Brize at the end of Ivan T Seamus O'Burns' Loadie course. (Gilthrax 's if you want the official line).

After the colostomy bags went to shiny 10, and the knuckle draggers to Lyneham-on-the-hill, the top perfomers were streamed again after Strawbs. Slow deliberate types to Wessex, and handsome, confident debonair types to starships. There were no Chin hooks.

Well that's how I remember getting to Pumas anyhow!;)

CG

[Tiger_mate]

I have it on very good authority that the % who get their choice is greater than 75%, in fact closer to 85%. I am quite confident from what I have seen that the right people go to the right jobs, although you must accept that the Queen has the majority vote when it comes to allocation as the system decides were 'needs are'. In short, if there are 10 vacancies on the Nimrod and 10 students to choose from, the ALM wannabies will not get a look in, that is the lottery associated with 21st Century NCA.

The system is quite fair at handing out carrots & sticks to, and hard work is likely to play dividends. Everbody starts off at the same standard, but not everybody is equal after trade training, socially or professionally. There is no simple: Stars get....... Knobs get.......for both have strengths and weakness.
There is no point in trying to second guess the system.

There are differant qualities demanded by the various trades. The subsequent training systems can cope with certain weakness', whilst being intollerant of others. A long time ago, an NCA who I flew with whilst employed in my previous trade simplified it all by saying "You either have it or you dont". It was not what I expected and did not help my preparation for OASC an iota, but nowadays I can see that he has a fair point.

Bottom line, the training system is relatively short, work your butt off, show that you can fit into a multi crew environment without p155ing everybody else off (not every OASC graduate can do this) and keep your whinges to yourself, you may get lucky. Oh and remember this, it takes most trades at least a decade to get 3 stripes, do not take yours for granted or belittle them by acting like a dick after a pint of shandy.

[toddbabe]

Like your last line there tiger "so true" however the system for me would prevent me from applying in the first place! the jobs are so radically different that if you were set on one and you got the other it would absolutely drive you insane! I couldn't take that risk no matter what anyone tells you the percentages are!
On average the percentages may be X but the month you get streamed may just be the month that they need 6 Aeop's (old money) and two Alm's if you want to be a loadie and your told your going to be a dry man on nimrods you are in for one hell of a shock as there is no comparison whatsoever.
Jizman what do you want to do as you find that there are few if any that aren't bothered either way?

[ProfessionalStudent]

Toddbabe

Surely Jizhead wants to be a loadie? No-one walks into the AFCO WANTING to be an AEOp.

[bwfg3]

Wait around for a few months, and the Air Eng option will be back on the cards, if they can find the staff to teach a course.

[Pontius Navigator]

toddbabe, I would hazard a guess that a fair few of the 25% were really don't knows or don't minds.

If you have a burning ambition to do a particular job then you will probably have starred in that area.

[R 21]

Jizzman

I have just returned from Cranditz and have spoken to a few of the guys and gals on the course. Their view is it is all Kinloss, Kinloss, Kinloss, at the minute.

There have been lots of people want Helicopters and being sent up north.

[Wessex Boy]

"Bottom line, the training system is relatively short, work your butt off, show that you can fit into a multi crew environment without p155ing everybody else off (not every OASC graduate can do this) and keep your whinges to yourself, you may get lucky. Oh and remember this, it takes most trades at least a decade to get 3 stripes, do not take yours for granted or belittle them by acting like a dick after a pint of shandy."

Sage Advice Tiger Mate, that I wished I had!

I worked hard all through training, got good results in all the tests, although had a few 'Incidents' that ended up on my record (see Gatehouse Thread for Finningley Culture) but then over-relaxed when I got to Strawbs, got drunk, shot my mouth off, and pi55ed off a few of the old hairys in the mess. My Instructor was the Mess Manager.
I got Back-squadded and given an absolutely awful instructor (very short, moustachioed RS2000 driver for those there then) who then destroyed my confidence.
I then got chopped 2 days before heading off to Aldegrove for In-Theatre training on the Wessex, dropped back to AC, then decided to leave.

[Never Alert]

R 21,

that's probably got something to do with the number of people leaving KS!

[R 21]

Never

think thats what happens when an AEOp designed and approved this new and 'improved' (NOT) course at Cranditz!!:}

[Tiger_mate]

Kinloss, Kinloss etc etc

Not true

6 of 17 does not make it a single track road. I am quite sure that those travelling north 'against the flow' can be counted on one hand with several fingers remaining spare. Most got what they wanted (or joined for). Besides, as has been said before, there are no SOP splits, and decisions are made very late about branch division.

Regarding not running the gauntlet (toddbabe) I guess you have resigned yourself to wondering "What if" for the rest of your life. There is also a steady stream of Kinloss escapees rebranching at this time both ex Eng and AEOp, so the cross trade doctrine given by AFCO is true to a degree (Which I say because getting out of rotary is another kettle of fish altogether).

[ThePhoenix]

Jizman,

It's good to see you've got your OASC date & best of luck with it. I left 55 Sqn 1 year ago & am about to go onto the OCU

The 55 cse is a cse for AEOps, taught by AEOps. You'll find a lot of the cse content pointless. In a 6 month period, there's only one week devoted to teaching the ways of the fixed wing/rotary loadmaster. If you're streamed the way of the loadie, you'll see what I mean.

Anyway, bitterness aside...

During the 6 months on 55 it's actively recommended you let people know your preference (i.e fixed wing, rotary wing, nimrod or linguist (which you are pre-streamed for anyway)) & they have a system for that. At the end of the cse, the powers-that-be sit in a room with a chap from Personnel HQ (at RAF Innsworth) & discuss each person indiviually. By the end of their meeting, your fate is decided.

My 55 Cse, started with 11 people & finished with 8. Of those 8, 1 wanted AEOp, 3 wanted fixed wing & 4 wanted rotary.

It turned out that 3 got AEOp & 5 got rotary. The 2 guys who got AEOp & didn't want it were mortified. They will try to give you what you want but if they don't need what you want, you won't necessarily get it.

The way they choose is:

The person with the highest academic score gets what he (or she...) wanted
The 2nd, 3rd, 4th etc go AEOp.

The rest go Loadie.

I'm waiting for the sneers & jibes to come through but the last 6 courses to have passed out of 55 all had that trend unless the person was pre-streamed (i.e the old system).

Hope it's some help but there's still a long way to go

ThePhoenix

[Tiger_mate]

The way they choose is:

The person with the highest academic score gets what he (or she...) wanted

Subject to service needs; this is a fair observation.
The 2nd, 3rd, 4th etc go AEOp.

The rest go Loadie.

Absolute rubbish.

[R 21]

Excuse me if I'm wrong but the new course at 55 Sqn was designed by an AEOp who then got promoted into a job where he approved his own course design!!! The purpose of which was to get more people to Kinloss. After one of the Nimrod Squadrons was chopped that is maybe not the case... but if the shoe fits:}

[Ivan Rogov]

Maybe an AEOp designed the new course because Loadies can't write? :}
Is this where I get proved wrong again? Expecting incoming :ok:
P.S. I agree that the course was redesigned to make it easier to send people to Kinloss, still I have heard good things about the the new structure.

[letsgoandfly]

Having recently gone through the new Generic course I disagree that it's geared towards WSOp (EW / Aco) - which I am! - but gives a better overall grounding to allow you to move between specializations later in you career (said expecting incoming). It's either the generic course or longer OCUs and less ease of changing later in life. Thoughts please?

[R 21]

Right sorry gotta bite.

The new course makes it easier for NCA to move around between specializations does it? Who exactly? Ah yes our AEOp chums. I believe no rotary mate cross trained yet to AEOp but not sure if any would. Why does it mean longer OCU's exactly? The new course has just delayed people who are streamed rotary actually getting to the squadrons.

I agree the course seems to cover a wide range of topics producing a well rounded trainee. However I think the extra cost in training should have been given to OCF's to produce a more rounded character specific to the aircraft they are going to be working on!

[letsgoandfly]

Supposedly yes, it does make it easier to move around between specializations. Why would an WSOp (EW / Aco) want to go and become a loadie...boring...bad knees...bad back...dare I go on?? The fact that no-one has yet changed comes down more to manning (or the lack thereof) I would guess as to move out someone needs to move in and replace you. It has prolonged the initial training but should you go around again later in life you would only do the specialist phase I would imagine. And cost wise, either do the generic stuff (met, tech etc etc) in 3 locations with 3 sets of overheads or in a single location, which makes sense as being cheaper. And with regards rotary boys, surely the holds prior to Shawbury are more of a delay?

[Jizman]

Thanks for all the replies! Some were more helpful than others, but gratefull for all. My prefered route is defo into rotary.

Jizman

[charliegolf]

It's a funny old world. NCA, or airman aircrew in old money, used to be viewed as a heirarchy. Different course, different entry criteria, and different pay.

No-one would be an ALM if they could be an eng, and all the siggies were volunteers for the role- no question. (This might be where the old loadies with a-levels do the "I only ever wanted to be a loadie" line.)

Now everyone seems to want to be a crewman.

Go figure.

The way you're all treated these days, I'd be ok with a stude who withdrew at the end of the generic course, if the destination didn't suit. Training cost would be peanuts in the great scheme.

CG

[R 21]

Jizman

good lad

CG

totally agree times change

[ThePhoenix]

Easy Tiger,


The 2nd, 3rd, 4th etc go AEOp.

The rest go Loadie.


Also just an observation

Having recently gone through the new Generic course I disagree that it's geared towards WSOp (EW / Aco)

Letsgoandfly,

That's because you are an AEOp and are probably using things taught at 55 right now as you go through your wet/dry trg (or OCU). Speaking from a loadies point of view, very little of what was learned during those six months has been relevant at this point in time. Having completed the rotary loadie cse (a further year after 55), most of what was said by the staff has been forgotten.

R21,

The new course has just delayed people who are streamed rotary actually getting to the squadrons.


I couldn't agree more.

Jizman

Definately the way forward.

ThePhoenix

[Wessex Boy]

Back in the day I wanted Air Eng first then Loadie, there was no way I wanted to sit in the Vomit Comet in the dark staring at a green screen....

We had the learn lots, take exams, then forget what you've been taught scenario in Loadie Groundschool.

You spent weeks working out the way to indiviually tie down the 58 variants of Landrover in Nato during the foundation course, and take 14 exams in it (and in-flight catering), and on the first day of Rotary streaming, it is "forget all that , you touch down, they drive in, you through a couple of P strops over, and you get outta there":uhoh: :cool:

[rockiesqiud]

The fact that no-one has yet changed comes down more to manning (or the lack thereof):=
Sorry to conterdict you but there's been 6 AEOps crossed over and passed(or soon to pass) the Shawbury course. I,ve not heard of any more coming this way and I,ve yet to hear of any loadies going the other way. Maybe it's due to location rather than job but I think the vast majority of ALM's could be re-trained to be AEOp's if they wish.
PS I am an AEOP I just can't spell that good!!:uhoh:

[Wessex Boy]

Fitting a Sliding door on the side, or a Ramp on the back of the Nimrod would probably make it alot more attractive to Loadies, it's nice to get a bit of fresh air while you're flying:cool:

[Roland Pulfrew]

it's nice to get a bit of fresh air while you're flying

It does on the Mighty Luncher as well. That's why they open the windows in flight!!:E :E

[escapee]

Quite frankly there is a lot of sh**e being spouted by people who have no idea what they are talking about.
Phoenix, the generic phase has cock all to do with being an AEOp, its generic and contains no more AEOp specific training than LM!

Tiger mate speaks an awful lot of sense and has quoted actual figures.

Of those 6 who were streamed AEOp 4 wanted to be AEOp and one didn't mind, only one really didn't get what he wanted.
No rotary loadie has crossed over 'cos the Air Farce is a bit short right now.
As previously stated the vast majority of studes get what they want!
And by the way there was also a loadie on the team that developed the course.
Personally I think studes should be streamed by the OASC and instead of wasting 6 mths teaching them generic skills teach them trade specific....or is that reinventing the wheel.

[manualtilt]

Yes you are wrong! The Generic course was infact designed as a direct result from the findings of the AASS and then approved by TGDA, Innsworth. The team had a loadie on it as well, so no bias was applied, so back in your box R 21. (Is that your age by the way?)
The course content was agreed after extensive consultation with all specialisations and that's why there's no spec phase for rotary studes on 55 Sqn anymore. The bottleneck is with Shawbury who are stuck with piggybacking loadies onto a contracted course for pilots, which isn't very efficent for getting guys through, but produces a high quality product who is ready to then go through a demanding OCU.
The divide between loadies and AEOps will always exist no matter what, but naive remarks only do damage to those who still wish to become NCA, no matter what specialization they may end up as, think on.....

[PTC REMF]

No rotary loadie has crossed over 'cos the Air Farce is a bit short right now.


No rotary loadie has crossed over to WSOP (EW) because they don't want the job.

[samuraimatt]

the generic phase has cock all to do with being an AEOp, its generic and contains no more AEOp specific training than LM!

It has bugger all to do with being a linguist but they still have to sit through being taught by AEOps.

[Rude C'man]

Ive seen some crap posted on PPRUNE but this thread is full of it. If you choose to join as NCA then you are streamed post the generic course. The streaming process is based on many factors that stem all the way from basic training at RTS for those recently from Halton, to how one has performed on 55 Sqn and OACTU and obviously what PMA 55 needs to fill at the sharp end. At the end of the day , piss people off at Cranwell and you'll not get what you want, (there are plenty have done this!!) cos you probably aren/t good enough for it!! Keep your nose ,clean work hard, play hard !but most of all be professional and always strive for excellence. Good luck , remember about 1 out of the 10 who ever think of NCA make it to a SQN.

[Mightycrewseven]

It has bugger all to do with being a linguist but they still have to sit through being taught by AEOps. (samuraimatt)
How about: "they still have to sit through being taught by AIRCREW
It has nothing to do with the fact they are AEOps, it is all about teaching 'generic' airmanship subjects that ALL NCA aircrew have to learn. Yes, they also teach/lecture on some of the specialisations, such as acoustics and non-acoustics, but this is purely to give all students a flavour of the various specialisations prior to making a desision on streaming.
For those of you bleating on this thread that went through before the introduction of the Generic 'Airmanship' phase, then you are not really informed enough to comment, unless you are instructing on 55(R) Sqn or subsequent OCUs (although I do admit you are entitled to your own opinions, even if they are ill-informed.) For the 'whingers' on this thread that have been lucky/unlucky enough (depending on how you found the experience) to have gone through the new training programme, then you are new to the RAF NCA cadre and really shouldn't be commenting on how your own training should have been performed. Only until you have had at least had a few years front-line experience and maybe even some exposure as an instructor yourself, then you will be informed enough to understand whether you believe that the NCA training system is flawed or not.
Regards M7

[toddbabe]

Chill out m7!!
The fact remains that by streaming once they are in the system as opposed to before it will put some people off, I don't know the stats for recruiting but suggest that if the AFCO'S are telling the truth and it's a big if as we all know they are economical with the truth! then I would think the risk of not getting what you want is enough to put people off all together.
Of course the cyninc in me believes that prospective NCA are told that they will almost certainly get what they want, and it will only be mentioned in passing that they might not! this isn't just true in the NCA world, afco's have been doing this forever to get people in the door.
How else would they get people to be stackers and policemen if they didn't embelish the truth somewhat?

[Mightycrewseven]

S'Ok....I'm Chillin' :cool:
I completely agree with your comments and sentiments. I'm also extremely cynical about the AFCO 'hard' sell, and that they are 'economical' with the truth when it comes to NCA issues.
My beef is with those on this thread that think the Generic course has been poorly put together, mis-managed and is a waste of time. As manualtilit eludes to, there was a TEAM of personnel that designed the course who put a huge amount of time and effort to get it right. The course is still in its infancy and will require continuous 'tweaking' to make it better.
Regards M7:)

[OilCan]

M7

I'm sure those charged with the responsibility are trying their utmost to make the concept work...

...doesn't mean the concept itself is not flawed. :rolleyes:

[Roland Pulfrew]

...doesn't mean the concept itself is not flawed.

Care to enlighten us as to why you think the concept is flawed, exactly?

Can anyone explain why streaming is not suitable for WSOps? Seems to work for pilots and WSOs!

As MC7 said it is still bedding in and their have been no complaints from the end user.

[samuraimatt]

they also teach/lecture on some of the specialisations, such as acoustics and non-acoustics, but this is purely to give all students a flavour of the various specialisations prior to making a desision on streaming.M7 The Lingiusts already know what they are going to be doing after the Generic phase so why should they have to sit through what is predominantly an AEOp course. If the RAF want helicopter crewmen/women maybe they could have a seperate training course where they go straight to Shawbury and miss out the AEOp crap at 55 sqn.

then you will be informed enough to understand whether you believe that the NCA training system is flawed or not.Never heard of a course critique then.

[charliegolf]

"seems to work for pilots...."

RP,

Hardly the same is it? Pilots (in the normal way of things) all learn to fly a basic aircraft then specialise. Except for amputees along the way, no-one undertakes unecessary training. They don't all learn to fly a light multi, for example, do they? To take your point, it is appropriate to stream, but it used to be done post AAITC.

Sam

Course critique! What planet are you on? I live on the one where constructive criticism is universally accepted as a good and worthwhile thing. Except by anyone getting criticised of course.

CG

[samuraimatt]

M7 was going on about how far into your career you should be before you critique the training system. What I am saying is, who better to say what is wrong with the course than the students themselves. You might even find that many of them are saying and I got this from a post earlier by M7.

" the Generic course has been poorly put together, mis-managed and is a waste of time." Especially the linguists.

[letsgoandfly]

As it stands, from a recent ex-generic stude, I don't think there is anything wrong with the cse. I started it pre-streamed as AEOp (hang over from OASC streaming) so I knew I could not be streamed loadie. Doesn't mean I didn't learn something, even if it only opened my eyes to what the rotary and fixed mates do. Thanks for correcting me as to lads moving to loadie, wasn't aware that anyone had. M7, I agree that we need experience but why not let people know what it's like whilst it's still fresh-ish in our minds? As for the cse being flawed, it's only been going for a short while and is bound to need some fine-tuning, hence regular cse critiques. Just thought I'd try to show the benefits to studes of taking the generic cse as opposed to being pre-streamed.

[Tiger_mate]

It could be worse. I did an exchange with a Foreign & Commonwealth Defence Force a few years ago, and their military recruits do not even know which arm of the Defence Force they will end up in after basic training. Their Officers are trained by the UK at one of our Officer training establishments, but a Sandhurst Course followed by helicopter pilot training (Air Wing) is quite pheasable. Bit of a bummer if you want to fly aeroplanes and get a job with the Navy/Coastguard though. It is a 3 year minimum sentence post training even if you hate the job, with no option to PVR.

Those sitting on the fence may wish to research the 'voluntary withdrawl' options should life turn against them. I have no idea what the present state is on that one, so throw the subject in amongst the pack for you to fight over.

Rude: Long time - Hope all is well.

[akula]

matt,

Which "AEOp crap" should be left out?

Would that be the airmanship crap, the SNCO development crap, the flying crap???

[wokkameister]

Hello, I'd like to join the RAF as a pilot.

I'm afraid it's not that easy sir. You can join as an officer and see where you end up.

Well, where could I end up?

Admin, supply, ATC, or pilot.

That doesn't make much sense. How does that work?

Well you do IOT then a generic officer course, bit of blanket stacking, couple of days in HR, bit of pilot stuff. At the end, we see how many pilots we need and select them from the crowd.

That's very odd. So I don't actually know what job I will be doing until I am a year into my career?

Yes. That's right. It was seen to work for the WSOp's.

Thank you. Goodbye

[P-T]

Sorry to jump in at the end here and not being a WSOp but a chopped WSO.

As far as I could see, each of the WSOp disciplines required different aptitude requirements and as such can be better assessed after practical application in the working environment.

I agree with the way it is now, although I can also understand the frustrations of people joining up to hang out the back end of a Chinook and then being told, sorry you are more suitable to throw sonar buoys out of the vomit comet and heat up ready meals.

I'm living proof that the aptitude test alone does not mean that you are suitable for a role.

I'll await the barrage of abuse (or should I call it opinion?).

[samuraimatt]

The only reason why the Generic course was developed was to recruit AEOps. Before this course was born the MOD were advertising heavily in Scotland to try and attract people because that is where they would probably end up. Why not have a system where you could apply to be A WSOp CMM or WSOP EW and after a relatively short Airman Arcrew initial training course where SNCO development and operational skills are taught. Then they could move straight to their respective aircraft types and be given the required training.

Why do WSOp CMM and Linguists need a 20 hour dominie package?

[Wessex Boy]

Errr, like we did in the '80s?:ugh:

[samuraimatt]

Bingo!!!!!!!!!!!
BTW are you an American?

[OilCan]

Roland

It's a 'jack of all' concept which appears to run counter to a growing need for increased specialization. Streaming has always been part of the NCA selection process, it's a question of how and when that streaming is done.

At a time when we are 'streaming' pilots earlier and earlier, we appear to be doing the very opposite with the NCA element. Why? - to try and improve the recruitment and retention of the AEop cadre. - plain and simple. (if it's not, then why has it changed?)

Potentially flawed, because it is unlikely to attract more AEops who want to be AEops, and will positivley discourage those who want to be ALMs, thereby exacerbating the problem. Lets not even mention the resurrection of the Eng!! :\

The potential for diversity may indeed be an attraction for some, but the inevitable lottery will be too big a gamble for most, especially when that lottery has so many variables and takes place so long after signing on the dotted line. Current allocation figures quoted on this thread do appear encouraging, but it's early days, only time will tell if that trend continues.

As an Eng, I have absolutely no experience of the current end product nor any knowledge of the structure and content of the course, so I would not presume to question those charged with its design or implimentation, they have my respect - and simpathy. I do however have experience of dealing with those who ended up as an Eng by default - not encouraging. :(

As a distant bystander, I suspect this may well become another 'lessons learnt' fiasco in a few years time.

I am now, apparently, a Weapon Systems Operator!!
- "Oh really Mr Oilcan, and what weapons do you operate?"
- "fuel cocks, and I'm f*ckin' deadly!" ;)

[Mightycrewseven]

Which "AEOp crap" should be left out?
Would that be the airmanship crap, the SNCO development crap, the flying crap???
Matt :ugh: :ugh: :ugh:
Read the above quote from akula. This is exactly what the course is intended to do - particularly the 20 hr Dominie package. I'm guessing from your posts that you may be a linguist, which is your specialisation within the NCA cadre. As such you are AIRCREW and therefore, like all other aircrew in all specialisations, you need to undergo 'FLYING TRAINING'!! Are you really suggesting that the Linguists should have a totally separate flying training regime (that would increase training costs by a very large sum of money the RAF does not have), where you can be assessed solely on your language skills and not on your awareness, capacity, SNCO qualities and other aviation skills that require you to achieve whilst under pressure?? I am sure that on your aircraft type, you are expected to be as professional and competent in all aspects of aviating as all your other brethren aircrew are in their specialisations. If you are indeed a linguist, I am absolutely astounded that you feel that you can bypass all this so you can sit on your aircraft and 'just' be a linguist. :mad:
M7

[wokkameister]

Wise words from Mr Oilcan.

I too suggest this will become a lesson learnt in years to come

[akula]

samauri,
Why do WSOp CMM and Linguists need a 20 hour dominie package?
The short answer is that they don't. However, a flying package is an integral part of any course of initial aircrew training.
There are many benefits of a flying package(demonstration of skills taught, capacity, airmanship and SA to name but a few) and the final product is far superior to those who did not have the opportunity to undertake an applied phase. Proof of this comes directly from the next units in the training system(OCU's,DHFTS), who comment that the current students are more capable that their predecessors. Further proof comes from students who feel better prepared for the rigours of conversion training.
On a lighter note how did you get on with your Dominie package?:} :}
ALWAYS assume NEVER check

[Cmn2644]

Having been through the new generic WSOp system, I could agree with a lot of people on this issue but not with others. When we went through 55, wanting to 'hang off the back of a chinook', we knew that we could be sent to rods and our course motto was even going to be 'we knew the risks.' Around 85-90% of us got what we wanted and the rotary wannabees who got rods yes were very disappointed but now have thrown themselves into it and are doing well.
Before I take some fire though, I agree this is easy for me to say having got my choice of streaming.
I would also strongly agree with keeping your nose clean and not pissing instructors off whilst on 55 but also A sqn. This could inadvertently lead to the start of your demise !!!

Oh and to add my comment to the strand above, I enjoyed the dominie package. Good introduction to as you say SA, airmanship, CRM!, ATC Comms etc etc.

[samuraimatt]

Ok lets look at this from a different angle. can you tell me why Fighter controllers and Airborne Technicians dont do this same course? After all they still get presented with a brevet.

[ProfessionalStudent]

The crux is "presented" with a brevet. Not EARNED.

[letsgoandfly]

They don't wear a brevet, they wear a badge. Enough said.

[samuraimatt]

Now then lets see.

http://www.britairforce.com/images/raf_wings_raf_t.jpg So what do you do in the RAF then? You obviously fly as you have a brevet and must have done an exhaustive aircrew course.

http://www.britairforce.com/images/raf_wings_fc_t.jpg Ahh I see you are a fighter controller. Where did you do your aircrew training as you wear a brevet.

http://www.britairforce.com/images/raf_wings_at_t.jpg Ahh I see you are an Airborne Technician. Where did you do your aircrew training as you wear a brevet. Did you enjoy the 20 hour dominie package? Obviously the SNCO development that you received as part of your generic course was valuable.

[charliegolf]

Thread's becoming a little circular, methinks. It ain't gonna change back for a while, no matter how (if indeed it is) crap it is.

But out of interest, what branch is the brevet with 'RAF' in it, in Samm's post?

CG

[samuraimatt]

But out of interest, what branch is the brevet with 'RAF' in it, in Samm's post?

Oh do be serious.:rolleyes:

[letsgoandfly]

According to AP 1358 the rearcrew brevet, which replaced the 5 individual brevets worn by rearcrew in Apr 03, contains the RAF monogram. The previous brevets were no longer issued after this date. Now as FC and AT badges do not contain the RAF monogram they are clearly not rearcrew brevets so therefore they are badges. I get your point but if you are so against the generic training system today maybe you'd rather there was a linguist BADGE in place of your brevet? :ugh:

[Cmn2644]

Lets go and fly - I agree with you on this but please, no quoting of AP's on a sunday !!! Its my day off !!

[letsgoandfly]

My day off too, just making sure my facts were straight. SAMM, you could have a look on the RAF careers website and look under 'aircrew', maybe that'll explain who wears brevets? :ok:

[samuraimatt]

Just making sure your facts were right? Obviously from that statement you must have a copy at home. Very sad...............:sad:

[Oldandgrey]

Can anyone shed some light on the Rotary Cse being cut from its current 40wks to 12wks?:uhoh:

[Tiger_mate]

Can anyone shed some light on the Rotary Cse being cut from its current 40wks to 12wks?
This is in the process of being tested. It is unlikely to become the 'normal course' as it required lots of dedicated crewman costed hours and is therefore expensive. It suits certain students better than others.
It is too early to make an informed judgement as to the success (or otherwise) of the trial. Indeed the 'guinee pigs' will need to arrive on sqns before a constructive conclusion can be reached, which is likely to be 6 months from now minimum. They will meet OCF input standard but lack experience.
Consolidation is a valuable tool to training, especially when cost free (pilots hours), and IMHO its loss will be noticeable. Time will tell:

That said, the pilots arriving without having done a JP course was very noticeable, and is now quite normal. ....progress!!